IRC logs for #openttd on OFTC at 2013-01-31
⏴ go to previous day
00:23:36 *** Flygon_ has joined #openttd
00:48:24 *** roboboy has joined #openttd
01:49:35 *** roboboy has joined #openttd
01:53:57 *** DorpsGek has joined #openttd
01:53:57 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o DorpsGek
02:24:17 *** Stimrol has joined #openttd
02:33:47 *** Stimrol has joined #openttd
03:17:30 *** Biolunar__ has joined #openttd
04:02:52 *** Bad_Brett has joined #openttd
04:05:45 <Supercheese> Playing OTTD in 1882 atm
04:05:55 <Supercheese> wondering if I should add some patches to the build I'm using...
04:06:21 <Bad_Brett> decisions, decisions...
04:07:03 <Supercheese> Also being lazy and not working on my grfs
04:07:08 <Supercheese> although I should, sometime
04:08:31 <Bad_Brett> want a sneak peek of my latest ...industry? :)
04:12:25 <Supercheese> Neato, reminds my of Civ3/4
04:16:19 <Bad_Brett> it will be one of the early sources for oil production... before oil wells were used
05:46:11 *** user54367644 has joined #openttd
05:52:11 *** roboboy has joined #openttd
05:56:17 *** Eddi|zuHause2 has joined #openttd
06:05:03 *** tokai|noir has joined #openttd
06:05:03 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v tokai|noir
06:05:26 *** user54367644 has joined #openttd
06:26:00 *** dihedral has joined #openttd
06:45:04 *** Markavian has joined #openttd
07:17:40 *** tokai|mdlx has joined #openttd
07:30:00 *** Flygon_ has joined #openttd
07:36:28 *** Devroush has joined #openttd
07:53:00 <peter1138> should i go "value + bool" or "value + (bool ? 1 : 0)" ?
08:01:56 <planetmaker> peter1138: the latter. Some compilers will otherwise complain
08:02:40 *** Eddi|zuHause2 is now known as Eddi|zuHause
08:11:09 * peter1138 wonders what "looks" better about restrictions on signals
08:17:12 *** Polleke has joined #openttd
08:22:39 *** Markavian` has joined #openttd
08:24:58 <peter1138> But this is interesting, if I don't remove goal from bankrupted company, the nem company receive this goal. I think the new company receive the old company's ID.
08:25:35 <kamnet> Morning. Anyone around?
08:25:37 <peter1138> company gets goal, company goes bankrupt, new company keeps the rule
08:26:41 <kamnet> How are you this morning?
08:26:48 *** valhallasw has joined #openttd
08:30:01 <Supercheese> peter1138: that bug's been reporte
08:30:52 <Supercheese> you were quotin that
08:31:02 <Supercheese> new post I hadn't read
08:32:01 <peter1138> report == on bug tracker
08:33:53 <Supercheese> Blaaah, I hate having to close and reopen OTTD when I update my grf
08:34:39 <peter1138> use a better os then :p
08:35:04 <Supercheese> Pretty sure the non-OTTD games I play only support Windows
08:35:22 <kamnet> There's a version of OpenTTD for OS/2 Warp??
08:35:23 <peter1138> non-OTTD games? what is this
08:35:59 <Supercheese> I've got World of Warplanes idling in the background
08:37:37 <kamnet> Well it took a few hours, but I've got all my OpenTTD builds and all my NewGRFs moved over to Skydrive. :D
08:43:09 <kamnet> Now I just need ChillCore's Patch Pack to behave along with everything else :D
08:44:10 <Supercheese> people still use it?
08:44:27 <peter1138> or better, sparkleshare
08:44:30 <kamnet> I've got a game that I've been playing since November 2010 on it.
08:44:37 <Supercheese> Ah, savegame compatibility
08:45:14 <__ln__> kamnet: Yes, there is/was a version for OS/2 Warp.
08:45:17 <kamnet> If it wasn't for the fact that I've got such a great game going, I'd probably give it up. But considering all the hours of work I've put into it, and I've only maybe used 15% of the map...
08:46:18 <Supercheese> one of those huge maps, eh?
08:46:37 <kamnet> That said, give me a PP that has CargoDest, More Height Levels, and a daylength patch along with something 1.2.x or higher, I'd give it up.
08:47:49 <kamnet> Not terribly huge, just 2048x2048. It spawned just right that I got really nice groupings of feeder services that can be networked into larger cities, and they're close enough that I can make really nice looking station layouts.
08:48:39 <kamnet> I haven't even really focused on passenger services, I've got enough work on my hands with FIRS & CD just getting all the industry chains serviced.
08:49:38 <kamnet> __ln__: It shouldn't surprise me that there was a Warp version. I always wanted to try Warp.
08:56:24 <kamnet> I must have missed that, otherwise I would have stopped that. What did that do?
08:56:38 <peter1138> want to draw 63 extra sprites per rail type?
08:57:51 <Pikka> actually, while you're there
08:58:50 <Pikka> it would be nice to be able to toggle autoreplace between replace now and "when old" without having to stop autoreplacing in between :)
08:59:40 <Eddi|zuHause> see, i'm not the only one making "completely different feature" suggestions :p
09:00:52 <Supercheese> kamnet: 2048x2048 maps are huge :P
09:01:15 <Supercheese> do they even go higher?
09:01:56 <peter1138> Eddi|zuHause, 2 wrongs make a right, of course!
09:02:02 <peter1138> Pikka, i never knew that dropdown was there
09:02:38 <peter1138> also it should auto-select the currently replacing vehicle
09:02:44 <kamnet> Supercheese: in CPP they can go up to 8192x8192.
09:03:07 <Supercheese> Gigabyte savegames
09:03:10 <kamnet> and height levels up to 256
09:03:10 <peter1138> doesn't the large maps patch go up to 1 million or something hideous?
09:03:54 <kamnet> I tried to create an 8k*8k map once. I gave up on the generation after 20 minutes. :D
09:04:59 <Supercheese> Haha, I made a Wright Flyer for my grf, and it's taxi speed is faster than its flight speed
09:05:57 <Supercheese> "Apostrophes are always for possessives", they said...
09:06:54 <Supercheese> Well, or contractions, I suppose
09:09:08 <peter1138> Pikka, of course, someone would complain that it makes mass-updating harder
09:09:46 <Pikka> my problem is that if you currently have "when old" selected, and then decide you want to replace /now/
09:09:58 <Pikka> you can't just click the dropdown and select "replace now", it doesn't work
09:10:10 <Pikka> which seems like a bug to me :)
09:10:23 <peter1138> and if you did change it it would use the currently selected vehicle on the right
09:13:04 <Pikka> I only just discovered that you can click on a bridge with the bridge tool to upgrade it :)
09:15:19 <planetmaker> oooooold feature (I think :-P)
09:16:10 <planetmaker> Sometimes I wonder how many of OpenTTD's features are actually used by the average player... if even "we" fail to use them due to ignorance
09:17:32 <peter1138> does autoreplacing articulated trams work as expected?
09:18:06 * planetmaker doesn't remember oddities with HEQS... but not sure this statement is worth much :-)
09:18:20 <Pikka> I think so, I don't use them much though
09:18:35 <peter1138> but that andy fellow
09:19:19 <Pinkbeast> I seem to recall some oddities with the refit-to-size HEQS trams but some time ago.
09:19:31 <planetmaker> they probably have smoke on the wrong place ;-)
09:19:39 <Supercheese> I think andy unified the cargo subtypes to help avert that
09:19:52 <Supercheese> Short/Medium/Long
09:20:18 <Supercheese> rather than X cars/Y cars/Z cars, which could be different for different vehicles
09:26:00 <planetmaker> HEQS has only 3 lengths for trams iirc. uniform for all cargos
09:26:16 <planetmaker> so that might have been the solution, yes
09:26:25 <Supercheese> Yes, but IIRC it wasn't always unified
09:26:50 <Supercheese> *version 1.4.1* Unified all cargo subtypes for trams ('short', 'medium', 'long') - helps auto-replace do a better job.
09:28:21 <planetmaker> it ain't broke, so don't fix it :D. Rather "fix" road types ;-)
09:28:32 <planetmaker> the ominous andy might rejoice then ;-)
09:29:01 <Pikka> newgrf(air)ports too please ;)
09:29:08 <Supercheese> I have a feeling road types won't be implemented for fear of people abusing them for subways
09:29:09 <planetmaker> and newports. and bridges
09:29:35 <planetmaker> Supercheese, that's not really an argument against
09:29:40 *** FireFly has joined #openttd
09:29:40 <MNIM> what fun is a feature if you can't even abuse it?
