IRC logs for #openttd on OFTC at 2011-06-21
⏴ go to previous day
00:29:47 *** fjb is now known as Guest5382
01:24:15 *** AD is now known as Guest5388
02:26:57 *** rhaeder1 has joined #openttd
02:54:02 *** devilsadvocate has quit IRC
03:09:21 *** devilsadvocate has joined #openttd
03:31:02 *** Ruudjah has joined #openttd
04:56:19 *** Eddi|zuHause has joined #openttd
05:13:18 *** peter1139 has joined #openttd
05:18:11 *** Cursarion has joined #openttd
05:25:44 *** caracal has joined #openttd
05:27:16 <caracal> so i must be missing something: whenever i try a scenario that starts in 1920, i cannot build any kind of depot ... using openttd 1.0.4
05:31:13 <Rubidium> yep, you're probably missing vehicles; not all climates get them introduced in 1920
05:31:19 <caracal> not sure what is the point, if i can't build any transport
05:31:19 <planetmaker> caracal: no vehicles available?
05:31:44 <caracal> planetmaker: nope ... only road and ship are even opening, but depots are greyed out
05:32:00 <planetmaker> then only road vehicles and ships are available ;-)
05:32:11 <caracal> but i can't build them without depots
05:32:37 <planetmaker> there's no train available... so you could built a depot, but no train anyway
05:32:48 <planetmaker> try again in a later year
05:33:02 <caracal> i know there are more than one, but the one i'm looking at right now is hawaiian islands ... tropical, i guess, so sure, i can understand that some things might not be available at that time
05:33:15 <planetmaker> or in a new game with some newgrfs which provide earlier vehicles
05:33:50 <caracal> this one claims that all required newgrfs are loaded
05:34:00 <planetmaker> yes, the default starting date is 1950. In tropical in 1920 you don't have rail vehicles unless you use a NewGRF
05:34:16 <planetmaker> oh, might claim it wrongly, eh?
05:34:23 <caracal> i sat and watched it on fast forward for two years, no change (well, no change in the menu, at least)
05:34:38 <caracal> planetmaker: i don't care about rail, i just want to be able to build *any* vehicle
05:34:41 <planetmaker> or... all NewGRF required there. Yes. But that doesn't guarantee maglev or trains available
05:34:47 <planetmaker> same for vehicles
05:36:21 <caracal> so i gather what you're trying to tell me is, i need to load one or more additional newgrfs that the scenario doesn't call for?
05:37:33 <planetmaker> caracal: in principle probably yes
05:38:20 <caracal> yeah, i was playing another scenario earlier, and it had rail disabled, but popups kept offering me new rail vehicles ... so the year of availability is irrelevant if you can't build the appropriate depot
05:38:49 <planetmaker> if a vehicle is availabe, you can build its depots. But not before.
05:39:34 <MNIM> that depends on the settings
05:39:47 <caracal> i beg to differ ... i saw a half dozen rail vehicles appear in the notices, but never got the ability to build a rail depot
05:40:01 <caracal> which was fine, i was doing air at the time
05:40:51 <planetmaker> caracal: if so, that'd be a bug. But that'd need a savegame to demonstrate that as I've not seen that so far
05:40:57 <caracal> okay, two (hopefully simpler) questions: (1) is there a keyboard shortcut to go in/out of fast forward? (2) kbd shortcut to close popup message windows
05:41:01 <MNIM> see advanced settings -> interface disable infrastructure when no suitable vehicles (...)
05:42:04 <caracal> i just found it odd that a transport sim wouldn't allow you to build, you know, transport <grin>
05:42:05 <MNIM> Delete removes all unpinned windows, if you make sure to pin the ones you want beforehand
05:42:23 <caracal> other scenarios work fine, so am not coming down on the game itself
05:42:37 <planetmaker> MNIM: yes, I completely forgot about that setting... but it won't help you with vehicles.
05:42:50 <caracal> MNIM: ah, thanks ... that rings a bell ... played openttd a lot some years ago, just now getting back into it
05:42:56 <planetmaker> thus IMHO it's better to keep it on the default 'don't make available, if vehicles not present'
05:44:35 <caracal> so hmm ... i have installed, for example, the "av8 Aircraft Set" newgrf, which says it offers planes "from 1920" ... and yet, no airports can be built in hawaii ... like i said, i must be missing something
05:44:37 <planetmaker> caracal: yes, it's odd that you can configure a scenario like this without getting a warning about missing vehicles.
05:44:46 <caracal> maybe there's a forum discussion about it
05:44:52 <planetmaker> Having it possible shall IMHO remain an option. It's scenarios after all ;-)
05:45:38 <planetmaker> caracal: did you modify NewGRFs?
05:45:45 <planetmaker> on the running game /scenario?
05:45:45 <caracal> right, but i'd assume a scenario maker would want to allow players to build at least one type of transport
05:45:58 <planetmaker> caracal: yes, but scenario makers make mistakes.
05:46:02 <caracal> i did not modify the newgrf settings, no
05:46:57 <planetmaker> you should not (normally). The scenario has its pre-defined list of NewGRFs which one can only change if you enable the scenario_developer tool
05:47:47 <planetmaker> what's the exact name of your scenario, I take it you got it from online content?
05:48:27 <caracal> yes, i got it from the bananas site, it's called "Hawaiian Islands", but i know at least one of the other scenarios i tried yesterday had the same problem
05:49:07 <planetmaker> well... there are probably quite some scenarios (unfortunately) which have that problem
05:50:03 <caracal> ah, so adding newgrfs before clicking "play scenario" doesn't work ... it forgets all those, apparently, in preference to the scenario's settings
05:50:27 <caracal> but if i try to add them afterward, it says "this is bad!" <g>
05:51:40 <caracal> more precisely, "this can crash openttd" ... it hasn't so far, though
05:51:46 <planetmaker> because it is true
05:52:12 <planetmaker> it often is unproblematic to *add* vehicle NewGRFs, though
05:52:15 <caracal> so what you're saying is, scenarios are just hit-and-miss, you take what you get, and some of them aren't, um, optimal
05:52:28 <planetmaker> yes, that's what I'm saying indeed
05:52:41 <caracal> well okay then ... can't complain about contributed content, i guess
05:52:42 <planetmaker> Many scenarios might be old and assume that you indeed do modify / add NewGRFs
05:53:40 <planetmaker> caracal: the easiest solution for you now is: cheat forward into the year 1940
05:53:42 <caracal> some of them at least seem to be really well done
05:54:34 <caracal> i added a couple newgrfs manually and now i can build ships and planes
05:54:36 <planetmaker> that's the least hassle and make no difference really and is 100% safe
05:55:52 <caracal> so, remaining question: is there a fast-forward/normal-speed keyboard toggle? or must i always use the mouse?
05:57:33 <planetmaker> you can assign it to a key you like, if you edit hotkeys.cfg
06:08:34 <caracal> and btw, i just found the Hotkeys page: Tab is the ff button, very nice
06:10:07 *** Br33z4hSlut5 has joined #openttd
06:29:40 *** Cybertinus has joined #openttd
06:33:58 <caracal> wow, hawaii is *much* more fun now that i can build vehicles ;)
06:34:26 <caracal> so i guess i could use the scenario editor and add whatever newgrfs i thought were useful, eh?
06:38:36 <planetmaker> that'll get you into trouble earlier than later
06:39:13 <planetmaker> don't change industries. ever.
06:39:22 <planetmaker> houses is not unproblematic either.
06:40:10 <planetmaker> some train newgrfs mess with cargos, too.
06:40:42 <caracal> what? in the scenario editor, i can do anything i want, right? i'm not talking about changing a running game, just fixing the scenario itself
06:42:01 <planetmaker> a scenario is basically the very same thing as a savegame
06:42:16 <planetmaker> Thus the same things go wrong the same way, if you change NewGRFs. Also in the scenario editor
06:42:34 <caracal> that doesn't make sense ... how can you ever create scenarios, then?
06:42:52 <planetmaker> by choosing the NewGRFs. an then creating the map
06:43:15 <planetmaker> same as you create a new game
06:48:06 <caracal> so you're saying that you have to select all the newgrfs *before* doing anything else?
06:50:52 <caracal> i certainly haven't read any of the docs about scenario creation, just figured one could "fix" a problem like i'm seeing, without bringing down the house
06:55:50 <caracal> Terkhen: that seems to be talking about not adding/removing grfs after you start *playing* ... or am i mistaken
06:56:25 <Terkhen> it's about why it is how it is, and the plans regarding this issue
06:57:11 <planetmaker> caracal: 'after start playing' is technically the same as 'within the scenario editor'
06:57:21 <planetmaker> currently at least
06:57:40 <planetmaker> thus choose your add-ons prior to creating a map - whether starting a new game or creating a scenario
06:58:04 <caracal> well in this case, the scenario doesn't have any existing vehicles, and all i want to add are vehicle grfs
06:58:45 <planetmaker> as said... adding vehicle newgrfs works 95%. But it's not fail-proof
06:59:39 <planetmaker> and certainly not to be used along the lines of "I can change anything in the NewGRF config"
07:00:46 <planetmaker> or in other words caracal: it's just as fail proof as a scenario author can claim "this scenario has all newgrfs readily configured".
07:01:10 <planetmaker> and I know of vehicle newgrfs where that assumption also fails ;-)
07:03:17 <planetmaker> it can - IMHO with a certain right - be argued that the SE lacks quite some functionality if one cannot savely swap newgrfs. Yes... but that's not yet implemented
07:03:38 <planetmaker> ask about that in a year again ;-)
07:09:54 <caracal> i doubt i'll be designing any scenarios
07:10:18 <caracal> but it's nice to know what the editor can and cannot do
07:11:05 <planetmaker> currently it's like ingame just without money and time progression and the option to modify terrain
07:11:12 <planetmaker> and building rivers
07:11:21 <planetmaker> and expanding towns.hm
07:18:57 *** ashledombos has joined #openttd
07:27:28 *** DayDreamer has joined #openttd
07:32:43 *** JVassie_ has joined #openttd
07:37:02 *** sla_ro|master has joined #openttd
07:55:19 *** devilsadvocate has quit IRC
08:05:53 *** Progman has joined #openttd
08:19:19 *** devilsadvocate has joined #openttd
08:26:22 *** JVassie has joined #openttd
08:30:21 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause: could you please send me the source of the long wagon grf? I'd like to get a sort of 'guide vehicle' in order to get some basic structure of the grf
08:30:50 *** Maarten has joined #openttd
08:30:53 <planetmaker> I don't really care about cleaned up or not... I'll most likely rewrite it anyway. But that's less than re-invent it ;-)
08:39:46 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: www.informatik.uni-halle.de/~krause/longwag.nml (it's against some ancient version of nml, might need some updates)
08:40:07 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: www.informatik.uni-halle.de/~krause/longwag.pcx (that image has 16 views in it, but only 12 are used)
08:40:08 <planetmaker> do you have the dummy graphics, too?
08:40:30 <Eddi|zuHause> and www.informatik.uni-halle.de/~krause/default.lng
08:40:37 <Eddi|zuHause> but that one's trivial ;)
08:41:19 <planetmaker> I mostly want to establish the grf structure with parameters, translation tables,...
08:41:30 <planetmaker> but it needs a dummy vehicle, if I want to do that properly
08:41:46 <planetmaker> so... it could just as well use what we want as example
08:41:58 <planetmaker> and it fails currently on the graphics block ;-)
08:42:08 <planetmaker> due to its non-existance :-P
08:42:24 <Eddi|zuHause> i told you, ancient nml ;)
08:43:17 <Eddi|zuHause> r8xx or something
08:44:28 <planetmaker> I wasn't talking about your code when I said 'non-existance' ;-)
08:45:05 <Eddi|zuHause> then i misunderstood you
08:45:37 <planetmaker> that's what's missing locally here so that the grf compiles
08:45:51 <planetmaker> and... I'd like to put in your code there
08:47:28 <Eddi|zuHause> yeah, that should likely be easy
08:50:18 <Eddi|zuHause> to avoid a few of the glitches
08:50:37 <Eddi|zuHause> (tunnels, bridges, foundations, drag&drop)
08:50:45 <Terkhen> did George test that binary?
08:52:30 <George> George> would be hard to make a var to tell the number of steps before the turn? I
08:52:50 <George> At least for the second engive and the following ones?
08:53:55 <George> Currently I planed to do such test with massive GRF code, but if the game would provide it as var it would help me a lot
08:54:05 <planetmaker> ok, that's so-far unimplemented variables, yes, Eddi|zuHause ?
08:54:11 <planetmaker> which the added patch supplies
08:54:33 <planetmaker> let's see :-) :-D
08:54:37 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: might be useful to prepare a "use experimental features" parameter
08:56:39 <caracal> i'm getting the impression you can't unload cargo at a station for pickup by another sort of vehicle
08:56:49 <caracal> i must be thinking of simutrans
09:01:32 <Eddi|zuHause> you can, use the "transfer and leave empty" order
09:02:34 <caracal> oh, i didn't see that one
09:04:18 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, for our grf?
09:04:47 <caracal> works a treat, too, thanky
09:05:25 <Eddi|zuHause> hm... what's the syntax of spriteblocks nowadays?
09:06:47 <planetmaker> hm, it didn't change?
09:07:35 <Eddi|zuHause> nmlc: "input", line 23: Syntax error, unexpected token "{"
09:07:53 <Eddi|zuHause> line 23 is:spriteblock(FEAT_TRAINS) {
09:08:26 <planetmaker> no feature definition ;-)
09:09:34 <planetmaker> it's called spriteset and spritegroup... for trains
09:10:00 <JVassie> is actual push-pull operation doable these days?
09:10:22 <Eddi|zuHause> JVassie: not quite. all grfs fake that one by switching graphics
09:10:59 <planetmaker> check out an early version of ogfx+trains
09:11:06 <Eddi|zuHause> there's a variable for "train has flipped", and depending on that, they use the engine graphics for the last wagon and vice versa
09:11:14 <planetmaker> I removed it as it was too much hassle and has issues
09:11:39 <planetmaker> issues which cannot be resolved in a NewGRF
09:12:01 <planetmaker> like OpenTTD showing the train head in reverse mode where actually a wagon is
09:12:06 <Eddi|zuHause> that's also one of the things that could benefit from having a GUI- and map-sprite separately
09:12:19 <planetmaker> only partially ;-)
09:13:24 <planetmaker> push-pull IMHO needs an openttd implementation and an some means to determine whether a train may operate in push mode
09:13:49 <planetmaker> which probably needs a wagon property which all wagons need to have or so. or maybe only the last
09:14:56 <Eddi|zuHause> but the real trouble is telling the vehicle code to loop backwards through the vehicles upon movement
09:15:20 <planetmaker> yes, I know. That's where I gave up :-P
09:15:50 <planetmaker> or rather put that endeavour to rest for an indetermined time period ;-)
09:21:57 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: well, then solve fs#3569 instead ;)
09:28:39 <planetmaker> bah. That looks not like something nice to look into
09:28:55 <Eddi|zuHause> basically: bounding boxes of vehicles should be shortened when vehicle is shortened
09:30:22 <Eddi|zuHause> (my test-grf is affected by that as well, since var45 results are unreliable due to vehicles turning at the wrong point)
09:38:39 *** Chris_Booth has joined #openttd
09:47:04 <JVassie> planetmaker: do high settings of station spread still cause game to slow down?
09:48:38 <Eddi|zuHause> it's probably significantly better than when this warning was written
09:49:49 <JVassie> i see no noticeable effects with the setting at 60
09:52:46 <Eddi|zuHause> problematic is delivery of cargo. you need to find all industries in the catchment area
09:52:57 <Eddi|zuHause> on each un loading step
09:53:22 *** Chruker has joined #openttd
09:53:29 <Eddi|zuHause> but the search has been changed from "loop through all tiles in catchment area" to "loop through all industries on the map"
09:53:47 <Eddi|zuHause> which turned out to be faster in almost all cases
09:54:07 <Eddi|zuHause> and i believe some things are cached meanwhile
09:56:42 <JVassie> this station doesnt need to worry about that tbh
09:56:55 <peter1139> it still loops over all tiles
09:57:06 <peter1139> (in the station area)
09:57:47 <peter1139> so the performance "impact" is higher spread == larger stations == more tiles to loop through == slower
09:58:00 <peter1139> whether it's problem is another matter
10:04:54 <peter1139> and of course, if you don't use larger stations, there's no impact
10:09:15 <peter1139> 46*11 is pretty... big
10:09:56 <JVassie> 20 dont have track though
10:12:21 <Eddi|zuHause> that is fairly irrelevant
10:14:12 <caracal> dang, i've delivered like a dozen eligible loads on this one route, and still didn't get the subsidy
10:14:26 <JVassie> Eddi|zuHause: I dont think its gnna be a problem anyway
10:14:43 <JVassie> I dont plan on delivering any cargo
10:17:27 <planetmaker> and of course... without vehicles and cargo... it won't have much (any?) effect either
10:24:23 <JVassie> i got toa certain poitn making it
10:24:33 <JVassie> and got the ottd warning about station too spread out
10:24:38 <JVassie> so went into options to change the setting
10:36:51 *** keky___ has joined #openttd
10:41:20 *** Brianetta has joined #openttd
10:45:49 *** Vikthor has joined #openttd
10:49:28 <Eddi|zuHause> time to celebrate the 20th successful hack against sony in 60 days :p
10:51:37 <Terkhen> what happened this time?
10:52:02 <Eddi|zuHause> sql-injection against sony france
10:52:33 <Eddi|zuHause> some 100 thouthand-ish customer email-adresses liberated
10:55:42 <Eddi|zuHause> i'm fairly sure that is the technical term :p
10:56:07 <planetmaker> a diff would be larger than the current repo, though, and it's completely untested
10:56:40 *** Intexon has joined #openttd
10:56:42 <planetmaker> and I hope it doesn't break as I defined it as engine and not as wagon.
10:57:16 <planetmaker> I consider to commit this as a draft so we have something to work on and improve on
10:57:21 <planetmaker> Thoughts about that?
10:57:52 <Eddi|zuHause> <stdin>:2:28: fatal error: src/defines.pnml: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden
10:59:02 <Eddi|zuHause> your alignment is off, sometimes spaces, sometimes tabs
10:59:09 <DorpsGek> Sacro: Bjarni was last seen in #openttd 12 weeks, 1 day, 11 hours, 37 minutes, and 6 seconds ago: <Bjarni> thanks
10:59:51 <planetmaker> I forgot to add ALL files ;-). Try again
11:00:07 <planetmaker> yes... it's not beautified, indeed
11:02:35 <Eddi|zuHause> still same error
11:03:48 *** Chris_Booth has joined #openttd
11:04:02 <planetmaker> seems bundle_src works then not as it should...
11:06:15 <planetmaker> he, yes, I also copied the same file :S
11:06:19 <planetmaker> I need definitely more tea
11:13:59 *** HerzogDeXtEr has joined #openttd
11:18:00 <Yexo> planetmaker: // TODO: should be "return template_wagon;" -- test if newer NML understands that <- nml now does understand that
11:19:42 <planetmaker> I just kept Eddi's r800 code there ... testing to be done maybe tonight
11:19:56 <planetmaker> but it compiles ;-)
11:21:10 <planetmaker> but let's update the diff...
11:26:04 <Eddi|zuHause> what's the repo url?
11:27:27 <planetmaker> but... I guess before I commit there anything I'll rename the engine also to dummy and move it to templates, too
11:27:45 <planetmaker> As the articulated code is not really a template... it needs the vehicleID
11:38:10 <Eddi|zuHause> i guess the whole thing needs to become template, as argument the vehicle id, the filename, and an y-offset into the file
11:38:40 <planetmaker> yes. Not difficult to do really
11:39:23 <Eddi|zuHause> File src/gfx/dummy.png: git binary diffs are not supported.
11:39:51 <planetmaker> it's the png version of your pcx
11:40:04 <planetmaker> nothing changed whatsoever
11:40:22 <planetmaker> that would also need a proper template ;-)
11:40:36 <Yexo> other question: are we going to bother supporting TTDPatch at all?
11:40:54 *** peter1139 is now known as peter1138
11:41:05 <planetmaker> Why do you ask, Yexo ?
11:41:16 <Yexo> because it'll lead to extra work with railtypes
11:41:28 <planetmaker> Probably not only there
11:41:40 <Yexo> and with vehiclesIDs of course
11:41:40 <Eddi|zuHause> i don't think we have enough of a target audience there to bother...
11:41:54 <Yexo> I agree eddi, just wanted it to be clear
11:42:52 <planetmaker> I guess I don't have issues with that decision either
11:43:05 <Eddi|zuHause> nmlc: "src/templates/gfx_dummy_vehicle.pnml", line 101: Unrecognized identifier 'eng_dummy' encountered
11:45:00 <planetmaker> do you use both the latest NML and diff I posted?
11:45:18 <planetmaker> earlier it used to be eng_g3
11:45:31 <planetmaker> but I renamed it to a dummy engine completely
11:48:00 <Yexo> planetmaker: nml doesn't support that yet
11:48:15 <Yexo> you use the name in a switch block before the first item-block with that name
11:48:20 <Yexo> so the name is not yet registered
11:48:32 <Yexo> that should be supported though, so I'll fix that in nml
11:48:59 <Yexo> hmm, actually it already is supported
11:49:02 <Yexo> so it shouldn't fail on that
11:49:09 <Yexo> Eddi|zuHause: which nml version do you use?
11:49:21 <planetmaker> It compiles here.
11:49:26 <planetmaker> I tested that much
11:50:12 <Eddi|zuHause> hm... disk full... not good
11:50:36 <Eddi|zuHause> says: 0.1.1 (b7e6d30c9445)
11:51:06 <Eddi|zuHause> i guess that's Ammler's job ;)
11:51:25 <planetmaker> disk full is Ammler's job?
11:51:38 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, nah, you can get nightlies just as fine
11:51:39 <Eddi|zuHause> no, providing a newer version
11:52:07 <planetmaker> Still... I recommend you to use a checkout of NML
11:53:56 <planetmaker> Both Yexo and Hirundo do a good job in making old versions of NML obsolete quickly ;-)
11:54:51 <Yexo> actually you'll need r1436 to support that diff
11:55:16 <Eddi|zuHause> then it doesn't help that r1430 is provided...
11:55:18 <Yexo> as r1436 contains a critical fix for using "return x;" which pm uses
11:55:35 <Yexo> in about 6 hours r1436 (or whatever is tip at the time) will be provided
11:55:57 <Eddi|zuHause> Problem: nothing provides python(abi) = 2.6 needed by nml-r1430-suse1130.noarch
11:56:08 <planetmaker> that's why I suggest to use NML repo checkout ;-)
11:56:11 <Eddi|zuHause> need a 11.4 version
11:56:57 <Yexo> hmm, missing cd nml probably
11:57:38 <Eddi|zuHause> better if it installs to userspace (~/bin)
11:57:54 <planetmaker> or skip the install and sudo ln -s /usr/bin/nmlc /path/to/nmlc
11:57:56 <Yexo> should also be possible, but you'll have to check the flags it needs for that
11:58:10 <Yexo> if ~/bin if that's in your path :p
11:58:30 <Eddi|zuHause> ~/bin is in my path, yes
11:58:32 <Ammler> I don't think we have full disk somewhere, do we?
11:58:44 <Yexo> Ammler: no, that has nothing to do with you
11:58:47 <planetmaker> I think Eddi|zuHause has ;-)
11:58:53 <Eddi|zuHause> Ammler: no, but outdated nml
11:59:00 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, nightlies...
11:59:10 <planetmaker> you don't expect openttd tip either, do you?
11:59:14 <Ammler> Eddi|zuHause: I would recommend to use nml repo anyway
11:59:17 <Yexo> I guess eddi wants build-on-push
11:59:27 <Ammler> then symlink nmlc to your ~/bin
12:01:45 <Eddi|zuHause> ok. seems to build now
12:01:50 <Eddi|zuHause> Ammler: yes, that's what i did
12:02:24 <Ammler> the rpms are basically just for the other packages, not really for public :-)
12:14:45 <JVassie> Eddi|zuHause Yexo planetmaker
12:14:57 <JVassie> are we considering the option of making long wagons optional?
12:15:32 <Yexo> I think that means doubling the work for artists, so not a good idea
12:15:35 <planetmaker> maybe. But IMHO it basically means to have the same set twice
12:15:43 <Yexo> we should stick with either long wagons or normal-length wagons
12:16:01 <JVassie> the engines dotn need to change size, or do they?
12:17:16 <Eddi|zuHause> basically any vehicle longer than 12m would need two versions
12:17:27 <JVassie> did we decide 24m per tile?
12:18:05 <Eddi|zuHause> not definitely, only as a first guidance
12:18:36 <Eddi|zuHause> 26m is probably the longest wagon in the set
12:18:39 <JVassie> do you happen to have a .png with what the 12 (24) views look like?
12:18:50 <planetmaker> I think the long vehicle idea a unique idea and a unique selling point which is definitely worth persuing
12:19:20 <Eddi|zuHause> engines are usually shorter than that
12:19:34 <planetmaker> <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: www.informatik.uni-halle.de/~krause/longwag.pcx (that image has 16 views in it, but only 12 are used)
12:20:14 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: which year is the test engine?
12:20:18 <planetmaker> it'll need a proper graphics template for those vehicles
12:20:27 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, 1877 - 1896
12:20:48 <planetmaker> typical test years :-P
12:21:04 <Eddi|zuHause> because i tried 1880 and 1890 and it doesn't appear
12:22:24 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, did you also try grf parameters?