09:29:54 <peter1138> nobody can agree on road types because people want 1 or 2 or 3 types per tile
09:30:11 <planetmaker> :-) It simply needs an executive decision ;-)
09:30:26 <Pikka> silly people can't agree on road types because silly people want 2 or 3 types per tile
09:30:51 <MNIM> planetmaker: sometimes it would do openttd good to have a dictator in charge, eh?
09:30:55 <planetmaker> And... wasn't it agreed that it needs a road and a tram type? And maybe a catenary type? :D
09:30:56 <peter1138> we already have 2 which makes ownership awkward
09:31:07 <Pikka> no it wasn't, planetmaker
09:31:37 <peter1138> some people still think rail catenary should be separate to railtype
09:31:52 <peter1138> 16 types, enough for everyone
09:32:09 <Pinkbeast> Well, I don't care how it's implemented but there is IMHO a serious need for more railtypes.
09:32:49 <Pikka> we should have two owners per rail tile
09:32:58 <Pikka> so I can put my diagonal rail right next to yours
09:33:03 <Supercheese> isn't that already possible?
09:33:15 * Supercheese doesn't play multiplayer
09:33:20 <Supercheese> I wouldn't know :S
09:33:21 <Pinkbeast> Or so I can upgrade my pax line to maglev without comedy ensuing where it runs next to the freight line?
09:34:24 <planetmaker> peter1138, having catenary as a flag instead of a railtype intrinsic property would save half of existing railtypes
09:34:43 <peter1138> planetmaker, not really
09:34:52 <Pinkbeast> planet: Perhaps I'm missing something, but haven't you just moved a bit from one place to another?
09:34:55 <planetmaker> do you look at the existing railtypes?
09:35:07 <peter1138> planetmaker, you might as well just add the extra bit you use to signify "catenary" and have 32 railtypes
09:35:08 <Pikka> also I want five different types of catenary :D
09:35:10 <planetmaker> there's RAIL, ELRL --> two
09:35:38 <peter1138> i'm saying it's waste
09:35:56 <peter1138> you'd need a bit on the map to say whether it had catenary, right?
09:36:06 <planetmaker> peter1138, yes. But that's how it's done / used: every railtype as non + electrified version. basically
09:36:21 <peter1138> nobody does electrified maglev or electrified monorail
09:36:36 <planetmaker> I don't argue that it's sensible for *every*. But the exageration is the clarification. You're red-herring it
09:36:40 <Pinkbeast> But in eg a NuTracks world almost all railtypes come as X or X+catenary.
09:37:00 <peter1138> you're saying "add a special bit so we don't have to duplicate railtypes"
09:37:17 <peter1138> but only RAIL is duplicated to ELRL
09:37:24 <planetmaker> narrow gauge + el. narrow gauge. grade A + el. grade A, same for grade B,C,D and high-speed
09:37:27 <peter1138> (yes, ignoring custom railtypes)
09:37:51 <Pinkbeast> But it's custom railtypes that provide any motivation to change anything!
09:38:04 <planetmaker> if you want to ignore custom railtypes you don't need railtypes. Or road types
09:38:13 <peter1138> it's better to have 32 rail types with duplicates than 16 rail types which some options you can't use
09:38:47 <peter1138> you'd get an extra 2 rail types to use!
09:39:08 <peter1138> and that's assuming all combos (except monorail/maglev) can be electrified
09:39:25 <peter1138> therefore, no. adding a separating catenary bit is stupid
09:40:04 <peter1138> also you fuck up rail type labels
09:40:15 <peter1138> RAIL with catenary bit
09:40:33 <peter1138> that changes how testing compatibility/powered works
09:41:10 <peter1138> what about pikka's engines that are powered on both 3rd rail and catenary rail?
09:41:27 <peter1138> it doesn't need catenary, but it also can't run on just RAIL
09:41:49 <Pinkbeast> It seems to me that it's best to keep all the railtype bits in one place and let railtype authors decide how to use them - but if the paltry allocation of 16 is increased, provide some support for railtypes that work as a set of basically independent bits.
09:41:58 <peter1138> Pinkbeast, exactly!
09:42:54 <peter1138> i mean, if you're going to waste a bit in the map array for "has catenary", imho it's better to "waste it" on doubling the railtype limit
09:43:10 <planetmaker> yes. But while it's not been possibly the best design decision with railtypes, it might be good for road types to choose the better design and make "catenary" a road type property ;-) And no: not on map array. In track properties
09:43:13 <peter1138> then you get 32 railtypes instead of 16 with some with catenary
09:43:52 <Pinkbeast> s/waste/use/ but I agree completely. 32 would at least be a step in the right direction.
09:44:17 <peter1138> Pinkbeast, rail types are stored directly on the map array, that's why they're limited
09:44:30 <peter1138> sure you could "just add a byte" and have 256 rail types
09:44:32 <Pinkbeast> (In particular, it doesn't work in MP, but in SP I can imagine a kludge where you have a much wider range of potential railtypes but only 16/32 in use at once).
09:45:18 <planetmaker> Pinkbeast, either it works in MP or it won't happen
09:45:22 <Pinkbeast> Because the 16 railtypes in use would have to be shared between the companies and...
09:45:22 <peter1138> we never add a feature that only works in SP
09:45:52 <peter1138> no, you could have 9001 railtypes
09:45:52 <planetmaker> you basically can't say a savegame is MP or SP. It breaks so many things and assumptions I don't want to even start
09:45:58 <peter1138> but only 16 allowed per company
09:46:03 <peter1138> just don't merge companies
09:46:19 <planetmaker> Now, that's an interesting concept, peter1138 :-)
09:46:24 <Pinkbeast> peter: bravo, it can work in MP!
09:46:40 * MNIM thwacks peter1138 on the head
09:46:48 <MNIM> this isn't dragonball Z.
09:47:00 <peter1138> also, there's no free bits for stations
09:47:17 <peter1138> well, that's bit 7 of m1
09:47:43 <peter1138> actually bit 7 of m1 is available rail/road station and tunnel/bridge tiles
09:47:53 <Pinkbeast> When you take over a company they eat as many of your railtype slots as they can and remaining track gets downgraded to something you are using.
09:47:55 <peter1138> add that bit and you get 32 railtypes
09:48:24 <peter1138> anyway, the concept of just 1 road type per tile is interesting
09:48:48 <peter1138> there's no reason it couldn't accomodate 2 sets of roadbits and 2 owners
09:49:13 <Pinkbeast> Let me guess, iterating over the entire map array is also discouraged?
09:49:18 <planetmaker> peter1138, ... :-( But how do I then add or remove trams? Or allow a 2nd person to build trams on my road?
09:49:27 <Pikka> this sounds familiar :D
09:49:31 <peter1138> Pinkbeast, depends how often
09:49:40 <peter1138> planetmaker, secondary owner, not too hard
09:50:03 <planetmaker> and how do I know which vehicle type? Is "tram" a flag?
09:50:08 <peter1138> of course you have to duplicate every road type :p
09:50:18 <peter1138> tram as a flag is horrible
09:50:21 <Pinkbeast> Once per company merger (and perhaps provide a feature in the player UI for "change all track of type X to type Y")
09:50:29 <planetmaker> but how else, if as one road type?
09:50:48 <peter1138> planetmaker, one road type == road, one road type == tram, one road type == rotr
09:50:53 <planetmaker> you'll put the combinatoric explosion in the road type itself. And make combining newgrfs like impossible
09:51:03 <peter1138> trams are compatible with tram & rotr
09:51:15 *** michi_cc has joined #openttd
09:51:15 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v michi_cc
09:51:18 <Pikka> exactly the same as with railtypes
09:51:31 <peter1138> fuck combining newgrfs
09:51:35 <Pikka> stop thinking of trams as anything other than "road vehicles which need a particular type of road"
09:51:45 <peter1138> they all look shit and are unbalanced when combined anyway
09:52:04 <Pikka> why can't you combine grfs?
09:52:26 <peter1138> usually they have completely different price rances
09:52:33 <planetmaker> So I just add the new "dirt roads" NewGRF. And I simply can't have the trans cross the dirt road? Sounds... broken
09:52:38 <planetmaker> would even work now
09:52:50 <planetmaker> if we just added roads and no new trams
09:52:58 <peter1138> yup, you'd need a dirt+tram type
09:53:11 <Pikka> you wouldn't, but yeah :)
09:53:12 <planetmaker> honestly, that's quite stupid IMHO
09:53:44 <peter1138> (allow multiple engine sets was the worst thing i ever did)
09:54:01 <Pikka> trams and tramtrack grfs
09:54:03 <peter1138> even you wanted to prohibit it at some point!