12:22:28 <JVassie> my only concern is our lack of sprite creators currently
12:22:36 <Eddi|zuHause> ah, no, i didn't check those
12:22:49 <planetmaker> it *should* be on by default, but...
12:23:20 <Eddi|zuHause> yeah, it's set to "core" and "prussia"
12:23:44 <planetmaker> I'm not sure whether avail_prussia_core = (param_amount < 2) && (param_epoch1 == 1 || param_epoch1 == 2); needs some more parenthesis
12:24:53 <planetmaker> oh... Eddi|zuHause that's the point: it's only climate1
12:25:02 <planetmaker> that's currently bullshit what I did there
12:25:09 <Eddi|zuHause> that'd be it then :p
12:25:13 <Yexo> planetmaker: it doesn't need more parenthesis
12:25:29 <planetmaker> yeah... but a conversion to CLIMATES_ALL ;-)
12:25:49 <planetmaker> climates_available: avail_prussia_core ? CLIMATES_ALL : 0;
12:25:52 <Yexo> add " ? CLIMATES_ALL : CLIMATES_NONE;" at the end
12:26:14 <Eddi|zuHause> hm... climate cheat doesn't fix this
12:26:30 <Yexo> and "reset_engines" after climate cheat?
12:28:32 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o orudge
12:29:28 <Eddi|zuHause> hm... no... started new game, only one grf, temperate, 1880
12:29:35 <Eddi|zuHause> no engine showed up
12:29:51 <planetmaker> try with -d grf=3 and see what openttd tells you
12:30:02 <planetmaker> whether the engine definition is accepted
12:30:35 <planetmaker> hm... it might also miss on the callback_flags
12:31:56 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, the articulated vehicle CBF is missing
12:32:15 <planetmaker> callback_flags: bitmask(VEH_CBF_REFITTED_CAPACITY, VEH_CBF_ARTICULATED_PARTS);
12:32:23 <Eddi|zuHause> conceptual thing: model_life := buy period + vehicle life; early retire := vehicle life
12:33:38 <planetmaker> ah. You mean the reliability decay is less then. Agreed
12:33:42 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: model life defines when reliability drops, early retire defines how long before that point the buy menu does not offer it anymore
12:34:10 <Eddi|zuHause> so a vehicle bought at the last possible date, should get a full lifetime of good reliability
12:34:38 <planetmaker> another patch updated ;-)
12:37:06 *** Guest5388 is now known as AD
12:45:08 <michi_cc> planetmaker: I don't now if you still saw that yesternight, but how about including the G10 as a low axle-weight cargo engine? (Date would be 1910-1925 with 2677 built engines, according to WP)
12:49:18 <JVassie> michi_cc: got a link? :)
12:49:50 <planetmaker> michi_cc, just add it :-)
12:50:23 <planetmaker> looks indeed like we need something for that service profile
12:50:54 <JVassie> add anything ya like :)
12:51:00 <JVassie> doesnt have to be just a core set addition
12:57:28 <MNIM> ...perhaps I should start making my threeway-junctions-with-terminus/roro-stations slightly less complicated >.>
12:58:17 <planetmaker> nah. Rather move the junction out of the town perimeter
12:58:25 <planetmaker> it's a bad place for it.
12:58:39 <JVassie> use realistic junctions :p
12:59:05 <MNIM> it's fairly realistic for a ottd junction >.>
12:59:55 <Eddi|zuHause> the station entrance is a little suboptimal
13:00:09 <planetmaker> I'd also consider the station placement not optimal ;-)
13:00:24 <Eddi|zuHause> and you should not mix path and block signals at a junction
13:00:36 <MNIM> yeah, I could probably have used a different setup like a fourway junction with a terminus station
13:00:56 <Eddi|zuHause> you have a signal missing coming from the lower right on the lowest track into the left part of the station
13:00:57 <planetmaker> MNIM, it's always a good idea to keep junctions and stations quit apart from eachother
13:01:10 <planetmaker> keeps things managable
13:01:45 <MNIM> hmmmh, whelp, you're right on the signal
13:02:20 <MNIM> though I had checked them all. :(
13:02:32 <Eddi|zuHause> the exit track from the right part of the station to the lower left needs some work
13:04:09 <JVassie> MNIM: check this out:
13:04:17 <MNIM> hmmmh, I seemed to have nuked that crossover during a reorganization
13:04:52 <JVassie> the station i was building
13:04:52 <MNIM> yeah, that's where it gets a little too much for me
13:04:54 <Eddi|zuHause> i would draw the exit from the left part to the upper left on the outside of that bridge
13:04:59 <MNIM> also, are those vacutrains?
13:05:34 <JVassie> there are no trains in that shot :p
13:05:54 <Eddi|zuHause> JVassie: use the "zoomed-in screenshot" option
13:06:11 <Eddi|zuHause> no, in the ? menu
13:06:44 <MNIM> oh wait, at the second look it appears it's dutch catenary, not those white vacuum tubes
13:07:27 <Eddi|zuHause> i take credit for coming up with the idea, and implementing it, as well ;)
13:07:52 <Terkhen> do you plan to use that station completely? :P
13:07:54 <JVassie> and you can have the zoomed in version
13:09:08 <JVassie> Terkhen: its a 'replica' of Frankfurt Hbf
13:09:29 <Eddi|zuHause> JVassie: what station set is that front building?
13:10:09 <MNIM> you know what the train orders really could use?
13:10:17 <planetmaker> hm... the tracks look too noisy for my taste, JVassie
13:10:25 <Eddi|zuHause> i know! shunting orders!
13:10:43 <MNIM> I was thinking more of 'reverse on spot' orders
13:10:50 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: "leave X wagons behind, take Y wagons" :p
13:10:52 <JVassie> planetmaker: how do you mean noisy?
13:11:15 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: use the "trains may reverse in stations" difficulty setting
13:11:22 <MNIM> that would be nice, but complicated
13:11:32 <JVassie> planetmaker: to do with nutracks no doubt
13:11:35 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: i don't like these new nutracks either
13:11:56 <MNIM> looks similar to me at least
13:11:58 <Eddi|zuHause> yep, since a month or so
13:12:29 <MNIM> hmmmh, perhaps I use an older version, but I like mine better
13:13:09 <MNIM> version 192 according to my newgrf info screen.
13:13:44 <MNIM> the only issue I have with it really is that the road crossings aren't properly drawn
13:13:50 <michi_cc> Hmm, either the prussian S7 or the T11 could be used for a low-axle weight engine for ~1902-1910, I'm just not sure if including one of them into core would make sense.
13:13:56 <planetmaker> hm, that noise is WAY too much
13:14:11 <planetmaker> it's even worse than some OpenGFX houses
13:14:11 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: that's probably one of the earliest with the new rails
13:14:28 <MNIM> EG-just the standard rail base over the road
13:14:57 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: the road crossings are in a newer version
13:16:28 <planetmaker> michi_cc, the main list may also contain engines which are not part of core. It gives us choice to consider
13:18:16 <michi_cc> Sure, I was just looking around because there are no passenger engines with <16t after 1900 (with the exception of the universal T3 with a low HP).
13:18:18 <Eddi|zuHause> T11 as replacement for the T3?
13:19:00 <Eddi|zuHause> maybe switch the T11 for the T12
13:19:14 <MNIM> is that noise so bad? 0-o
13:19:20 *** TWerkhoven has joined #openttd
13:19:39 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: yes, especially when you want to distinguish different railtypes
13:19:45 <MNIM> I kinda like it like this.
13:20:08 <MNIM> it's not like real rail bed is mirror-smooth either!
13:20:08 <Eddi|zuHause> the first three look almost the same
13:20:31 <MNIM> contrast could be better
13:20:32 * planetmaker prefers rather low-noise graphics for this game
13:20:47 <planetmaker> I don't say 'no noise'
13:20:58 <Eddi|zuHause> the opengfx grass also has pretty high noise
13:21:02 <MNIM> huck it, imma nuke that reningly junction and redo it
13:21:05 <Eddi|zuHause> additionally to being rather dark
13:21:18 <MNIM> that's Opengfx+landscape Im using there
13:21:55 <Eddi|zuHause> i don't like opengfx for those three reasons: darkness, noisiness and dullness
13:21:56 <planetmaker> Yes, but the grass may have, that's natural surface roughness. Houses, buildings, tracks, roads, vehicles should not that much
13:22:38 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: ever compared the factory with the original one?
13:22:46 *** TheMask96 has joined #openttd
13:22:54 <michi_cc> Eddi|zuHause: T12 has almost double HP over the T11 and a longer build period, so that is kind of a bad deal.
13:23:07 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, I might have done more than most
13:23:40 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: it looks totally empty, abandoned, like any factory around here...
13:24:56 <MNIM> I kinda abandoned the standard factories after having discovered the ECS sets
13:26:07 * MNIM nukes the bridge he torched a thousand times before!
13:26:09 <planetmaker> and you haven't even yet seen its construction stages ;-)
13:26:19 <MNIM> and the rest of the town along with it ]:-D
13:27:01 <planetmaker> the ttd factory (and steel mill) are so terribly bad there.
13:28:01 <Eddi|zuHause> michi_cc: but they have almost the same usage area
13:29:19 <JVassie> does it look better with those tracks?
13:29:20 * MNIM attempts to build a cloverleaf junction
13:30:24 <michi_cc> Eddi|zuHause: Sure, besides the axle weight there isn't much in favour of the T11. Maybe including the S7 for low axle-weight is a better idea as there's a gap in the express engines right now till the S10 comes.
13:30:25 * MNIM summons an amount of money and starts cracking
13:30:32 <Hirundo> I'd suggest to not build cloverleafs
13:31:02 <Eddi|zuHause> michi_cc: i think rather the historic buy-periods should be extended
13:32:00 <Eddi|zuHause> michi_cc: i'm currently leaning to taking the T11 for local/commuter, and let the P8 handle the stronger main passenger railway
13:32:48 <michi_cc> Makes sense if the buy period of the T11 gets extended a bit.
13:34:23 <MNIM> I don't like those inner two curves though
13:34:41 <Hirundo> you can quite easily make those larger
13:35:24 <MNIM> yeah, but the fun is in trying to limit the space and amount of terraforming used of course :p
13:37:16 <MNIM> and of course my lines don's exactly intesect at perfect positions
13:37:48 <Eddi|zuHause> now the P8 is the first engine requiring heavier rails
13:38:56 <Eddi|zuHause> maybe take the S6 instead of the S10?
13:39:46 <Eddi|zuHause> although it is only marginally faster than the P8
13:40:02 <JVassie> i presume this is a choice for the core set?
13:40:12 <JVassie> not for the set ingeneral?
13:40:59 <JVassie> thats what it looks like in real life
13:41:28 <MNIM> I never got why they design terminus stations IRL
13:42:00 <Terkhen> to demolish only half of the buildings in the city instead of all of them :P
13:42:22 <michi_cc> Eddi|zuHause: S6 would reduce the gap a bit and incidentally comes at the same time as the P8, making the heaver railtype more interesting.
13:42:38 <JVassie> MNIM / Terkhen, you heard about the plans for Stuttgart Hbf?
13:43:13 <JVassie> the plan is to rip up the current terminus
13:43:22 <JVassie> and make a new through station underground
13:43:30 <JVassie> turned thru 90 degrees
13:43:45 <Eddi|zuHause> JVassie: they try to do that in Stuttgart...
13:44:02 <Eddi|zuHause> i don't think they'll try that ever again anywhere :p
13:44:24 <planetmaker> I doubt they will. Indeed
13:44:47 <planetmaker> 5 billion Euro for that station project, though ;-)
13:45:10 <MNIM> I also kinda wonder if it would be possible to make bent stations in ottd possible
13:45:22 <JVassie> not with the current map array
13:45:28 <MNIM> that would make mountainous trains a lot more awesome
13:45:40 <michi_cc> IMHO the target should be to always have 4-5 (maybe a bit more including electrics) engines available without too big gaps in the service profile (i.e. it's okay to not always have all four pax profiles, but have at least something slow for local and something fast(er)).
13:45:40 <MNIM> how is a station represented on the map, then?
13:45:46 <Eddi|zuHause> JVassie: germany was at the brink of a revolution because of that station :p
13:46:06 <MNIM> as a special building which happens to have rails on top of it, or the other way round?
13:46:21 <Hirundo> It's just ones and zeroes really
13:46:30 <MNIM> if it's function on top of rails it could have loads more flexibility than currently exhibited
13:46:44 <Hirundo> All the stuff per tile has to fit in 9 bytes, with some extra information stored outside the map
13:46:44 <MNIM> those ones and zeros represent something, hirundo
13:47:33 <Hirundo> Yes, that's 72 bits in total
13:47:48 * MNIM multiplies that with 1024^2
13:48:33 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: the funny thing is, 1024^2 is exactly 1 MB
13:48:52 <MNIM> yeah, 1000vs1024, I know
13:49:17 <MNIM> but 72 megabite is less impressive than 75497472 bites :P
13:49:17 <Eddi|zuHause> so a 1024^2 map uses 9MB
13:49:50 <MNIM> imagine needing to take that much bites of a hamburger
13:50:12 <Eddi|zuHause> 9MB is actually ridiculously little, compared to most modern games
13:50:29 <MNIM> that's why I went :0 at nine bits per tile
13:50:35 <MNIM> I expected at least twice that
13:50:55 <MNIM> who doesn't confuse 'em sometimes?
13:51:03 <JVassie> What would be awesome is rewriting OTTD to allow up to say 100 bytes per tile
13:51:23 <Yexo> that would be really easy, but not awesome
13:51:31 <JVassie> 100MB for a 1024^2 map
13:51:55 <Yexo> sure, just extend the _m2 struct
13:52:07 <MNIM> it would be nice to have some representative structure in the map
13:52:22 <JVassie> Yexo, why not awesome?
13:52:24 <Eddi|zuHause> so: conclusion: P8 and S6 first to use heavier railtype around 1906, around same time, should we introduce larger cargo wagons to go with that railtype?
13:52:32 <JVassie> i reckon so Eddi|zuHause
13:52:40 <Yexo> because simply allowing the rest of the code to use 100 bytes instead of 9 doesn't magically add any features
13:52:46 <Hirundo> What's the point of 100 bytes of memory, when only 9 are used? What are you going to do with the other 91?
13:52:48 <MNIM> tile data divided up into information regions: one defines ground/sea underneath
13:52:52 <Eddi|zuHause> historically, that was also the time when freight speed was increased from 35km/h to 45km/h
13:53:03 <JVassie> Yexo, i thought that was what stopped new features beign worked on, the lack of more map bytes
13:53:19 <Eddi|zuHause> JVassie: no. that was never the reason
13:53:20 <MNIM> the next one defines the type of tile (infrastructure/town/industry)
13:53:23 <Yexo> more a proper way of extending them
13:53:51 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: that's what it currently does already
13:54:00 <Yexo> just needs saving and loading them
13:54:06 <MNIM> yes, but not in a very flexible way!
13:54:28 <MNIM> you can't define a new infrastructure, for example
13:54:32 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: but in a very compressed and fast way
13:54:57 <MNIM> ottd's main issue is not memory but cpu in my view
13:55:00 <Yexo> MNIM: defining "new infrastructure" is exactly what was done with "NewObjects"
13:55:04 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: you can define new infrastructure easily
13:55:15 <Yexo> and yes, cpu time is the limit, not memory
13:55:51 <MNIM> would I be able to define, say, diagonal rail stations or road with it?
13:55:54 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: but using more memory does not automatically make things faster
13:55:59 <Hirundo> Using more memory only makes that worse, though, because of more cache misses
13:56:31 <Eddi|zuHause> not every algorithm is a speed/memory tradeoff
13:56:32 <Yexo> MNIM: I don't see why not
13:56:33 <Hirundo> Although that may be offset by using the extra bytes to cache often-used information
13:56:38 <MNIM> in a way that is understandable to a coder using only C?
13:56:42 <Yexo> but just defining how they're stored in the map array doesn't make them magically work
13:56:46 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: the main problem with diagonal stations is graphics, imho
13:57:24 <Eddi|zuHause> then you have to do pathfinder additions, because a single station tile may now contain two platforms
13:57:34 <Yexo> and the newgrf specs, as currently the railtype specs assumes there are only non-diagonal station tiles
13:57:39 <Eddi|zuHause> means a change of various preconditions/assumptions
13:57:57 <Eddi|zuHause> the map array is the least of the problems
13:58:53 <planetmaker> it always looks easy. And then the details hit
13:59:10 <MNIM> stations are defined as special tiles named 'station'
13:59:20 <MNIM> which you can drive through and find a path through
13:59:28 <planetmaker> and much more ;-)
13:59:40 <MNIM> now if you would alter that system to a system that says "this is a rail"
13:59:57 <MNIM> nothing would be changed in pathfinding, right?
14:00:11 <Terkhen> trains wouldn't have destinations
14:00:20 <MNIM> now if you gave this "rail" tile a special property, being, "station"
14:00:23 <Eddi|zuHause> no, MNIM, tiles are already called "rail"
14:00:28 <Yexo> but you'd still need a way to make a distinction between station / non-station tiles
14:00:29 <planetmaker> the difference between rail and station is that: stations are destinations
14:00:43 <Eddi|zuHause> and have a special property that means "this is a station"
14:01:13 <Yexo> MNIM: also stations are drawn in a completely different way from normal rail tiles. Station tiles can't have signals, they can't have junctions, etc.
14:01:15 <planetmaker> station tiles know when and how they may be passed through. But so do rail tiles
14:02:11 <MNIM> that's what I mean! stations, bridges and tunnels all have special attributes which don't exactly hold up in the real world
14:02:16 <planetmaker> thus a station tile is already a rail tile with 'add-ons'
14:02:59 <MNIM> they don't have signals or anything!
14:03:18 <MNIM> most stations Ive seen have loads of signals
14:03:32 <Yexo> adding signals to stations on the map array is not a problem, however how exactly these signals should work is problematic
14:03:49 <MNIM> so they can for example park two trains after each other, which isn't possible
14:04:18 <Yexo> MNIM: in RL trains don't go to "any free platform at a given station", they go to "platform 1", or "platform 3", but it's defined where they go to
14:04:36 <Yexo> MNIM: and if you park two trains after eachother, but the one in front needs to reverse?
14:05:03 <Eddi|zuHause> Yexo: well, in Paris gare de l'est, they decide the platform like 15 minutes before the train arrives
14:05:20 <MNIM> the same would happen as if they were on normal track
14:05:35 <MNIM> that is, they can't, and should not in the first place!
14:05:49 <Eddi|zuHause> in germany, they decide the platform 3 years before ;)
14:06:03 <Yexo> eddi: interesting, I did not know that
14:06:06 <Eddi|zuHause> (unless there's delays and stuff)
14:06:22 <planetmaker> "Wegen Verzögerungen im Betriebsablauf, fährt heute ICE xyz außerplanmäßig auf Gleis3"
14:06:48 <MNIM> though, I don't know how you guys do it
14:06:48 <planetmaker> (which translates to "because we messed up, things are different"
14:07:09 <MNIM> but I often specify which platform a train needs to go to with waypoints
14:07:34 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: yep, but there's still a difference between "we have a plan, but we don't stick to it", and "we don't have a plan, we just make it up as we go along"
14:07:58 <MNIM> especially at stations mixing my three train formats (UL-28 tiles, L-14 tiles and N-5 tiles)
14:10:16 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: which is especially annoying if you don't end up on the platform directly next to the train that you want to reach, which leaves <2min later
14:10:47 <MNIM> Ah. so that's what limits bridges and tunnels in only two directions.
14:11:00 <MNIM> sometimes I wish I was a better coder
14:11:19 <MNIM> it's kinda interesting to know though
14:11:42 <MNIM> there's actually people working on tunnels and bridges with (limited) signals on it!
14:11:50 <MNIM> and it supposedly works too
14:12:06 <Eddi|zuHause> it actually doesn't, but that's another story
14:12:58 <Yexo> afaik nobody is working on proper support for it
14:13:10 <Yexo> the patch you can find in the development section is a hack that will break in several cases
14:13:36 <MNIM> most stuff breaks if you handle it wrong
14:13:38 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: it uses a totally wrong approach
14:13:49 <planetmaker> there are zillions of things which can be improved
14:14:02 <MNIM> of course, that's the coders dilemma
14:14:10 <Yexo> what such a feature needs is splitting a bridge in separate tiles, on each of which you can place signals (and stations, and....)
14:14:13 <MNIM> so much code to write, not enough fingers (and brains)
14:14:42 <Eddi|zuHause> an off-map storage for "wormhole" tiles
14:16:36 <MNIM> from what I gathered the current hack places a signal at the wormhole foot and then controls the train's behaviour directly instead of letting it pay attention to any (not really existing signals)?
14:16:53 <Terkhen> IIRC the coder of that patch started a new patch to support signals in tunnels and bridges properly, but left it incomplete
14:16:57 <Eddi|zuHause> yes. something like that
14:17:47 <peter1138> i once had custom bridgeheads working!
14:19:03 <MNIM> according to the suggested improvements on the wiki they are only 50% done with that
14:19:20 <Eddi|zuHause> peter1138: but if they had been included back then, we wouldn't have bridges-over-everything now
14:19:44 <MNIM> it says that diagonal clearing and leveling isn't done either, but it works very damn well for a feature that doesn't exist
14:20:21 <JVassie> what features are possible with more maps bytes?
14:20:29 <MNIM> anyway, that's the hack which isn't(shouldn't) be working?
14:20:42 <Terkhen> MNIM: the people that decided to create that page (suggested improvements) have not been updating it much
14:20:44 <MNIM> jvassie: theoretically or practically?
14:20:59 <Yexo> that page is for several patches outdated or outright wrong
14:21:01 <MNIM> but from my observations it's rather outdated
14:21:11 <MNIM> theoretically, unlimited
14:21:13 <Yexo> and in no way an official "this is the todo list" page
14:21:25 <Eddi|zuHause> peter1138: afair that was one of the things that didn't work out with celestar's custom bridge heads, because the wormhole behaviour of bridges made it impossible to have a train stop at a signal on the bridgehead
14:21:32 <MNIM> but in the end it all depends on the willpower and intellect of the coder
14:21:42 <MNIM> just try creating a perfect junction
14:21:58 <peter1138> i don't remember if i had signals on custom bridgeheads
14:22:02 <Terkhen> I'm pretty sure that free time also plays a role :P
14:22:03 <MNIM> most effecient imaginable
14:22:34 <MNIM> tekrhen: kinda included that in willpower, but yeah, you could say it deserves separate mention
14:22:39 <Eddi|zuHause> peter1138: even if you didn't, i'm pretty sure that was easier before wormhole-bridges were introduced
14:22:42 <Yexo> but how efficient a junction is depends on train length
14:22:51 <peter1138> Eddi|zuHause, bridges have always been wormholes
14:23:13 <peter1138> or was that tunnels? lol
14:23:45 <Terkhen> for me doing RL stuff is what requires willpower, not doing OpenTTD stuff :P
14:23:54 <peter1138> Eddi|zuHause, anyway, i want diagonal bridges :S
14:23:56 <Eddi|zuHause> i don't know how trains behaved on the old bridges, but there were definitely real bridge tiles inbetween
14:24:06 <MNIM> Yexo: Im not sure, but Ive seen 28 tile long trains go through junctions faster than five tiles long
14:24:06 <Eddi|zuHause> peter1138: i do want that, too :)
14:24:40 <MNIM> terkhen: does that include complicated and boring coding jobs?
14:24:59 <Terkhen> mostly because RL stuff is also complicated and boring coding jobs
14:25:04 <Yexo> the complicated parts are often the most fun
14:25:58 <peter1138> i found doing utf-8 fun
14:26:34 <peter1138> should i have used ucs-4? :p
14:27:03 <JVassie> Is there anyway to get a free and legal (old) version of visual studio that anyone knows of?
14:27:25 <JVassie> as recent as possible
14:27:33 <peter1138> and why not visual studio express?
14:27:59 <MNIM> are we on a roll here? 8rolleyes*
14:28:08 <JVassie> VSE doesnt include full MSDN library
14:28:29 <Terkhen> JVassie: you can get express for free, and MSVC via dreamspark if you are a university student
14:28:36 <Terkhen> that's how I got my copy :P
14:29:20 <JVassie> I wonder if doing a course at OU counts
14:29:21 <Eddi|zuHause> that's the easiest thing to do: go to the immatriculation office and say: "i want"
14:30:04 *** Intexon has joined #openttd
14:30:10 <Terkhen> JVassie: I saw a lot of authorized places for spain that were not universities, just try :P
14:31:11 <__ln__> Terkhen: what edition of MSVC do you actually get through dreamspark?
14:31:30 <Terkhen> visual studio 2010 professional
14:31:34 <JVassie> $239 for 2005 Visual Studio Standard through Amazon >.>
14:32:08 <__ln__> Terkhen: but not the even more advanced ones that have static analysis and stuff?
14:32:24 <JVassie> you need ultimate for that __ln__
14:32:39 <Terkhen> probably not, I don't know much about different versions of MSVC :P
14:32:50 <Chris_Booth> Terkhen: you can also get MSVS free from MSDN AA as a student
14:33:21 <Terkhen> I only use it to debug openttd and because my project is a lot less buggy with it than with mingw
14:33:24 * JVassie tries to get verified
14:34:04 <JVassie> I have no activation code or ISIC card
14:34:44 <Yexo> the dutch government just accepted legislation forcing websites to to ask users "for unambiguous consent to place any unnecessary cookies" such as cookies from advertising companies
14:35:24 <Terkhen> Chris_Booth: what do you require to sign up on that? IIRC I checked it but found dreamspark easier
14:35:57 <Chris_Booth> Terkhen: MSDN AA you need to find your university/School in the list
14:36:06 <Terkhen> same thing than dreamspark then
14:36:17 <JVassie> - An Open University 'confirmation of registration' for 60 points or more.