09:54:11 <Pikka> no different from 3rd rail vehicles and 3rd rail track grfs
09:55:03 <planetmaker> road types: bool is_tram; bool needs_catenary;
09:55:30 <planetmaker> if is_tram == true --> draw as overlay on road. Otherwise not. needs_catenary for road *or* tram: draw catenary
09:55:35 <Pikka> <Pikka> stop thinking of trams as anything other than "road vehicles which need a particular type of road"
09:55:50 <peter1138> planetmaker, and tram tracks without road below?
09:56:12 <planetmaker> peter1138, in order to define drawing order. And to avoid two trams or two roads on same tile
09:56:23 <planetmaker> but to allow road + tram
09:56:35 <peter1138> so i can have tram & trolleybus crossing?
09:56:43 <Pikka> planetmaker, there's no such thing as "tram", stop it
09:56:55 <planetmaker> peter1138, yes, you can. why not?
09:57:06 <peter1138> but you just disallowed two trams on the same tile
09:57:20 <peter1138> is a trolleybus a tram or a road vehicle?
09:57:21 <planetmaker> peter1138, trolleybus are road vehicles, not tram
09:57:29 <planetmaker> roadtype + catenary
09:57:36 <Pikka> trams are road vehicles, not tram :D
09:57:55 *** Flygon_ is now known as Flygon
09:58:08 <planetmaker> ok: how do you, Pikka, want to tell OpenTTD that first the road, then the tram tracks need drawing?
09:58:20 <planetmaker> call it how you like then
09:58:30 <Pikka> it will draw the road tile
09:58:33 <Flygon> Clearly we need to mod OpenTTD to let trams on train tracks
09:58:39 <Pikka> which may or may not have tram tracks on it
09:58:50 <planetmaker> that's a step back wrt even now
09:59:09 <Pikka> it's a step back from a horrible mess, yes
10:00:18 <planetmaker> how is it a mess?
10:00:37 <planetmaker> two different road types. two different sprite sets. easy
10:00:43 <planetmaker> you don't have that with rail tiles
10:00:51 <Flygon> If I can make a silly statement, it's always annoyed me how roads are the size of one track width, despite the size of one road land irl being the same size as one lane irl
10:00:53 <planetmaker> there you always only had and have one
10:00:56 <Flygon> But, I know it's a holdback from 1994 :3
10:01:14 <Pikka> yes, and it's so much simpler, innit?
10:01:40 <planetmaker> Pikka, let's code trains as ships. Easy. No signals, no junctions to care, etc
10:02:49 <Pikka> sure, except trams /are/ road vehicles. there's no difference between trams and road vehicles except trams have a hacky implementation of semi-road-type which is getting in the way of doing road types properly.
10:02:53 <Flygon> May as well make a Final Fantasy GRF
10:03:14 <Flygon> Where you have airships coupled together to create airfreight, and it looks like 1500s sailing ships
10:03:23 <Flygon> Not that that's a bad idea, mind you
10:03:53 <planetmaker> Pikka, not true. It are two different road types. Not semi
10:03:56 <Flygon> I lack both the coding competency and art skills :p
10:04:08 <planetmaker> it's mutually exclusive for a vehicle
10:04:14 <Flygon> My stuff is toonier than roger rabbit @_@
10:04:58 <Pikka> but it shouldn't be. they're just a different kind of road vehicle and should be rolled back into a roadtypes spec which resembles the railtype spec as far as practical
10:05:31 <planetmaker> sure. I agree. But that doesn't imply there can't be two road types per tile :-)
10:06:03 <Pinkbeast> Now is not the time to mention those Simutrans trams that quite happily use heavy rail as well.
10:06:07 <planetmaker> and that's the single major difference between roads and rails
10:06:16 <Flygon> Pinkbeast: I already mentioned it
10:06:21 <Flygon> <Flygon> Clearly we need to mod OpenTTD to let trams on train tracks
10:06:43 <Pinkbeast> Sorry. I missed the previous mention of Simutrans - when was it?
10:07:00 <Flygon> The ideal solution would be roads being one tile a lane, but we know that's impossible without breaking compatibility
10:07:12 <Flygon> Pinkbeast: I mentioned the idea, but not Simutrans
10:09:45 <Pikka> planetmaker, well, if you're going to make it happen with two roadtypes per tile, I guess I shouldn't argue. ;) it just seems to me that one is simpler and easier
10:11:27 <Pikka> in case it's not obvious, btw, I think that OpenTTD should not ship with any "built in" tram tracks. tram tracks in existing games should all revert to normal road, and the "tram" flag for road vehicles should be deprecated
10:11:57 <Flygon> Why not simply read the saves based on version number
10:12:09 <Flygon> If it's below a certain number, offer to convert it to the new format
10:12:46 <Pikka> regardless of how roadtypes are implemented, trying to salvage the existing system would be more trouble than it's worth, imo :)
10:13:28 <planetmaker> Flygon, you ... state the obvious which OpenTTD does since the beginning of time... silently
10:14:02 <Flygon> planetmaker: Wouldn't the change of something as fundumental as the roadtypes be potentially dangerous to convert?
10:14:58 <planetmaker> a mere 3000 lines. And that doesn't include everything
10:15:21 <Flygon> I've been not involved with the development of OpenTTD
10:15:55 <Flygon> So half the stuff I've been saying is probably from foggy memories of forum posts x.x
10:19:26 <Flygon> Point is, almost everything I've worked with, none of it even resembles OpenTTD
10:21:06 <DorpsGek> Commit by peter1138 :: r24950 trunk/src/autoreplace.cpp (2013-01-31 10:21:04 UTC)
10:21:07 <DorpsGek> -Fix (r24136): Also set replace when old flag when replacing an autoreplace
10:21:22 *** Bad_Brett has joined #openttd
10:22:20 <peter1138> back to trams & simutrans, yeah... trams should never have been road vehicles imho
10:22:33 <peter1138> what's ever done for us?
10:23:13 *** HerzogDeXtEr has joined #openttd
10:23:35 <peter1138> why does svn allow that?
10:23:55 <peter1138> i just committed from a checkout that wasn't updated
10:24:27 <__ln__> it doesn't matter if you don't touch files that don't need to be updated.
10:24:50 <peter1138> no but it's bad practice imho
10:25:07 <peter1138> can still end up with invalid code
10:26:35 <__ln__> given how slowly ottd adopted many of the files that ttdp had had for years, i don't think ottd would have advanced at all without ttdp setting a level of features that people expect.
10:30:19 *** oskari89 has joined #openttd
10:33:55 <peter1138> i doubt we've come up with newgrf
10:34:37 <Pikka> no need for newgrf really
10:34:57 <Pikka> coal tgvs and the maglev update cycle were so fun
10:35:26 <peter1138> newgrf stations are just pointless
10:36:01 <peter1138> MICROPROSE PRESENTS
10:36:17 <peter1138> TRANSPORT TYCOON DELUXE
10:36:48 <peter1138> we should put those annoying splash screens in
10:37:14 <peter1138> right, how do i play?
10:37:48 <Pikka> david braben got on kickstarter and said "give me two million dollars and I'll think about making elite 4"
10:38:10 <peter1138> elite dangerous or something
10:38:15 <Pikka> but you're talking about chris sawyer made me think about it
10:38:26 <peter1138> which is the one true elite
10:38:33 <Pikka> *cough* frontier was better than elite
10:38:36 <peter1138> he did pc elite or something
10:38:44 <Pikka> he did the pc port of frontier, yes
10:38:49 <Pinkbeast> peter: cough murmur second-processor or Master Elite is the one true Elite
10:38:57 <peter1138> Pinkbeast, TUBE ELITE
10:38:59 <__ln__> MICROPROSE PRESENTS a game by Sawyer, Ludde, Darkvater, Bjarni: OPEN TTD
10:39:02 <Pikka> complete with "look out for chris sawyer's transport game, coming soon" billboards in the space stations
10:39:47 <peter1138> only on an emulator :(
10:39:56 <peter1138> didn't have a real one
10:40:09 <peter1138> awww, no mouse wheel support
10:40:30 <peter1138> no resizable windows, hehe
10:40:44 <Pinkbeast> Ah, bad luck. I dunno what happened to that old Beeb, but I had access to a real one. :-)
10:40:55 <peter1138> mine died eventually :(
10:41:28 <Pinkbeast> At least the emulators are good these days. I think the Spectrum boys had a hidden advantage in having such crappy hardware - emulation got sorted out much earlier.
10:41:36 <Pikka> I've been talking to scuddles too muc
10:42:03 <peter1138> yeah i was playing on speccy emulators 15 years ago
10:42:16 <peter1138> i can only just emulate a beeb on my core 2 quad...
10:42:25 <peter1138> dosbox is faster damn it!