14:36:35 <Chris_Booth> then you use your university log in
14:37:00 <JVassie> Chris_Booth: does it support OU?
14:37:21 <Chris_Booth> shoudl do JVassie
14:37:23 <MNIM> yexo: they are forcing websites to ask people first before they are legally allowed to place cookies
14:37:25 <Eddi|zuHause> Yexo: as with all "internet laws", they probably meant well, had no clue, listened to too many lobbyists, and screwed up the whole thing beyond repair
14:37:35 <Chris_Booth> if you know what region of the UK OU should be found in
14:38:00 <Yexo> MNIM: a lot of websites that currently provide free content do so because they gain there profit via advertising
14:38:00 <MNIM> well, besides the practicality of the idea, that is
14:38:06 <JVassie> should be milton keynes
14:38:11 <Yexo> the advertising is profitable _due_ to those tracking cookies
14:38:15 <Chris_Booth> try and find it in there
14:38:16 <MNIM> advertising can be done in other ways
14:38:24 <peter1138> yay is now spelled jay?
14:38:30 <Chris_Booth> but I would guess the OU is where ever you have to send your work to
14:38:36 <Yexo> no tracking cookies -> advertising is less profitable -> either less content or more adverts
14:39:02 <MNIM> yexo: does your tv have tracking cookies?
14:39:23 <JVassie> is XNA game studio any good?
14:39:28 <Yexo> MNIM: I don't have a tv, which is mostly caused by the huge amount of advertisement between shows
14:39:34 <Eddi|zuHause> Yexo: but actually, when the person being tracked must take a consent action, the adverts to that person should be worth more
14:39:50 <MNIM> and you wanna imply advertisement isn't fricken annoying already?
14:40:04 <MNIM> (on the internet, that is)
14:40:21 <Yexo> MNIM: no, but without tracking cookies we'll either get more adds or more annoying adds (popups, anyone?)
14:40:31 <Chris_Booth> JVassie: never used it
14:40:46 <Yexo> and I'd rather have somewhat relevant adds than completely random ones
14:41:04 <Terkhen> Chris_Booth: I remember now, they required me to contact with one of the departments of my university; dreamspark only needed my student email
14:41:05 <MNIM> you'll get 'em anyway if you don't have a popup blocker
14:41:09 <Eddi|zuHause> Yexo: i generally turn off flash because of annoying ads
14:41:24 <Chris_Booth> Terkhen: that is probably true
14:41:37 <Chris_Booth> but atleast MSDN AA works for JVassie
14:41:46 <Chris_Booth> or should do if he is a computing student
14:42:31 <Chris_Booth> and I know my university isn't singed upto dreamweaver
14:42:39 <Chris_Booth> but is on the MSDN database
14:44:55 <Chris_Booth> I am also not sure the difference in MS products you get from both, but I guess MSDN AA would be more computing based, such as MS server and extensions such as SQL or Exchange
14:45:09 <JVassie> Chris_Booth: im not technically a current OU student :p
14:45:37 <Chris_Booth> you are not JVassie? but can you access the MSDN stuff?
14:45:59 <JVassie> well i get up to the poitn where i can put stuff in the basket
14:46:06 <JVassie> it then asks for me to login
14:46:14 <JVassie> but it doesnt look like it will use my OU login
14:46:46 <JVassie> and if i choose register, it asks for an account identifier
14:47:23 <Chris_Booth> I am not sure, since you are not realy a student
14:47:30 <JVassie> Please enter a valid username and password. Note that you must register on this webstore to be able to sign in -- an account you may have with your institution is not sufficient.
14:47:43 <Chris_Booth> it should just take the login you use from you webmail
14:48:14 <Chris_Booth> maybe you or your unviersity needs to add you to the list
14:49:55 <MNIM> hmmmmh, now I got a decent looking junction, now I need to install lighting and move that town
14:49:56 <SpComb> dreamspark used my university's web SSO
14:50:07 <SpComb> MSDNAA, I think it was just an email
14:50:20 <SpComb> or there might have been some kind of in-house manual approval as well
14:50:48 <Chris_Booth> it was 3 years ago I did the MSDN AA signup so not a clue
14:51:04 <JVassie> my need for it isnt essential
14:51:12 <Chris_Booth> think I had to fill a form out at university and give it to the head of maths & computing
14:51:16 <JVassie> could fidn another IDE I guess
14:51:27 <JVassie> anyoen suggest a good IDE for C++?
14:51:34 <MNIM> I had to cheat a bit by going outside my originally intended bounding box, but it's not too bad in the end, I guess
14:51:39 <peter1138> erm, you don't need msdn for the ide...
14:51:46 <Terkhen> geany; on windows it is missing the console though
14:51:58 <Chris_Booth> you can get VS Express for the IDE
14:52:04 <peter1138> my preference is vim, mind you
14:52:05 <Chris_Booth> or you can use netbeans
14:52:21 <Chris_Booth> Netbeans is quite nice
14:52:22 <JVassie> peter1138: didnt need MSDN for the IDE
14:52:23 <peter1138> if you swing that way
14:52:37 <JVassie> OU used Netbeans for Java
14:52:39 <Terkhen> IIRC codeblocks on windows includes mingw so you don't have to set it up, but I don't like it much
14:52:56 <peter1138> maybe eclipse if that supports c++
14:53:09 <JVassie> michi_cc: what other core set stuff are we thinking?
14:53:12 <Chris_Booth> I never realy like Eclipse
14:53:23 <JVassie> havent got much planned for 1920s onwards yet
14:54:10 <Chris_Booth> only reason I would se Eclipse is if I wanted to make and android app
14:55:01 <Chris_Booth> never used vim, but I am sure its nice
14:55:18 <JVassie> not when learning a language
14:55:30 <SpComb> IDEs are terrible tools to learn when learning a language
14:55:43 <SpComb> since they prevent you from actually understanding how the app is actually built and launched
14:55:47 *** Vikthor has joined #openttd
14:56:10 <SpComb> IDEs should really only be used once you understand the project/build process and what the IDE actually does
14:56:12 <Chris_Booth> and the fact they write most the code for use
14:56:29 <Yexo> SpComb: you can argue that both ways: it makes launching your first app easier, so the user can focus on the langauge, not on the tools
14:56:29 <SpComb> otherwise you'll be completely lost when it somehow breaks or you have to actually *do* something other than just copy-paste example code
14:56:44 <SpComb> yeah well, languages should also be simple enough to be useable without IDEs :)
14:57:20 <Yexo> it's not just the language, no ide usually means you're back to the commandline
14:57:28 <Chris_Booth> SpComb each to ones own, if you like and IDE use one, if you don't you will never have to
14:57:28 <Yexo> which is for a lot of users a scary thing
14:57:47 <SpComb> well, they should get comfortable with it if that's what the stuff they do is based on
14:58:18 <Yexo> agreed, but they can also do that after a while
14:58:57 <SpComb> e.g. python's pretty easy to get started with without any IDEs
14:59:35 <SpComb> Chris_Booth: it's not just that, it's also a matter of understanding the tools you're using, since things will inenvitably break, or you'll want to do things that aren't immediately apparent
15:00:05 <Terkhen> we started learning C++ using DevC++, which was already old and unsupported back then
15:00:22 <Terkhen> I wish they have taught us properly, it made me lose a lot of time :P
15:00:26 <Chris_Booth> I am not sure about that, I have been coding for 6 years now and never wanted to not use an IDE
15:01:19 * Terkhen had to unlearn many things regarding the tools and then relearn them properly
15:01:39 <michi_cc> JVassie: Eddis proposal with the S6 is still open. Makes sense from a timeline POV, even if it is significantly less powerful than the S10.1
15:02:47 <SpComb> I had the download-sdk-and-click-create-project-and-start-coding thing with QML and Symbian now
15:03:02 <SpComb> and our project's build stuff is a right mess because of it
15:04:02 <SpComb> but on the other hand, I e.g. installed the Harmattan SDK stuff today, and the IDE for that was broken, but I was able to launch the emulator and install the .deb manually from the command line :)
15:04:20 <SpComb> (although the emulator was still completely broken and the app even more so)
15:04:57 <SpComb> Chris_Booth: it works fine if you stick with the stuff that works fine, but inenvitably I tend to find that anything nontrivial tends to wander outside of that area pretty quickly
15:05:14 <SpComb> at which point all the IDE hand-holding just gets in the way of understanding and getting the thing working
15:09:38 <SpComb> abstractions are nice and absolutely required in programming, but it's still beneficial to know what's behind them
15:11:03 <peter1138> it helps if you can learn to code with intellisense
15:12:11 <planetmaker> michi_cc, I'm not sure that engine adds anything...
15:12:44 <planetmaker> it's introduced at the same time as the P8, both cater passengers
15:13:22 <planetmaker> both have about same axle weight
15:13:31 <michi_cc> Well, wasn't my idea :)
15:13:34 <planetmaker> what would be the reason to not have the P8 do its job?
15:15:13 <MNIM> I wish you could dig down with tunnels
15:15:15 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: i thought of speed limit on passenger wagons, but no speed limit on long distance wagons
15:15:16 <planetmaker> if at all, it might replace the S10
15:15:31 <MNIM> like placing a tunnel on a flat tile
15:15:43 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, speed limit on wagons... what's that to do with the engine?
15:15:58 <Eddi|zuHause> so if all passenger trains go 60km/h, it makes sense to put a cheaper P8 on that, instead of a more expensive S6
15:16:38 <Eddi|zuHause> successively increase passenger train speed later, similar to freight train speed
15:17:28 <planetmaker> the speed difference of the two engines is 10 km/h: 100 vs. 110
15:18:01 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, but speed limit would only be relevant to long distance trains
15:18:19 <Eddi|zuHause> which exactly separates these two engines
15:18:41 <planetmaker> sorry, I don't follow
15:18:53 <planetmaker> both have the same speed approximately.
15:19:09 <planetmaker> how would you limit one of the engines?
15:19:51 <planetmaker> and with which justification limit passenger wagons after the P8 to 60km/h while allowing them to travel 110 after the S6?
15:19:56 <MNIM> hmmmh, lemmy make a little example of what I mean
15:20:03 <Eddi|zuHause> two passenger wagon classes: "regional" with speed limit (at 1900 around 60km/h), "long distance" without speed limit
15:20:23 <planetmaker> ok. And why would the P8 not pull both?
15:20:39 <Eddi|zuHause> it realistically also did
15:20:48 <planetmaker> that's what I assumed ;-)
15:20:51 <Eddi|zuHause> but the S6 is faster, so better suited for long distance
15:21:04 <planetmaker> so you take the 10km/h faster as the reason?
15:21:21 <JVassie> we only have 1 commuter loco sorted so far :p
15:21:41 <planetmaker> JVassie, P8 is the multi-purpose work horse
15:21:54 <Eddi|zuHause> the P8 would be slightly slower, but would be cheaper, so better for regional passenger, which doesn't need the speed
15:22:16 <JVassie> P8 would cover passenger, local and commuter?
15:22:25 <Eddi|zuHause> JVassie: "commuter" at this point means the railways around berlin
15:22:49 <Eddi|zuHause> that what later becomes the "S-Bahn"
15:22:52 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, well. I guess I have no strong opinion either way
15:23:09 <Eddi|zuHause> JVassie: at this point in a game, you likely don't have a lot of major cities anyway
15:23:13 <planetmaker> If you think it makes sense. Though I think we could currently do without
15:23:26 <JVassie> well Eddi, if you start in 1850 you might well do
15:23:46 <planetmaker> If we have sprites abundantly, we can still consider to move this to core
15:25:21 <planetmaker> Though we might want to continue this coverage list into the post-WW2 era
15:25:40 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, DRG stock is next
15:26:02 <planetmaker> having more engines there might make the choice for or agains engines in the late 20s also easier :-)
15:26:13 <Eddi|zuHause> but what's currently in the DBSet is a rough guide
15:26:51 <JVassie> DBSet was obviously written when the 116 ID limit was in place
15:27:32 <MNIM> not like the advanced tunnels set, where you can simply build (some things) on top of the entrance, but you still need to terraform down
15:27:49 <MNIM> but where the tunnel entrance itself points down
15:28:06 <JVassie> i solve it by making the area bigger :p
15:28:35 <MNIM> true, but I always try to build within existing confines
15:28:41 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: that might actually not be too hard to implement
15:28:57 <MNIM> which, in my view, is one of the very challenges that make it fun
15:28:59 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: just replace the tunnel building mechanism with the bridge building mechanism
15:29:29 <MNIM> well, replace tunnel head with bridge head, keep tunnel underground, you mean?