10:42:28 <Pinkbeast> Pretty sure there's still a Beeb in active service here.
10:42:49 <peter1138> i don't really see why, it's not exactly advanced hardware
10:42:52 <peter1138> not much in the way of quirks
10:42:58 <peter1138> 6502/6522 are simple
10:43:15 <peter1138> the crtc was common enough
10:43:18 <Pinkbeast> I think you must be using a ropey emulator - BeebEm worked fine for me on kit from about 5 years ago
10:43:23 <peter1138> (i think early cga cards used them as well)
10:43:30 <peter1138> beebem stutters for me
10:43:58 <peter1138> technically this pc is from 5 years ago
10:44:31 <Pinkbeast> Maybe more than that, I forget how fast hardware changes. A 1.8GHz single-core Athlon, anyway.
10:44:37 *** Zeknurn has joined #openttd
10:45:24 <Pinkbeast> So I think you must have some other problem with BeebEm.
11:25:13 *** goodger has joined #openttd
11:32:52 *** NGC3982 has joined #openttd
11:58:54 <NGC3982> Did i got disconnected?
11:59:10 <NGC3982> My status tells me i didnt, but #OpenTTD just gave me a nicklist.
11:59:24 <Pikka> * NGC3982_ has quit (Server closed connection)
11:59:24 <Pikka> * NGC3982 (appe@noskapin.krot.se) has joined #openttd
12:08:47 <Eddi|zuHause> <peter1138> therefore, no. adding a separating catenary bit is stupid <- i think there needs to be some UI improvement to easily switch between electrified/unelectrified rail, without going through the lengthy (hidden) dropdown menu
12:09:58 <Eddi|zuHause> at the least, add the railtype dropdown to the rail toolbar
12:10:26 <peter1138> that is more reasonable
12:10:35 <Eddi|zuHause> next to the convert button
12:11:06 <goodger> not only for the UI but because the presence or absence of a catenary is not necessarily a distinct "railtype"
12:11:35 <Eddi|zuHause> as an extension, allow the NewGRF to split that dropdown into two, at the NewGRF's choice to separate rail and catenary, or something completely different
12:12:11 <Eddi|zuHause> it helps solve some combinatoric explosion
12:12:29 <Eddi|zuHause> don't change the internal railtype labels, but change how the railtypes are presented to the user
12:13:12 <goodger> with nutracks there are a baffling array of track types which are really just four track types plus all combinations of third rail and catenery
12:13:45 <Pinkbeast> I'm not sure 16 yet counts as a baffling array
12:13:49 <goodger> I feel that could be better handled
12:14:20 <Eddi|zuHause> Pinkbeast: all numbers >7 are problematic
12:14:39 <peter1138> don't use track sets with so many combinations if it's confusing you
12:14:43 <goodger> Pinkbeast: please forgive my hyperbole, but it's certainly a vast increase over TTD's original three kinds of track
12:15:05 <Eddi|zuHause> peter1138: it's not about confusing, it's about cumbersome
12:15:12 <peter1138> don't use track sets with so many combinations if it's cumbersome
12:15:45 <Eddi|zuHause> peter1138: you frequently change between "128km/h with catenary" and "128km/h without catenary", but less frequently between "128km/h" and "180km/h" railtypes
12:15:51 <goodger> (and those were actually three distinct kinds of track)
12:16:32 <V453000> I think the whole rail speed limits are stupid, howgh
12:16:44 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, but that is not the point :)
12:17:25 <V453000> speed should be set by engine, not tracks
12:17:39 <V453000> doing it by tracks just shows that the train set has dumb train stats
12:17:43 <Pinkbeast> That's just circular.
12:17:57 <goodger> in the real world, both the engines and the tracks have speed limits
12:18:15 <V453000> yes real world also doesnt have pixels
12:18:22 <V453000> not that I know of at least
12:18:38 <Pinkbeast> Err so the engines should just fly through the air. It's not the real world.
12:18:43 <Eddi|zuHause> tracks don't have speed limits, signal distances and curves have speed limits
12:19:21 <Pinkbeast> Tracks _do_ have speed limits - presence or absence of superelevation, ability to sustain wear from trains at high speeds.
12:19:24 <Eddi|zuHause> (except when the tracks are horribly worn down)
12:19:41 <V453000> and how is that relative to the game ? :)
12:19:46 <Eddi|zuHause> superelevation, wear ==> curve-related
12:19:55 <Pinkbeast> And signal distances are not meaningfully represented by OTTD signals.
12:20:10 <goodger> it's relevant to the game because the game is a simulation
12:20:34 <Pinkbeast> Eddi: But you can't superelevate a curve; OTTD doesn't directly represent curves less than 45 degrees; wear matters even on straight tracks.
12:20:55 <Pinkbeast> I mean, in OTTD there is no way to superelevate a curve to permit higher speeds
12:21:58 <Pinkbeast> Track for high-speed trains _is_ much more expensive and it is in my view nice to see that in the game.
12:22:09 <Pinkbeast> (also, axle loading limits, hem-hem)
12:22:24 <peter1138> personally i would've gone with "normal tracks" and "high speed tracks"
12:22:43 <peter1138> and high speed tracks don't need 3rd rail or non-electrified variants
12:22:47 <V453000> but what is the technical difference for the game?
12:23:05 <V453000> oh and prevented rail crossings (:DDD)
12:23:12 <Pinkbeast> V453: I'm not sure I even understand your question.
12:23:33 <V453000> trains behave the same on these tracks
12:23:45 <Pinkbeast> Except they go slower, yes... is this not expected?
12:23:45 <V453000> except that it obviously prevents trains X from going full speed there
12:23:55 <V453000> that is ... completely useless?
12:24:04 *** SpComb^ has joined #openttd
12:24:14 <V453000> if the trains have their stats correctly, their usefulness should be defined by those, not tracks
12:24:25 <Pinkbeast> This is just circular again.
12:24:38 <V453000> if tracks are used to reduce speed of trains, and they are still useful, then their speed is apparently too high in the first place
12:25:00 <V453000> cost is completely irrelevant
12:25:04 <Pinkbeast> Errr tracks aren't "used to reduce speed of trains". Tracks reduce the speed of trains because they need upgrading.
12:25:25 <V453000> so absolutely no effect
12:25:38 <V453000> cause upgraded tracks will do nothing then? wont even slow trains down
12:25:40 <Pinkbeast> Except reducing the speed of trains which is what you'd expect a speed limit on tracks to do.
12:26:10 <V453000> tracks after upgrade will still limit speed? :D
12:26:17 <Pinkbeast> goodger: V453 thinks everyone plays the same way he does; set up a cash cow and then buy the best of everything.
12:26:38 <Flygon> The pathfinder will do anything to put High Speed Trains on FASTER routes, even if the trip would be LONGER
12:26:38 <V453000> I dont think that at all, I know you play differently
12:26:40 <Pinkbeast> In that mode of play, of course, low-speed tracks serve no purpose.
12:26:53 <Flygon> eg. it'll prefer 1000 tiles of 240km/h track over 100 tiles of 160km/h track
12:26:58 <goodger> Pinkbeast: well, that is also how I play
12:27:21 <V453000> having everything expensive doesnt do anything at all, making money in openttd is trivial
12:27:31 <V453000> it just makes you wait longer
12:27:44 <Pinkbeast> _If_ you just set up a cash cow and buy the best of everything.
12:27:44 <goodger> but I don't spend £85k per tile on unlimited-speed track when the trains are going to be running at 75 mph
12:27:45 <V453000> eventually build less expensively, but still only prolonges the game
12:28:31 *** peter1138 has joined #openttd
12:28:31 *** ChanServ sets mode: +o peter1138
12:28:37 <V453000> to be fair, nutracks with higher cost setting do mean that you upgrade trains only when you have money for the tracks
12:28:43 <V453000> but again that is what train set should do
12:28:54 <Pinkbeast> Says you - but that's purely circular.
12:28:57 <goodger> actually, since I've been playing with cargodist, I've been very stingy
12:29:38 <V453000> ok, says me, and what does you say that tracks give as a gameplay feature?
12:29:48 <V453000> it "fixes" train sets, ok, next?
12:30:04 <goodger> it doesn't fix train sets
12:30:14 <Pinkbeast> We already explained that; it's just your inability to understand how anyone else plays the game means you don't comprehend. Sorry.
12:30:29 <V453000> I am asking for a simple answer
12:30:37 <V453000> that has nothing to do with me understanding
12:31:06 <Pinkbeast> Prioritising track upgrades versus other expenditure of money and human attention is fun.
12:31:30 <goodger> it provides a separate, infrastructure-based constraint on the speed of the train, which is more in line with how railways actually behave than having all trains run at their maximum speed on all routes
12:31:45 <peter1138> Flygon, that just means the penalties applied are too steep
12:31:47 <Pinkbeast> And as goodger says it also feels more like a "real" railway.
12:31:55 <V453000> :D ok I had enough fun
12:32:18 <Flygon> peter1138: Steep is an understatement
12:33:12 *** Supercheese has joined #openttd
12:35:58 <goodger> I'm glad to see the spirit of co-operative discourse in this channel hasn't diminished in my absence
12:36:50 <Pinkbeast> Oh, I'm used to V453 and his "Why would you want trains to be different lengths, anyway?" questions. :-)
12:38:17 <goodger> I wonder how long it's been since I was last here.
12:39:06 <peter1138> only for a week or 2
12:39:46 <goodger> your grep skills are clearly superior to mine
12:40:01 <NGC3982> Does the dedicated server (Windows) use multiple CPU threads?
12:40:14 <NGC3982> Or does it use my computer like the actual game?
12:40:27 <peter1138> NGC3982, it is the actual game
12:41:14 <NGC3982> I'm about to move my server from my HTPC (Windows 7) to a Pentium 4 server (with no direct graphic interface).
12:41:30 <NGC3982> I guess the P4 will do better than my Atom230 (twat face) HTPC.
12:41:30 <goodger> <dihedral> goodger, 6% is not that much, when you consider that about 20-25% of the forum users are real idiots
12:42:37 <goodger> now I want to know the context for this.
12:43:16 <peter1138> yeah it doesn't appear to search nicks
12:44:34 <V453000> I am just wondering if that is more, or less retarded than the previous topic Pinkbeast :)
12:44:42 <goodger> that was embarrassing
12:44:56 *** Zeknurn has joined #openttd
12:45:34 <goodger> I'd like to point out that I have been receiving medical attention for a couple of years and it has made me less of a tit*
12:48:11 <V453000> I will ask you one thing however, Pinkbeast. I am indeed missing at least one part of "your" building logic, and that is ... what do you actually do when you have enough money to afford anything?
12:48:19 <V453000> as that moment inevitably comes at some point of the game
12:48:35 <Pinkbeast> Think about starting another game.
12:49:05 <Pinkbeast> But I also make human attention a limited resource. If I was playing with base railtypes, for example, I won't just select the whole map and electrify it.
12:49:13 <Pinkbeast> I'll electrify one line after another.
12:50:28 <peter1138> hell yeah, i don't electrify the whole thing
12:50:31 <Pinkbeast> Also, ponder the mess that is RV routing.
12:54:55 <Pinkbeast> But I am very much in favour (for me) of things like infra maintenance and progressive tax that keep money relevant as long as possible without making the early game agonisingly slow.
12:54:56 <Eddi|zuHause> back-to-the-future-style
12:56:22 <Pikka> "Coal Ash is CMNT", mb replies within 3 minutes
13:10:40 <Eddi|zuHause> it should be TMNT :p
13:14:10 *** HerzogDeXtEr has joined #openttd
13:23:54 *** roboboy has joined #openttd
13:27:53 <Eddi|zuHause> Pikka: i'm not entirely convinced that reusing a random label for something completely different is a bright idea
13:28:31 <Eddi|zuHause> e.g. an eyecandy vehicle set could have a cement transporter for CMNT only
13:29:42 <V453000> hm, Q: I have some railtype defined by my newGRF. What I want to do is make it compatibile with both original bridges, and newbridges. But newbridges have a bit different bridge heads which need a slightly different offset for the ramps. Is there any way to automatically check if newbridges are loaded within nuts, or should I just add that as a parameter?
13:29:57 <V453000> aka can a newgrf check for other loaded newgrfs?
13:30:41 <V453000> k now to find out how in NML :D
13:31:30 <peter1138> or newbridges should be fixed ;p
13:33:02 <Eddi|zuHause> V453000: FIRS has lots of checks for other newgrfs
13:33:28 <V453000> well I just figured it might be better to have sprites first before doing such a feature :P
13:35:03 <Eddi|zuHause> not entirely sure what you mean with needing different offsets though
13:35:22 <Eddi|zuHause> and there are several bridge sets
13:35:51 <V453000> the ramps are of the same shape, but different position
13:36:08 <Eddi|zuHause> newbridges, combined bridge and road set, total bridge renewal, ...
13:36:09 <V453000> I know, but has some custom heads which wont fit my tracks at all in fact
13:36:40 <V453000> and the rest of tbrs seems compatible with original
13:36:52 <V453000> so I might just need that one check for the ramps for newbridges
13:38:59 <Eddi|zuHause> i think combroads has mostly the same bridges as newbridges, so you should check for that as well
13:39:18 <V453000> I dont think I even used that thing ever :D
13:39:35 <Eddi|zuHause> i did a long time ago
13:39:46 <Eddi|zuHause> until OTTD broke it
13:40:11 <V453000> well I know I tried it some time ago, but it didnt replace anything
13:42:00 <V453000> I forgot the sprite aligner resets upon reloading newgrfs
13:42:11 <V453000> newbridges and original seem compatible
13:50:52 <Eddi|zuHause> what do people want this shares thing for anyway? i always hated the stock market in RRT
13:51:45 <peter1138> don't remember that
13:52:02 <NGC3982> Any cinematic buffs around here?
13:52:08 <V453000> something like "omg I spend 1M now, I get 300M later when I dont know what to do with money anyway"
13:53:09 <Eddi|zuHause> peter1138: it's the thing where if you don't react immediately to an AI buying shares in your company they get 60% and you lose
13:53:31 *** roboboy has joined #openttd
13:54:05 <Pinkbeast> I thought it worked well in RRT3 (albeit perhaps not right for OTTD) where you were often trying to increase your personal wealth, and where share issues were a sensible source of funding.
13:56:14 <Flygon> Can't make a Government Railway and issue bonds? :P
13:56:30 <Flygon> Government Railways: The fun is in hoping Tony Abbot doesn't get elected!
13:56:41 <Flygon> Man's probably never been to a train station in his life
13:57:18 <Eddi|zuHause> no idea wth you're talking about
13:58:10 <Flygon> Point is, not every company is in the stock market
13:58:34 <Flygon> Man, I'm so stupid when I'm suppose to be going to sleep >_>
14:01:18 <Eddi|zuHause> Flygon: well, in RRT you can buy 50% (or 100%) of your shares, then a hostile takeover is much harder. but doing that in the beginning would probably eat up all your starting money
14:01:43 <Flygon> Sorry for my ignorance x:
14:01:53 <Flygon> Peeps keep telling me to play RRT x.x
14:02:01 <goodger> yeah, stock buybacks are not usually a good idea
14:02:36 <Eddi|zuHause> i just always disabled that they try to buy you out, then it's fine
14:04:59 <NGC3982> planetmaker: Are you around? I for some time ago noticed that you had some knowledge in star formations? :)
14:06:09 <goodger> formations, or formation?
14:07:00 <planetmaker> I might be and I might have but that's definitely a meta-question I can't answer
14:07:19 <NGC3982> Ah, yes, formation. As in nurseries.
14:08:08 <Eddi|zuHause> he's a planetmaker, not a starmaker :p
14:08:12 <NGC3982> I have recently started reading about the more practical birth of stars.
14:08:17 <NGC3982> And it's quite interesting.
14:08:39 <planetmaker> Eddi|zuHause, planets are just collateral "damage" :-P
14:10:17 <Eddi|zuHause> so what are twin stars then? :p
14:11:27 *** Devroush has joined #openttd
14:11:54 <Eddi|zuHause> "lesbian canibals"... you want to make people aroused and disgusted at the same time? at this hour? :p
14:12:33 <goodger> furries have made a profitable industry out of doing so
14:12:45 <NGC3982> I for some time ago heard that our current observation states that most star have a twin
14:13:12 <Eddi|zuHause> what's "most" in this context?
14:13:24 <goodger> I think it was about 70%?
14:13:32 <NGC3982> I do not know, really.
14:13:52 <planetmaker> most stars are in multiple systems. Not most stars systems are a multiple system :-)
14:13:55 <planetmaker> Note the difference
14:14:20 <NGC3982> I guess that is size-of-orbit related?
14:14:39 <planetmaker> No. Simple number theory
14:14:57 <NGC3982> Then, i did not understand that.
14:14:59 <Eddi|zuHause> if i have two star systems, and one of them is a twin-star system, then 66% of all stars are in a twin system
14:15:06 <planetmaker> if 2/3 of the stars are in binary systems, still 50% of the stellar systems are single
14:15:46 <Eddi|zuHause> because twin systems have twice as many stars
14:16:53 <Celestar> planetmaker: well. ternary and higher star systems also bias that observation
14:16:54 <Eddi|zuHause> so if 33% of all star systems are twin systems, then 50% of all stars are in twin star systems
14:17:13 <NGC3982> But in a cosmological sense, a star that orbits another star closely with planets (a "two star system") is the same thing as a twin star system, with only orbit size in difference?