15:29:51 <Eddi|zuHause> tunnel head and bridge heads are almost the same
15:30:06 <JVassie> i smell new feature :p
15:30:17 <planetmaker> custom tunnel entrances might work, if the tunnel entrance is replaced by a(n action5?) which shows the entrance at the tile border
15:30:27 <planetmaker> and draws a flat tile on top
15:30:33 <planetmaker> might look ugly, though ;-)
15:31:10 <MNIM> well, that could be solved with making sprites
15:31:28 <planetmaker> oh, many things could be solved by that.
15:31:35 <DorpsGek> planetmaker: someone was last seen in #openttd 35 weeks, 2 days, 21 hours, 51 minutes, and 12 seconds ago: <Someone> indeed
15:31:40 <planetmaker> ^ lazy guy though
15:31:42 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: you need 4 sprites per climate, and probably around 10-20 lines of code
15:32:13 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, if you use the foundation approach you might only need two
15:32:19 <MNIM> are newgrfs built with C++?
15:32:27 <planetmaker> but yes... 4 makes more sense.
15:32:44 <MNIM> hmmmh, in that case, tough luck
15:32:51 <MNIM> C++ I might just attempt
15:33:01 <planetmaker> uhm... you didn't understand the problem ;-)
15:33:33 <planetmaker> custom tunnel entrances need code support within OpenTTD. And sprite support by its base set(s)
15:33:55 <planetmaker> that's got little to do with NewGRFs - initially
15:34:29 <Eddi|zuHause> MNIM: start at src/tunnelbridge_cmd.cpp
15:37:53 <peter1138> you'll need quite a lot of gui changes too
15:38:14 <JVassie> where can the source be found? openttd.org i presume?
15:38:40 <Eddi|zuHause> "svn co svn://svn.openttd.org/trunk"
15:39:48 <peter1138> or git clone git://git.openttd.org/openttd/trunk.git
15:39:49 <JVassie> yeh got it thx lads :p
15:39:49 <michi_cc> or git clone git://git.openttd.org/openttd/trunk.git
15:42:37 <planetmaker> hg or git are more suitable for people toying with patches IMHO
15:44:25 <michi_cc> Regarding DRG rolling stock, how is the plan regarding railtypes? Explicitly distinguish <16t, <18t, >18t etc or do it more like DBrails seems to do it, i.e. just have main line and branch line?
15:44:50 <JVassie> well were usign axle weights afaik
15:44:56 <JVassie> so I guess sticking with that?
15:45:24 <michi_cc> Simplified case would mean to classify the axle weight relatively, i.e. 16t for the early trains and then somewhere in the DRG era put all with <16t into the branch line class.
15:45:40 <planetmaker> no, we can support that explicitly w/o relative stuff
15:45:54 <planetmaker> people can then upgrade. I mean... that's easy-peasy
15:46:25 <JVassie> so whats the major roadblock currently in terms of expanding the number of bridges?
15:46:29 <michi_cc> It means more railtypes though, because the current scheme would make for example BR01 and BR03 redundant.
15:46:40 <planetmaker> JVassie, *someone* is it. He's a slacker
15:47:26 <planetmaker> michi_cc, not really, does it? We have 16, 18 20, 20 and 22.5
15:47:51 <planetmaker> JVassie, it simply needs doing
15:48:43 <peter1138> i wrote newgrf bridges once
15:48:45 <peter1138> i had a patch someone
15:49:13 <michi_cc> That would make up to 8 types including catenary, which is quite a lot already. The bold types in the issue only indicate 16 and 20 for non-electrified right now.
15:49:38 <planetmaker> but yes, it's electrified
15:50:36 <planetmaker> one could add Bn w/o catenary, if electrification of 18t track bothers people
15:50:46 <planetmaker> then it's 6 types
15:50:56 *** devilsadvocate has quit IRC
15:51:20 <Eddi|zuHause> michi_cc: the difference between 18t and 20t versions of engines doesn't matter in that proposed track set, indeed
15:51:21 <planetmaker> Though I think the 5 types is ok.
15:51:50 <Eddi|zuHause> that's why 18t versions in the DRG-era (e.g. BR 03) would not be "core"
15:53:00 <Chris_Booth> with nuTracks is there a way to disable Very High Speed Rail? (the unlited rail)
15:53:06 <michi_cc> But then there's no need at all to build more than the 20t track type, if there are no lower-axle weight engines.
15:53:38 <planetmaker> but there are such engines
15:53:46 <JVassie> Eddi|zuHause: got that test .grf for longer wagons to hand pls?
15:53:57 <JVassie> Chris_Booth: check the parameters
15:54:07 <planetmaker> JVassie, build the diff I linked earlier ;-)
15:54:31 <JVassie> im wanting to send someone the .grf :p
15:54:46 <michi_cc> So either the Bn track is needed, or track types of engines aren't aligned exactly with reality but simply chosen based on gameplay into heavy rail and lighter rail.
15:55:07 <Chris_Booth> JVassie: I will have to read the readme then since in the nice Parm GUI I can't find it
15:55:21 <Eddi|zuHause> michi_cc: that's the problem i have with this as well ;)
15:55:50 <JVassie> how many track types are we limited to? 16 total?
15:56:04 <planetmaker> I tend towards allowing for some artistic license wrt track type usage
15:57:05 <michi_cc> Using all 16 is not a good idea though, especially if you want to allow space for narrow gauge, rack rail, transrapid and whatever else somebody could come up with.
15:57:09 <planetmaker> though I could live with 6 track types
15:57:17 <planetmaker> 8 already sounds too much to me
15:57:49 <planetmaker> as I'd expect to have a monorail, metro, transrapid, narrow gauge tracks available for other means of transport concurrently
15:58:12 <Eddi|zuHause> the proposed 10, 2 for metro, 2 for narrow gauge, leaves 2 for rack and transrapid
15:58:47 <planetmaker> it feels to me like too much micromanagement
15:59:19 <planetmaker> 5, maybe 6 track types which make a difference still sound like they add fun.
15:59:30 <planetmaker> Really more, just for rail... dunno
15:59:44 <Eddi|zuHause> the "realistic" reason for having the 18t versions like BR 03 was because they didn't manage to upgrade the tracks
15:59:51 <Chris_Booth> I like speed limited rail
16:00:07 <Chris_Booth> means I can run all trains at stations
16:00:20 <Chris_Booth> then split networks into highspeed and low speed
16:00:22 <michi_cc> So the real question is, should the player be rewarded for upgraiding rails more than once, or do we use that purely to have a reason to include some more engines?
16:00:27 *** devilsadvocate has joined #openttd
16:00:34 <Eddi|zuHause> Chris_Booth: speed limits alone are boring, because they have almost no significance to freight
16:01:14 <Chris_Booth> Eddi|zuHause: I only use them in mixed cargo stations to stop fast trains slowing/stoping all the time
16:01:16 <JVassie> can we parameterise axle weights? ;p
16:01:45 <Eddi|zuHause> JVassie: the game has no concept of axle weights
16:01:50 <Chris_Booth> or maybe I have a mixed cargo junction with highspeed and low speed trains
16:01:55 <Eddi|zuHause> this purely depends on the used track set
16:02:15 <JVassie> well I presume were plannong on releasing one
16:05:04 <Chris_Booth> would slower track not have a high tonnage?
16:05:16 <Chris_Booth> since it has less track stress?
16:05:26 <Chris_Booth> otherwise there is no reason to use it apart from date
16:05:29 <JVassie> Ameecher just asked me that
16:05:54 <Eddi|zuHause> that's why my original proposal has both slow and fast versions for the higher weights
16:06:11 <JVassie> so if the axle weight is larger than the limit, it cant use that track fullstop?
16:06:27 <Eddi|zuHause> JVassie: either that, or have really high running cost
16:06:41 <planetmaker> michi_cc, yes, I can live with that.
16:06:51 <planetmaker> But pretty please not more rail track types ;-)
16:06:56 <JVassie> Ameecher suggested that trains above the limit should be limited in speed
16:07:31 <Eddi|zuHause> JVassie: that's difficult, unless you implement it on a per-engine-basis
16:08:06 <JVassie> a lot of work to do it per engine, or just a difficult feature anyway?
16:08:39 <michi_cc> We could even drop the speed limit completely, why have S 1 with 90 km/h *and* low axle weight if the speed can only be used on a better track?
16:08:39 <planetmaker> it would IMHO defy the axle weight categorization
16:09:06 <Eddi|zuHause> JVassie: i think just not allowing is enough
16:09:35 <planetmaker> michi_cc, yes, possibly. But it could be considered a step up in signaling technique, too
16:09:36 <Chris_Booth> I can understand weight limiting a train for a full train, so 240t max
16:09:41 <Chris_Booth> but not with axel wight
16:09:50 <planetmaker> Chris_Booth, but axle weight is what happens in RL
16:09:50 <JVassie> well axle wight is what counts#
16:10:01 <michi_cc> And even in reality the track type isn't what is limiting the speed, it's the track alignment that does
16:10:02 <JVassie> its like an elephant vs a stiletto
16:10:06 <Chris_Booth> planetmaker: this is not RL
16:10:21 <planetmaker> don't you say :-P
16:10:30 <Eddi|zuHause> michi_cc: i'd like to drastically lower the curve speed penalties
16:10:42 <JVassie> <Eddi|zuHause> JVassie: either that, or have really high running cost <-- how easy is it to charge a load of extra money?
16:10:52 <Eddi|zuHause> JVassie: there is a callback for that
16:10:55 <Chris_Booth> I would have an ingame use to limit a train by power to weight ratio
16:11:00 <Chris_Booth> but not a axel qeight
16:11:09 <Chris_Booth> that is just silly imo
16:11:17 <Eddi|zuHause> JVassie: not easy, but possible
16:11:48 <Chris_Booth> it like openttd doesn't know about voltage, and doesn't need to
16:12:05 <Chris_Booth> these are things that just make the game silly
16:12:13 <JVassie> you dont have to use CETS :p
16:12:21 <Eddi|zuHause> Chris_Booth: you can just use no track set
16:12:36 <JVassie> we couldve gone down the rotue of specifying 25k AC and 1500V DC seperate track
16:12:37 <planetmaker> JVassie, it's nothing to do with CETS ;-)
16:12:39 <Chris_Booth> Eddi|zuHause: most the time I do
16:12:47 <Eddi|zuHause> all trains will default to RAIL/ELRL if you don't use a track set
16:12:51 <planetmaker> it'd be all separate
16:12:51 <JVassie> planetmaker: DBRails then
16:13:02 *** |Jeroen| has joined #openttd
16:13:13 <planetmaker> CERTS ;-) central european rail track set :-P
16:13:53 <Eddi|zuHause> JVassie: the TOE set tries to model 15kV/25kV/3kV/1.5kV difference
16:14:23 <Eddi|zuHause> maybe we should record that stuff in the table, can decide to use that later ;)
16:14:31 <JVassie> could be interesting :p
16:14:58 <Chris_Booth> TOE is the one that is similar to 2cc but with voltage limits
16:15:00 <Eddi|zuHause> although the most prominent user of 25kV, France, is not represented in the set
16:15:13 <JVassie> germany is all 25kV, no?
16:15:34 <Chris_Booth> 25kV is mainly France and UK
16:16:09 <Chris_Booth> not sure what italy is
16:16:13 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, switzerland, austria and germany very early decided to go with a common voltage
16:16:22 <michi_cc> Eddi|zuHause: lower? I think they are quite low already, seeing that even a 45° curve is only limited to 88.
16:16:50 <JVassie> CD is a mix of 3kV and 25kV
16:17:00 <Eddi|zuHause> PKP and CSD decided to drop 15kV after WWII
16:17:19 *** Hyronymus has joined #openttd
16:17:51 <Chris_Booth> I would guess the 25k is highspeed
16:17:58 <Chris_Booth> and 3kv is old rails
16:18:23 <JVassie> mind you, all of Finland's OHLE is 25kV
16:18:59 <Eddi|zuHause> but this all is fairly irrelevant unless you really want to model cross-border stuff
16:19:08 <Hyronymus> more countries made the choice for 25kV
16:19:26 <JVassie> would make for a very interestign set Eddi
16:19:29 <Chris_Booth> even then you have dualvoltage trains like the ICE3 and TGV POS
16:19:36 <JVassie> gives much more scope for a lot of newer locos
16:19:42 <JVassie> which are dual/triple/quad voltage
16:20:15 <JVassie> also France's OHLE is about 2/5 1500V and 3/5 25kV
16:21:54 <JVassie> Eddi|zuHause: is there any way of providing for different voltages except for seperate railtypes?
16:22:18 <JVassie> tbh I cant even think how you could
16:23:30 <Hyronymus> JVassie: I think you need multiple electrified track types then
16:24:03 <JVassie> just trying to think how you could provide that capability without usign track types
16:24:08 <JVassie> but i dont think you can
16:24:34 * planetmaker wonders... does a track type disappear from the availability list when there's no vehicle available for it anymore and non present either?
16:24:45 <Eddi|zuHause> nmlc: "src/eng_dummy.pnml", line 7: Unrecognized identifier 'CLIMATES_ALL' encountered <-- what am i doing wrong?