14:17:22 <NGC3982> Or is this some magical language thing i have missunderstood.
14:17:40 <Eddi|zuHause> Celestar: i'd assume those get rarer so that the influence drops asymptotically
14:17:46 <NGC3982> Yes, this was a magical language thing.
14:18:21 <planetmaker> planets don't matter when considering multiplicity of stellar systems. Planets are just dust
14:18:46 <NGC3982> planetmaker: If not, what is the difference of a two star system, and a twin star system?
14:18:51 <NGC3982> That was the thing that puzzled me.
14:18:57 <planetmaker> And yes, the multiple stellar systems with n>=3 become increasingly rare
14:18:59 <Celestar> afaik triple star systems are not THAT rare
14:19:09 <Eddi|zuHause> NGC3982: i think of it as the twin star is a planet that got large enough to shine on its own
14:19:12 <planetmaker> NGC3982, there's none?
14:19:32 <Celestar> "planet that got large enough to shine on its own" <- that's no planet anymore
14:19:43 <Eddi|zuHause> Celestar: semantics
14:19:50 <Celestar> unless someone on it built a huge bulb
14:19:51 <planetmaker> oh, you mean two distinct systems vs. double star? gravitationally bound is the definition of double (multiple) system
14:20:10 <planetmaker> A system generally is everything which is gravitationally bound to eachother
14:20:13 <NGC3982> planetmaker: Yes, and so i thought, that is why i noted: "< NGC3982> I guess that is size-of-orbit related?" when "two star" and "twin star" systems was mentioned.
14:20:36 <planetmaker> size of orbit = oo for two systems
14:20:40 <NGC3982> A two star system that also has a long distant twin star. Three stars in a system, but only two locally.
14:20:47 <planetmaker> i.e. "orbit" has no meaning there
14:21:16 <planetmaker> that'd be a quadruple system consisting of two close binaries. No problem with that.
14:21:23 <NGC3982> I guess i'm not supposed to argue on stuff like this, when the language hinders me from understanding basic points.
14:22:48 <Celestar> planetmaker: is it meanwhile clarified whether Alpha Centauri is a triple star system?
14:23:11 <planetmaker> I always believed that it's a tripple?
14:23:36 <Celestar> I wasn't sure whether Proxima is really gravitationally bound or just happens to be near :P
14:24:12 <Celestar> hm .. Septuple star systems.
14:24:58 <planetmaker> I've no special knowledge there either.
14:25:00 <Eddi|zuHause> just imagine indefinite star systems, then 7 is just a special case :p
14:25:32 <planetmaker> I read once the wiki article on it, that's it :-P
14:28:23 <Celestar> stellar systems can't be single, can they :P
14:29:10 <Celestar> because afaik the definition of a stellar system is > 1 star gravitationally bound to one another :P
14:29:33 <NGC3982> Doesn't the definition allow multiple (fairly closed, but still attached by gravity) stellar systems to be "twins"?
14:29:55 <NGC3982> In hard science, all of the universe is one stellar system, then.
14:30:57 <planetmaker> Celestar, a stellar system can consist of one star only
14:31:07 <NGC3982> Yes, it would. Since gravity works in infinite distance, one could propose such a thing. We do not, since we notice that stellar systems have some sort of limit to them.
14:31:21 <Celestar> planetmaker: that's a star system or planetary system :P
14:31:22 <NGC3982> And, if we can define a limit, we can also define more than one stellar system
14:31:37 <Celestar> NGC3982: gravitationally bound means C3 < 0.
14:31:46 <planetmaker> Celestar, a star system with one star can be a planetary system with a single central body. yes
14:31:51 <NGC3982> Thus, if more than one exist, we could potentially tie them together without calling them a single system. A cluster, for instance.
14:31:58 <planetmaker> the inverse is not necessarily true
14:32:03 <Eddi|zuHause> you guys really should fix up your semantics before assuming the other one uses it the same way as you :p
14:32:38 <NGC3982> Eddi|zuHause: Yes, i know. And that might be my fault. I love science, but i can't really express it properly in English.
14:32:59 <planetmaker> Celestar, replace "stellar" by "solar" and you'll see that one star suffices :-)
14:33:04 <Eddi|zuHause> none of us us english :p
14:33:30 <Celestar> planetmaker: afaik stellar system != star system (or solar system)
14:33:35 <NGC3982> Eddi|zuHause: This channel consists of the best english speaking non-english people i have ever encountered on IRC.
14:33:38 <SpComb> imagine in infinite plane of identical and uniformly distributed stars
14:33:55 <Celestar> with solar system being one instance of a star system :P
14:33:58 <SpComb> then calculate the resistance between two points
14:33:58 <NGC3982> Wikipedia states that a solar system = stellar system.
14:34:10 <Eddi|zuHause> NGC3982: usually the worst english speakers are native english speakers :p
14:34:24 <NGC3982> Eddi|zuHause: That makes me feel a tad bit better.
14:35:00 <Celestar> "a solar system"? There is only one :P
14:35:14 <NGC3982> Sweet jesus, people are using public servers like crazy. When starting to advertise my server, i thought id get one or two players per day. Now, it feels like ten people join every hour (and leave :/).
14:36:13 <planetmaker> Celestar, you only make sense, if you now argue that "stellar system" is the same as Galaxy. Otherwise stellar system = star system = system where one or more stars form alone or jointly the local gravitational well which it / they reside in and which their prospective planets etc might orbit as well
14:37:12 <Celestar> planetmaker: ah from what I understood a stellar system is a binary or higher star system.
14:37:20 *** ntoskrnl has joined #openttd
14:37:38 <planetmaker> I'd never necessarily assume so :-)
14:37:47 <Celestar> Even Wikipedia doesn't make sense there :P
14:37:58 <planetmaker> that's why you must not quote it ;-)
14:38:20 <planetmaker> (or only on pain of scientific death or so)
14:38:23 <NGC3982> Is there a way to set a defualt user password?
14:39:08 <NGC3982> Oh, what command/entry can i use?
14:39:18 <Celestar> ok. let's say a bunch of non-stars orbiting one or more stars is called a "planetary system". A Star system is a number of stars gravitationally bound to each other, they may or may not have planets.
14:39:46 <NGC3982> That sounds about right.
14:39:52 <planetmaker> I'd like to include single stars in the latter
14:40:08 <Celestar> what's the difference between a planetary system and a star system then?
14:40:15 <NGC3982> My intuition tells me that a star system does not have to include anything else than the star.
14:40:24 <planetmaker> given the ubiquity of planets: in reality none
14:40:33 <Celestar> planetmaker: probably
14:40:38 <NGC3982> A planetary system needs planets, i guess?
14:40:50 * NGC3982 googles the word ubiquity
14:41:11 <Celestar> I think we will find few stars that do not have planets
14:41:41 <planetmaker> sure, there will be. no doubt. Especially those short-lived high-mass ones
14:41:43 <Celestar> no I meant planets, no stuff :P
14:41:46 <NGC3982> I guess older stellar nurseries may have protoplanet junk instead of actual spheres.
14:41:51 <Celestar> planetmaker: "few" :P
14:41:54 <planetmaker> though even those will have a disk. Most likely
14:41:58 <peter1138> ^ unsuppported! patch! for! 32! railtypes!
14:41:59 <planetmaker> Celestar, yes. very few
14:42:11 <Celestar> planetmaker: aren't the high-mass ones very very very friggen rare?
14:42:16 <planetmaker> big stars are very scarce
14:42:38 <planetmaker> the initial mass function peaks somewhere around half a solar mass. Thus that's most common
14:43:05 <NGC3982> So, the sun is bigger than the average?
14:43:05 <Eddi|zuHause> when i last took astronomy class, the theory was that multi-star systems likely wouldn't have planets
14:43:14 <Eddi|zuHause> but that was ages ago :p
14:43:15 <Celestar> Eddi|zuHause: when was thaT? 1995?
14:43:18 <NGC3982> I was under the impression it was the other way around. :)
14:43:38 <Eddi|zuHause> Celestar: yes, something like that :p
14:43:41 <planetmaker> treatise on multiplicity of stars for planetary systems ;-)
14:43:51 <Celestar> NGC3982: well. average or mean size? :P
14:43:52 <__ln__> did anyone take an astrology class?
14:44:11 <NGC3982> __ln__: We actually did.
14:44:14 <Celestar> __ln__: if I had, I would have been convicted of manslaughter I guess
14:44:31 <Celestar> astrology? class? really?
14:44:44 <Celestar> Was your teacher called Trelawny? :P
14:44:49 <peter1138> i think he doesn't know what astrology means :)
14:45:04 <NGC3982> As a bit of our astronomy/physics lessions, we had a (suprisingly long) part about astrology, and how it is the worst "science" that was ever used seriosly.
14:45:16 <NGC3982> peter1138: I was about to curse on you.
14:45:34 <Celestar> Making stuff up isn't science
14:45:41 <__ln__> in the good old times, astronomy and astrology were one science, i've understood.
14:45:45 <Eddi|zuHause> NGC3982: clearly that missed out on homoeopathy
14:45:56 <NGC3982> Religion was also considerd the best of observation back in the day
14:46:26 <NGC3982> As with astrology, hence the teachers enthusiasm in teaching us how the best of observations might lead to the worst of conclusions.
14:46:48 <NGC3982> That is at least what i guess the point was.
14:47:30 *** Defaultti has joined #openttd
14:47:49 <Eddi|zuHause> NGC3982: well if the moon cycle and a woman's cycle (almost) sync up, what conclusions can you possibly draw? :p
14:48:13 <Celestar> erm. yeah. right. :D
14:48:16 <NGC3982> Eddi|zuHause: That sex is magic, and "blue balls" should really be "moon balls".
14:48:20 <Belugas> hello sir Celestar :)
14:48:49 <Belugas> still sitting on the same chair and drinking teh same coffee since last time !
14:49:04 <Belugas> well... same mug, same brand of coffee...
14:49:19 <Belugas> and same frequency of drinking...
14:49:39 <NGC3982> peter1138: And that assumption offended me.
14:49:40 <Eddi|zuHause> NGC3982: also, if a certain star formation typically appears at the same time as the fertilizer-bringing flood, and mix in a bit of religion... how can there come anything other than astrology out of it?
14:49:42 <Belugas> and still mumbling about stupid "help" desk
14:50:07 <Belugas> Definition of HelpDesk... the guys who are crying for help...
14:50:13 <peter1138> NGC3982, i was going on a native-language angle
14:50:26 <Celestar> Eddi|zuHause: well but that's the past.
14:51:00 <Eddi|zuHause> Celestar: the past has this tendency to bleed into the presence...
14:51:13 <NGC3982> Eddi|zuHause: Well, that was kind of the point of these lessons. Our modern school systems can be very good at teaching how to be sceptic, but also be very bad at teaching where scepticism is appliable. As in the example you gave, the connection may be irrefutable with what at the time was modern observation.
14:51:14 <Eddi|zuHause> it's called "conservativism"
14:51:28 *** supermop has joined #openttd
14:51:58 <Eddi|zuHause> aka "we have always done it this way"
14:52:03 <NGC3982> Eddi|zuHause: And the main purpose might have been not to accept "the best of observation" just because it's the best of observation.
14:52:11 *** TheMask96 has joined #openttd
14:52:12 <NGC3982> It doesn't have to be
14:53:17 <NGC3982> Since we have explored science and nowadays know that stuff may not be what they seem like, it's easy to say that everything is the "best of observation - right now".
14:53:33 <NGC3982> That is hard to apply in a society where your observation always leads to some kind of truth.
14:53:43 <NGC3982> God in pre-space-exploring times, for instance.
14:54:10 <Celestar> Eddi|zuHause: yeah hence we have some strange leftovers.....
14:54:30 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, like partys that have a "C" in their name
14:55:05 <NGC3982> Lawrence Krauss has a good conversation about this in A universe from nothing, where he compares astrology with what future scientists may say about the world when the expansion leads to us not observing anything else but our own galaxy.
14:56:45 <Pinkbeast> Oh, yes, I saw a story about that in Scientific American. And of course there is the interesting question of whether this has already happened.
14:56:58 <NGC3982> And that is a horrible notion
14:57:26 <Pinkbeast> ... but I think he rightly observes that in that old universe it is very hard to form a self-consistent cosmology supported by evidence at all, which is not the position we are in.
14:57:37 <NGC3982> The best of observation leads to an ultimate theory that can under almost no circumstances be disproved due to enourmous proof and observation ..And it's ..Wrong.
14:58:38 <NGC3982> I guess we could potentially ignore it, though.
15:02:34 <Pinkbeast> Also, our cosmological theory makes predictions which prove true, which is always nice. Even if the old-universe people form a bogus cosmology, that won't work.
15:11:12 <Belugas> hello sir planetmaker (sorry for lag, i was cutting some heads)
15:11:52 <planetmaker> old news, oskari89 ;-)
15:37:06 *** Eddi|zuHause has joined #openttd
15:44:02 *** oskari892 has joined #openttd
15:47:40 *** roboboy has joined #openttd
16:01:41 *** goodger has joined #openttd
16:08:17 *** Kurimus has joined #openttd
16:17:14 *** Flygon_ has joined #openttd
16:19:03 *** valhallasw has joined #openttd
16:21:22 *** mrdaft_ has joined #openttd
16:21:58 *** mrdaft_ is now known as mrdaft
17:08:22 <NGC3982> I wish to change my server system from Windows to Linux. What dist is the best one to start with? Ubuntu?
17:17:07 <Pinkbeast> NGC: If you have no prior Unix admin experience I would try Ubuntu; if you have plenty, Debian.
17:19:41 <Pinkbeast> Ubuntu because it's approachable (but a Debian derivative); Debian because it's of a high technical quality and not tied to a corporate who might pull a Red Hat.
17:20:00 <peter1138> what's unapproachable about debian?
17:21:56 <Pinkbeast> Debian is not really targetted at users without existing Unix admin experience
17:23:42 <peter1138> in your humble opinion
17:24:00 <peter1138> it isn't "targetted" at all
17:24:18 <Pinkbeast> I think that's a meaningless semantic quibble.
17:24:24 <peter1138> ubuntu == crock of useless shit
17:24:28 <Pinkbeast> ... and I also know IWJ would say the same thing.
17:25:07 <Pinkbeast> (and recommends Ubuntu to less-experienced users)
17:25:35 <NGC3982> Pinkbeast: I have no prior experience.
17:25:57 <peter1138> so no need to pollute your virginity with ubuntu crap
17:27:48 <Pinkbeast> NGC: Then you know what I recommend.
17:29:15 <NGC3982> Pinkbeast: I have used both, but never more then in instances as user.
17:29:29 <NGC3982> I guess i know how to start stuff.
17:29:31 <NGC3982> But i guess ill manage
17:29:56 <Pinkbeast> Well, I'm chasing off home, nohow. But I don't really have anything to add to "probably Ubuntu then"
17:30:29 <NGC3982> Already installing Debian
17:44:53 *** frosch123 has joined #openttd
17:57:59 <MNIM> peter1138: well, post 10.10 anyway
17:58:19 <MNIM> also, guys, what was the conclusion of that roadtypes discussion you had this morning?
18:03:33 <Terkhen> conclusions? in this channel?
18:04:29 <MNIM> holy meatballs, is it just me or is there a buttload of new features in the 1.3.0 beta?
18:06:51 <Terkhen> there are many nice things :)
18:07:46 <Terkhen> meh, I'm stupid, I forgot to separate beta1 and <next_version> in my changelog
18:13:56 <peter1138> i did make a patch for 32 railtypes
18:14:02 <peter1138> but nobody cared cos it was all about stars
18:25:58 <NGC3982> This will be interesting. I have never used any server software on a Linux system.
18:26:08 <NGC3982> It will be nice to see how Debian works out.
18:27:47 <peter1138> what do you intend to run?
18:29:33 <NGC3982> The game, as a server.
18:31:08 <NGC3982> Oh, and it was ..simple.
18:32:39 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, just type openttd -D and you have a server. amazing
18:32:46 <NGC3982> Well, that is not the big part.
18:33:23 <NGC3982> I guess choosing NewGRF's and map configuration is not as easy as in Windows, since i do not have any graphical interface to start OpenTTD in.
18:34:03 <peter1138> yeah, someone™ should do something about that
18:34:15 <DorpsGek> Commit by frosch :: r24951 trunk/src/station_cmd.cpp (2013-01-31 18:34:11 UTC)
18:34:16 <DorpsGek> -Fix: [NewGRF] Var 10 of CB 24 missed the T part.
18:35:19 <NGC3982> peter1138: You make it sound as it's impossible. :e
18:43:03 <peter1138> it's pretty impossible to get someone™ to do something
18:45:11 <DorpsGek> Commit by translators :: r24952 trunk/src/lang/unfinished/tamil.txt (2013-01-31 18:45:07 UTC)
18:45:12 <DorpsGek> -Update from WebTranslator v3.0:
18:45:13 <DorpsGek> tamil - 15 changes by aswn
18:49:01 <NGC3982> I'm actually not getting it to work.