16:24:50 <JVassie> didnt we have this discussion planetmaker ?
16:25:20 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, yes
16:25:46 <planetmaker> + climates_available: avail_prussia_core ? ALL_CLIMATES : NO_CLIMATE;
16:25:51 <Terkhen> IIRC it is ALL_CLIMATES now
16:26:02 <Eddi|zuHause> that explains things :p
16:26:37 <Terkhen> this reminds me that I did not upload the nml syntax highlighter
16:28:09 * Terkhen makes a note hoping that he will not forget about it again
16:47:04 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: i'm still not getting the engine
16:50:09 *** Hyronymus is now known as Hyr|away
16:50:43 <Eddi|zuHause> and shouldn't you give the power in kW when that's what is recorded in the table?
16:52:26 <Eddi|zuHause> oh, and you also miss VEH_CBF_WAGON_LENGTH
16:52:37 <JVassie> wtf happened to the spreadsheet?
16:54:16 <MNIM> I decided to revert back to my original junction
16:57:37 *** TheMask96 has joined #openttd
16:58:25 *** Adambean has joined #openttd
17:03:51 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, it might be related to some properties not being available to articulated parts... I'll check out, if I don't define them
17:04:10 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: that shouldn't be relevant
17:06:21 <planetmaker> well. OpenTTD registers the engine upon load... but doesn't make it available for *some* reason
17:06:44 <planetmaker> and most likely it's a stupid mistake or lapse
17:15:31 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
17:15:43 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, it's the refittable_cargo_classes
17:15:58 <planetmaker> set that to CARGO_CLASSES_ALL and you're set
17:16:25 <planetmaker> uhm. ALL_NORMAL_CARGO_CLASSES
17:17:05 <planetmaker> that's a stupid, but anything but obvious mistake
17:17:17 <Eddi|zuHause> can you give me the actual code?
17:19:22 <planetmaker> the difference is in cargo_definitions:28
17:23:51 <Ammler> just thought you work on cets with diffs :-P
17:24:25 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: that part is not touched by the diff
17:26:29 *** frosch123 has joined #openttd
17:27:20 <planetmaker> uhm... it should?
17:28:17 <planetmaker> are you sure you got not some cached version or so?
17:28:32 <Eddi|zuHause> a diff between this diff and the last one shows only differences in callback_flags, model_life and climate availability
17:29:28 <Eddi|zuHause> you should probably just commit this stuff
17:31:56 <planetmaker> probably you're right. done
17:36:36 *** Adambean has joined #openttd
17:37:32 <Eddi|zuHause> aye, now it shows up
17:37:55 <planetmaker> btw, you of course also have commit access via your DevZone credentials
17:39:49 <Eddi|zuHause> now... what are my devzone credentials :p
17:40:09 <Eddi|zuHause> hm...there's a wrong offset somewhere
17:40:11 <planetmaker> you have an account there, don't you?
17:40:26 <planetmaker> at least it has your e-mail address :-P
17:43:10 <Eddi|zuHause> **.orig <-- is that intended? (in .hgignore)
17:43:42 <planetmaker> yes. Ignore often-occuring backup and whatever files
17:44:01 <planetmaker> might be better placed in the user .hgignore. Oh, yes. That traverses the path then IIRC
17:44:07 <planetmaker> long ago I looked at it.
17:44:20 <planetmaker> c&p for months, if not years :-P
17:45:24 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: translators * r22605 /trunk/src/lang/ (czech.txt simplified_chinese.txt):
17:45:24 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: -Update from WebTranslator v3.0:
17:45:24 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: simplified_chinese - 3 changes by Gavin
17:45:24 <CIA-2> OpenTTD: czech - 3 changes by marek995
17:49:15 <planetmaker> "Objects have around 8 random bits per tile of the object. " <-- frosch123 that means 8 +- 2? ;-)
17:53:22 <planetmaker> (and no, you didn't edit that page, it's just a random marvel I found)
17:53:39 <frosch123> looks like there are 8 bits per tile
17:53:52 <frosch123> planetmaker: iirc the spec changed several times there
17:54:12 <Eddi|zuHause> yay... kate krashed. :p
17:54:46 <planetmaker> mainly I found it amusing to find a phrasing like "there are roughly xy bits used for..."
17:55:06 *** Hyr|away is now known as Hyronymus
17:56:00 <frosch123> planetmaker: maybe random bits means, that their presence is random :p
17:56:27 <planetmaker> that'd pose an interesting challenge
17:56:41 <planetmaker> "catch me. I'm the random bit" ;-)
17:56:43 <Eddi|zuHause> planetmaker: so, how do i tell hg that i am authorized?
17:57:08 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, you need to add a separate line to your .hgrc:
17:58:11 <Eddi|zuHause> that seemed to have helped
17:59:46 <planetmaker> are you sure you want to have 'johannes' configured as your user name? ;-)
18:00:27 <planetmaker> you could edit ~/.hgrc
18:00:39 <planetmaker> better for that stuff than configuring it for every repo
18:01:45 <Eddi|zuHause> what do you suggest i should use for this repo?
18:02:06 *** Brianetta has joined #openttd
18:02:08 <planetmaker> most people seem to use their IRC and forum nick
18:02:18 <planetmaker> I'd suggest Eddi in this case ;-)
18:03:13 <planetmaker> username = Eddi <email>
18:03:35 <planetmaker> I don't really mind. Just wondered
18:04:59 <planetmaker> you might find it interesting maybe to join #openttdcoop.devzone
18:05:37 <Eddi|zuHause> what's the preferred way to set 32px-vehicles and depot offset nowadays?
18:05:52 <planetmaker> there are global variables defined in NML
18:06:07 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, but what's their name?
18:06:08 <planetmaker> which are write-able
18:06:52 <planetmaker> train_width_32_px = 1;
18:07:03 <planetmaker> traininfo_y_offset = 2;
18:07:10 <planetmaker> but I did have to look up that stuff, too ;-)
18:07:51 <planetmaker> I'd add them to header.pnml probably...
18:08:12 <planetmaker> but maybe we want a separate file for global definitions and things like these
18:08:22 <SpComb> train_width_32_px = 33;
18:09:19 <Eddi|zuHause> it works with my old lines, but nml complains
18:09:44 <Eddi|zuHause> and they really are necessary, otherwise it looks odd
18:13:38 <Eddi|zuHause> ah... hg is stupid... for hg outgoing it uses the push address
18:13:46 <Eddi|zuHause> so it asks for login there, too
18:15:48 <Eddi|zuHause> it produces 3 steam puffs...
18:17:15 <Yexo> hg outgoing should tell you which revisions would be pushed if you did hg push
18:17:35 <Eddi|zuHause> Yexo: yes, but it could find that out from the public adress as well
18:18:08 <Yexo> it couldn't, since it doesn't know that the pull and push address contain the same repo
18:23:22 <Eddi|zuHause> Yexo: exactly. it could, if it wasn't stupid :p
18:23:50 <Yexo> eddi: but between every pull/push the remote repo could change
18:24:01 <Yexo> so there is absolutely no way it can be sure those two are the same
18:25:45 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, then put your credentials in your ~/.hgrc as described in the link I supplied...
18:26:35 <Eddi|zuHause> i'm not putting credentials in a plain text file...
18:34:51 *** Alberth has joined #openttd
18:34:51 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o Alberth
18:35:01 <planetmaker> Zuu seems to be the person with the most AI shortnames - and the amount of AIs used in the most peculiar way ;-)
18:36:02 <Zuu> The more AIs the better? :-p
18:39:26 <Alberth> either that, or 'crazier' (in a good way) :p
18:40:20 <Ammler> [20:26] <Eddi|zuHause> i'm not putting credentials in a plain text file... <-- if you want, we can give you ssh access or are you aware of anohter auth method?
18:42:41 <Ammler> I guess, there is with ssl certs, not sure thought
18:43:45 <Alberth> sign the text with a ssh key
18:45:22 <Ammler> Alberth: answering me?
18:45:55 <Alberth> just giving another suggestion
18:46:46 <Ammler> well, suggestions without the need to patch mercurial or webserver :-)
19:00:20 <Alberth> are you saying my suggestion needs any of that? I am confused
19:04:48 *** George|2 has joined #openttd
19:06:43 <Zuu> planetmaker: I think a #openttdcoop project/hg account for TutorialAI would be useful. Especially as I think this is a project that might interest others to contribute chapters.
19:07:14 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
19:08:01 *** zachanim1 has joined #openttd
19:08:29 *** SpComb^_ has joined #openttd
19:10:22 *** XeryusTC2 has joined #openttd
19:10:52 *** DJ_Nekkid has joined #openttd
19:10:57 <Zuu> planetmaker: For every more AI that I make, the more useful SuperLib become :-p
19:11:24 <Eddi|zuHause> "TutorialAI" -- i'm just imagining "Mr Paperclip" saying: "looks like you are trying to build a train station, can i help you with that?"
19:11:32 *** DJ_Nekkid is now known as DJNekkid
19:11:35 *** pm is now known as planetmaker
19:12:25 <Alberth> so glad you are back in one piece again :p
19:19:00 *** Progman has joined #openttd
19:20:16 *** michi_cc has joined #openttd
19:20:16 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v michi_cc
19:23:51 *** michi_cc has joined #openttd
19:23:51 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v michi_cc
19:26:05 *** Twerkhoven[L] has joined #openttd
19:28:34 <planetmaker> Zuu, iirc ctrl+click also deletes a sign. Might be faster ;-)
19:28:48 <Zuu> planetmaker: Only when you are the owner of the sign.
19:28:59 <planetmaker> then do it twice ;-)
19:29:11 <planetmaker> but... maybe doesn't work. Dunno :-)
19:29:21 <Zuu> Is that implemented for non-owned signs?
19:30:02 <planetmaker> dunno. I just thought that first click changes ownership, 2nd deletes
19:30:07 <planetmaker> I might mis-remember
19:30:10 *** DayDreamer has joined #openttd
19:30:15 <Wolf01> gah... trying to extend Point to get Right... I must be tired
19:31:08 <Zuu> Anyway, if the tutorial gets popular it might give a push towards some way of making an easier to use interface ;-)
19:31:16 <planetmaker> Zuu, I guess a NoAI chat function would be nice, eh?
19:31:50 <planetmaker> like 'emit_general_chat_message(string)'
19:31:51 <Zuu> Anyway, it abuses a half closed door.
19:32:33 <Zuu> The idea has never been that competitive AIs should be allowed to interact with players through chat etc. At least that's what Yexo + TrueBrain has told me.
19:32:57 <Zuu> For example AIs can't read signs owned by other companies.
19:34:28 <Zuu> An AI that can easily be controlled secretly by one player could be abused in eg. multiplayer.
19:35:21 *** Chris_Booth has joined #openttd
19:35:24 <Eddi|zuHause> how is that different from two people working together?
19:35:25 <planetmaker> ah, right. makes sense
19:35:49 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, one person with his bots joining as well
19:35:58 <planetmaker> easier than getting a team join a server
19:36:00 <Zuu> In theory there could be some API functions only available to some class of AIs that may get other restrictions imposed by OpenTTD.
19:36:24 <planetmaker> but then luckily AIs are server-side ;-)
19:37:16 <Zuu> That doesn't stop me from adding a backdoor in CluelessPuls and use that on a server that have my AI running.
19:38:03 <Zuu> Anyway, I think AIs can read the company names of other companies so that backdoor could possible be added already so it is triggered by my usual multiplayer company name etc.
19:38:38 <planetmaker> he, early night. Good night to you Terkhen
19:40:28 <Zuu> That said, maybe there could be a GUI/AI-chat only available in single player that would be somewhat MP-safe. (ignoring the 3-line change that according to TrueBrain is enough to get AIs to run on MP-clients)
19:45:32 *** TinoDidriksen has joined #openttd
19:47:35 *** Chris_Booth_ has joined #openttd
19:48:38 <Zuu> Maybe the (G)UI-features could be made so that they use DoCommand(P) but are restricted to SP only. So that in an unmobified OpenTTD AIs will not be able to use those APIs in MP. On a modified build which allows AIs on clients the AI-GUI calls will still be routed via the server which will block the commands. Thus requiring a larger modifcation that re-routes the events as client-only to abuse it.
19:50:28 <Zuu> That said, if there are AIs that would actually be usefull for the script kiddies to use in MP, they would probably only then try to use AIs in MP. Hm......
19:52:17 <Zuu> But then there already exist so many ways to be evil in MP that it might be a bad idea to let this potential issue stop the development.
19:52:21 *** SpComb^_ is now known as SpComb
19:53:18 *** Chris_Booth_ is now known as Chris_Booth
19:54:22 <Zuu> All that said, for now I don't think I will for now look into extending the AI API but rather try to experiment with what is availale. But if someone takes the challenge and adds some AI-(G)UI that would be welcome so to say :-D
19:55:30 <Yexo> <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, one person with his bots joining as well <- that isn't an argument, since AIs are server-side only
19:56:43 <Yexo> Zuu: you want an AI to be able to control the GUI?
19:57:40 *** amkoroew has joined #openttd
19:58:07 *** Biolunar has joined #openttd
20:04:17 <Zuu> Yexo: I'm not sure which parts that would be most useful yet.
20:05:27 <Hyronymus> who is experienced in using mediawiki
20:05:44 <Zuu> Center user view at some location and some way of displaying left-aligned multi-line text + getting user feedback would be useful. That's what I can think of for now.
20:07:28 <Alberth> the latter by means of a new window?
20:07:32 <Yexo> Hyronymus: better ask your real question
20:07:43 <Yexo> I wouldn't call myself experienced, but I might be able to answer simple questions
20:07:54 <Zuu> But I don't know if it is "the right thing" to write tutorials as AIs. It might be better to have "Tutorials" that happen to share most of the AI API + having some extra APIs + lot of money/no mone restriction.
20:08:13 <Hyronymus> is that something you can do on every page
20:08:19 <Zuu> Alberth: That's one solution.
20:08:43 <Zuu> I haven't though very much yet. I wrote TutorialAI last night :-D
20:08:56 <Yexo> Hyronymus: that's done by this: {{Database layout}}, in other words by including the Database layout template
20:09:20 <Hyronymus> ok, I'll look further into that Yexo
20:09:30 <Alberth> Zuu: programming a tutorial through an AI beats doing it in C++, imho
20:10:44 <Zuu> Alberth: Indeed, and I plan to reuse quite a lot of AI code and more or less just put in break points in it to start with.
20:13:52 <Zuu> If you want a static tutorial, you could bundle it with a savegame/scenario. Though I don't plan to do that for now unless there will be a need for it.
20:15:43 <Zuu> The main downside I think with a tutoraial AS an AI is that it can't show newbies how to use the GUI. it can only talk about the GUI. That said, if you want to be specific about the GUI you become more dependent on specific OpenTTD versions.
20:17:50 <Alberth> automagic mouse moving and clicking should be possible, at least in theory.
20:18:11 <Alberth> but then you're building for the user, not for the AI :p
20:22:19 <Zuu> Thus a "Tutorial".tar would be useful which is an AI that start on the same company as the user. (or where the user is auto-cheated to the AI company)
20:22:56 <Zuu> ... unless the AI can open the cheat dialog and move the user to the AI company... :-p
20:23:30 <planetmaker> Zuu, add a special AI tag... or introduce similar to grfIDs a special meaning for names starting with 0xFF
20:23:44 <planetmaker> though I like a special property an AI declares better
20:23:57 <planetmaker> or however that'd be named in the NoAI domain ;-)
20:24:12 <MNIM> every time I browse the wiki I am surprised how many junctions are possible
20:24:43 <Zuu> I think it would be a function that you can ovverride in info.nut eg. IsTutorial() and make it return true.
20:25:05 <Zuu> The default implementation would simply return false.
20:25:45 <MNIM> Im kinda interested by this one right now
20:27:39 <MNIM> whoopsie, forgot to post link :P
20:28:00 <MNIM> anyway, Im not that interested in those mega-big stations and stuff
20:28:29 <Zuu> Another crazy zuu-idea: Use the idea of some AI author to read human constructions and save to file (via debug-console). Then write an AI where this data is pasted into the source and the AI will randomly build different advanced junctions. The purpose would be just for fun and nice to look at :-)
20:28:36 <MNIM> I try to keep it at least a bit managable
20:28:53 <MNIM> even if my cpu decides he's working too hard :P
20:29:00 <MNIM> as is happening with one of my oldest games
20:29:24 <MNIM> I swear, I go near a city with my viewport, BOOM slomo!
20:30:17 <Eddi|zuHause> hm... cool nmlc reports the error in the pnml file, not the nml file
20:32:03 <planetmaker> I'd be wasted otherwise ;-)
20:32:32 <MNIM> I also have a full overview screenshot of that game, but I can't view it because I don't have enough ram
20:43:55 <MNIM> I like the zoom fucntion, I think
20:44:36 <MNIM> even if it still causes image sizes in excess of 3(e3)^2 pixies
20:45:46 <MNIM> here's the zoomed out version
20:46:01 <MNIM> most complicated system so far
20:47:13 *** DGMurdockIII has joined #openttd
20:47:32 <MNIM> and for some odd reason, which seems to be the case in every game so far, it's not the main hub city which grows the most
20:47:35 <DGMurdockIII> you guys seem like you would know
20:47:57 <DGMurdockIII> do you know if there are any good open source city building games?
20:48:23 <MNIM> I founded several offshoot cities from new world, and both are several times their daddy in population!
20:48:42 <MNIM> murdock: you mean as in sim city-likes?
20:49:47 <MNIM> what are you doing in the middle of a giant metropolis measuring several tens of thousands of citizens while squashed between a mainline and its bypass?
20:50:00 * planetmaker would bet on lincity
20:50:15 <Alberth> micropolis == simcity
20:51:11 <MNIM> to be honest, I haven't seen any convincing sim city replacement so far
20:51:41 <Alberth> how is the original first version not convincing? :p
20:52:15 <DGMurdockIII> micropolis i would love to find a windows verson
20:52:25 <MNIM> silly freight train. why are you only going 180 kmh?
20:52:32 <DGMurdockIII> or someone build a game based on the source code
20:52:51 <Alberth> MNIM: because you gave it a too fast engine? :)
20:52:55 <DGMurdockIII> the only one i have seen is open city
20:53:23 <DGMurdockIII> if they keep working on it could have been very good
20:56:24 <MNIM> alberth: the year is 2095 in this game and all non-multiple-unit trains running on electrified rails are powered by sncf CC40100 and taurus locs going 241-230 respectively
20:56:36 *** Intexon has joined #openttd
20:57:28 <Alberth> weird people living in such a hurry
20:57:48 <andythenorth> how to connect svn to rss / irc?
20:57:59 <andythenorth> does the bot here read the rss from Trac?
20:58:07 <andythenorth> or some other commit hook or such?
20:58:16 <MNIM> there's also the NTV AGV duplex trains which slam along the lines with 362 even
20:59:08 <Alberth> andythenorth: most likely a post-commit hook
21:00:34 <Alberth> andythenorth: I would expect such a thing to be somewhat standard available with svn
21:00:44 <MNIM> then there's also the 28 tile long mammoth trains thundering along powered by two centennials (UP EMD DDA40X)
21:00:59 <MNIM> the slowest trains I use, actually
21:01:32 <Zuu> I've heard about a very very good game called P1 that will have every city building and transport game feature ever though of. ;-)
21:02:55 *** devilsadvocate has quit IRC
21:03:11 <planetmaker> with status updates every few weeks, but time intervals following a fibonacci series ;-)
21:03:40 <Eddi|zuHause> that's quite exponential ;)
21:04:35 <Eddi|zuHause> @calc (1+sqrt(5))/2
21:04:35 <DorpsGek> Eddi|zuHause: 1.61803398875
21:05:33 <Eddi|zuHause> @calc 1/sqrt(5)*(((1+sqrt(5))/2)**0+((1-sqrt(5)/2)**0)
21:05:33 <DorpsGek> Eddi|zuHause: Error: unexpected EOF while parsing (<string>, line 1)
21:05:34 <DGMurdockIII> where can i find the game P1
21:05:44 <Eddi|zuHause> @calc 1/sqrt(5)*((1+sqrt(5))/2)**0+((1-sqrt(5)/2)**0)
21:05:44 <DorpsGek> Eddi|zuHause: 1.4472135955
21:06:11 <Eddi|zuHause> @calc 1/sqrt(5)*((1+sqrt(5))/2)**0-((1-sqrt(5)/2)**0)
21:06:11 <DorpsGek> Eddi|zuHause: -0.5527864045
21:06:50 <Eddi|zuHause> @calc 1/sqrt(5)*(((1+sqrt(5))/2)**0-((1-sqrt(5))/2)**0)
21:07:01 <MNIM> how gentle and calm, a centennial pulling an empty mineral train passing a British rail diesel intercity in a mountain scenery.
21:07:03 <Eddi|zuHause> @calc 1/sqrt(5)*(((1+sqrt(5))/2)**1-((1-sqrt(5))/2)**1)
21:07:07 <Eddi|zuHause> @calc 1/sqrt(5)*(((1+sqrt(5))/2)**2-((1-sqrt(5))/2)**2)
21:07:12 <Eddi|zuHause> @calc 1/sqrt(5)*(((1+sqrt(5))/2)**3-((1-sqrt(5))/2)**3)
21:07:14 <DGMurdockIII> has anyone tryed Cities in Motion?
21:07:25 <Eddi|zuHause> @calc 1/sqrt(5)*(((1+sqrt(5))/2)**4-((1-sqrt(5))/2)**4)
21:07:32 <Eddi|zuHause> @calc 1/sqrt(5)*(((1+sqrt(5))/2)**5-((1-sqrt(5))/2)**5)
21:07:37 <Eddi|zuHause> @calc 1/sqrt(5)*(((1+sqrt(5))/2)**6-((1-sqrt(5))/2)**6)
21:09:10 <DGMurdockIII> has anyone tryed Cities in Motion?
21:09:33 <Eddi|zuHause> not since the last time you asked
21:10:01 <MNIM> trying to pull a train with four locs.
21:14:17 <Zuu> MNIM, unless you have modified your NewGRF settings in-game, please provide crash.dmp, crash.log, crash.png etc. to bugs.openttd.org
21:14:38 <Zuu> oh, forgot crash.sav would also be useful.
21:15:10 <Zuu> If you are on Windows Vista/7 they are most likely found in C:\Users\<user name>\Documents\OpenTTD\
21:15:16 <MNIM> yeah, newgrf devtools are enabled, so Im not gonna while
21:16:08 <planetmaker> he @ Eddi|zuHause
21:16:18 <MNIM> though it's still a bit exceptional, Ive been running the same newgrf for a while already, and it suddenly cops out when Im expanding towns in scnedit
21:16:34 <planetmaker> looks a bit weired
21:17:21 <Eddi|zuHause> the steam puff is too far in front
21:17:34 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, you can change that via the CB for visual effects
21:17:57 <planetmaker> and aligning steam is... tedious
21:18:09 <Eddi|zuHause> and the wagons in the steam era aren't that long
21:18:57 <planetmaker> I guess we'll have to employ two schemes: we can use the normal way for wagons shorter equal than 8/8
21:19:11 <planetmaker> and only resort to the elaborate scheme for the longer vehicles
21:19:38 <MNIM> is there a way to enable multiple docks/airports in the same station?
21:19:47 <planetmaker> yes. Write a patch
21:20:03 <MNIM> ah. the predictable, I suppose
21:20:17 <MNIM> but it's not a simple line in a .cfg somewhere, then
21:21:07 <MNIM> duplicated circumstances exactly, duplicated results too
21:22:24 *** TB is now known as TrueBrain
21:25:20 <MNIM> Zuu: still want those crash results?
21:26:02 <MNIM> short explanation: opened .sav in scedit to edit town sizes and some rivers +scenery and such
21:26:30 <MNIM> when I tried to expand New Handwell, BOOM
21:27:00 <Alberth> lots of newgrf changes in the game
21:27:35 <MNIM> yeah, never caused me big trouble before though
21:28:17 <MNIM> biggest issue with newgrfs so far was when the nutracks that was recommended with 2CC trainset wasn't actually compatible
21:29:00 <MNIM> which was quickly solved by updating one of those newgrfs.
21:29:32 <MNIM> suppose there's always a first, eh?
21:30:26 <planetmaker> with those changes you did, I'm not really surprised
21:30:35 <planetmaker> I told you before that it's a path to disaster
21:30:45 <planetmaker> thus it took you less than 24 hours
21:30:58 <MNIM> less than twenty-four hours?
21:31:03 <planetmaker> and now you know why this setting usually should *not* be enabled
21:31:26 <MNIM> dude, most of those newgrfs have been running for months already in other games
21:31:41 <planetmaker> yes. But you didn't change or re-configure them on the fly
21:31:46 <planetmaker> which is the whole point
21:34:23 *** devilsadvocate has joined #openttd
21:45:31 <planetmaker> echo 'good night' && mv pm /dev/bed
21:46:39 <MNIM> I assume that's your way of saying "sudo apt-get sleep"
21:50:30 <MNIM> hmmhhh, still the same result
21:50:40 <MNIM> and oddly, only with that specific town
21:51:24 <Zuu> MNIM: I won't deal with them, but they can be useful to track down bugs.
21:52:20 <MNIM> hmmmhm, the trouble with my (ab)use patterns is finding where exactly the issue lies
22:18:43 *** Prof_Frink has joined #openttd
22:26:26 *** douknoukem has joined #openttd
22:45:42 <MNIM> that's a lot of progress lost
23:50:06 *** amkoroew1 has joined #openttd
continue to next day ⏵