18:49:28 <NGC3982> I guess the default config should support simply starting the server dedicated, and playing should work as long as networking allows it?
18:49:44 * NGC3982 needs to investigate.
18:56:51 <peter1138> NGC3982, yes but LAN only i think
18:57:36 <NGC3982> The version present in apt-get is 1.0.4
18:58:01 <Terkhen> Eddi|zuHause: it's missing on top a picture from spain with salt on the streets but no snow
18:58:13 <peter1138> just need to download a stable from our website
18:58:13 <NGC3982> How ..does one remove software.
18:58:26 <Terkhen> a week ago they actually started a "red alert for snow" but we got no snow at all
18:58:44 <NGC3982> I wonder if openttd.org supports lynx.
18:58:44 <peter1138> installing it pulled in all the dependencies for you, which was handy
18:59:04 <Eddi|zuHause> Terkhen: in Lübeck they used sharp-edged greeble, and now all the bicycles have flat tyres
18:59:08 <peter1138> there is a debian squeeze patchage on our downloads
19:04:14 <NGC3982> It seems it did not like to install 1.2.3 when 1.0.4 was installed.
19:04:26 <peter1138> shouldn't be a problem
19:04:34 <peter1138> it'll remove 1.0.4 to install 1.2.3...
19:06:17 <NGC3982> Hold on, something else is wrong.
19:06:25 <NGC3982> I could install openttd with apt-get as a user.
19:06:38 <NGC3982> But i don't seem to have the rights to use dpkg, as the same user.
19:06:42 <NGC3982> Might that be a problem, say.
19:11:38 <Belugas> nice, Eddi|zuHause ;)
19:12:53 <peter1138> you can't use apt-get as a user
19:13:07 <peter1138> you need to be root, use su, or sduo
19:13:50 <peter1138> NGC3982, okay, ignore me. remove openttd & openttd-data
19:13:59 <peter1138> NGC3982, then it'll install
19:14:03 <peter1138> but check the clock on your server
19:14:11 <peter1138> cos those errors are cos of that
19:14:30 * NGC3982 needs to google how to remove programs.
19:14:51 <peter1138> on a deb-based system anyway
19:15:29 <NGC3982> Now, all i need to fix is to allow my user to install via dpkg.
19:16:40 <peter1138> apt-get install sudo
19:16:51 <peter1138> adduser username sudo
19:17:04 <peter1138> then you can do sudo dpkg etc
19:17:18 <NGC3982> But yes, ill try that.
19:17:27 <peter1138> then add your user to the group :p
19:18:44 <NGC3982> I think i did that by hand.
19:22:43 <NGC3982> First, i run the apt-get remove, and it confirms that openttd is not installed
19:23:18 <NGC3982> openttd-data does not seem to be removed with sudo apt-get remove openttd.
19:23:28 <Eddi|zuHause> how is your reading comprehension? he said to remove BOTH!
19:25:26 <NGC3982> It seems i need libicu38.
19:26:07 <Eddi|zuHause> then you probably downloaded the wrong .deb
19:27:00 <peter1138> linux debian squeeze
19:27:09 <peter1138> you must have got linux debian lenny
19:27:29 <NGC3982> I did not see that Squeeze link until i rechecked
19:27:38 <NGC3982> That's what i get for using Lynx.
19:27:39 <peter1138> 18:59 < NGC3982> Squeeze? Ok..
19:28:07 <Eddi|zuHause> something is really wrong with your reading comprehension
19:28:19 <NGC3982> I had no idea what Squeeze was.
19:29:36 <NGC3982> peter1138: Thank you.
19:30:45 *** Celestar has joined #openttd
19:32:24 <peter1138> probably not helpful
19:33:45 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd
20:05:53 *** Devroush has joined #openttd
20:06:56 *** fonsinchen has joined #openttd
20:30:09 <Belugas> This Will Destroy You - Black Dunes
20:36:28 *** HerzogDeXtEr1 has joined #openttd
20:56:56 <MNIM> D'oh. You'd think my intersection would be big enough with a HSL line crossing a 'slow' mainline with two branches
20:59:42 <MNIM> well, I suppose you could call it four branches if you count the part past the station too.
21:02:01 <MNIM> I think Ive finally found the root of my routing issues though.
21:06:58 <NGC3982> There is a site with the corresponding Online Content data, right?
21:07:18 <NGC3982> For me (who cannot use the Online Content feature)?
21:07:45 <NGC3982> That seems to be BaNaNas.
21:09:32 <peter1138> technically you can
21:09:35 <peter1138> it's just not very friendly
21:10:49 <NGC3982> Yes, i noticed. My initial reaction was to look for a "Download everything" button.
21:11:17 <peter1138> you might end up grabbing zbase though
21:11:22 <peter1138> which is a bit large
21:22:19 <NGC3982> I tried downloading all of the ECS files that was on the Bananas site, but they ..do not seem to be the same as the ones in the Online Content?
21:22:46 <NGC3982> That said, i can't get them to match with the already existing ones my local Windows client is using.
21:22:54 *** andythenorth has left #openttd
21:23:50 *** Superuser has joined #openttd
21:29:08 <MNIM> I think (hope) I solved all routing troubles in my new intersection, now I hope I can get that festering stinking sexual organ of a train route that was one of my local stop services to run on the correct track
21:32:40 <peter1138> mmm, festering stinking sexual organs
21:35:10 <Terkhen> that sounds far worse than the actual swear words
21:37:18 <MNIM> As was my intention, thank you :P
21:38:37 <MNIM> Seriously, it was a train route running across half of a 1024^2 map stopping at every station it encountered and not a single train was doing anything useful due to one tiny error (a signal pointed the wrong way)
21:39:06 <MNIM> well, and the inherent routing complication a parallel loop comprises, but that was easily solved by waypoints
21:55:59 <MNIM> less than I expected, actually
22:00:45 <NGC3982> Where can i read on how i toggle parameters on NewGRF's that are loaded via a dedicated server (in Linux)?
22:01:19 <NGC3982> For some reason, the UKRS2+ sets a default "No locomotives" parameter when using the GRF in my initial config.
22:02:05 <frosch123> you write numbers after the "=" in openttd.cfg
22:07:47 <NGC3982> frosch123: Where can i find more documentation about it? I notice that "Parameter: 3" shows, but it does not change any of the existing ones.
22:08:15 <frosch123> do you know that openttd.cfg will only affect you games?
22:08:24 <Supercheese> NGC3982: Load OTTD in a normal GUI-environment, set your parameters, and look at what they are there to compred
22:09:18 <Supercheese> For example my UKRS2 has Parameters: 0 0 2 1 0 4 3
22:09:28 <Supercheese> UKRS2+ has no parameters
22:10:24 <NGC3982> Yes, sorry, i was refering to UKRS. I think i kind of fixed it.
22:10:31 <NGC3982> Ill just test it and see what happends.
22:11:02 <Supercheese> GUI parameters are nice, since they have real descriptions and stuff rather than just being numbers :)
22:13:34 <NGC3982> Supercheese: is "0" the first choise of the given parameter?
22:14:04 <Supercheese> First parameter, Locomotive Selection, is for me set to "Extended"
22:14:04 <NGC3982> number "3" is "normal" for the first parameter.
22:14:43 <Supercheese> Locomotive Selection is NOT the first in the parameter numbers
22:14:49 <Supercheese> It's second-to-last
22:15:10 <Supercheese> So Parameters: X X X X Y X
22:15:14 <Supercheese> The Y is loco selection
22:15:20 <NGC3982> Uhm, how do i know that?
22:15:27 <Supercheese> Y = 4 is "Extended"
22:15:29 <NGC3982> I only went for in what order the list was in.
22:15:36 <Supercheese> Y = 0 is "no locos"
22:15:48 <Supercheese> (this info is all obtained from the NewGRF GUI)
22:16:05 <NGC3982> Yes, that part is clear to me. What is not clear to me is why it's second to last in order? :)
22:16:11 <Supercheese> Yeah, I dunno either
22:19:19 *** tycoondemon has joined #openttd
22:19:39 <NGC3982> That means i am done moving my server
22:19:49 <NGC3982> Debian+Samba+Openttd+all of the configs.
22:37:03 <MNIM> NGC3982: you got a server hidden in that?
22:42:43 *** Born_Acorn has joined #openttd
22:51:04 *** Prof_Frink has joined #openttd
22:53:46 <MNIM> well this won't help my death count.
22:54:18 <MNIM> a 14-tile long intercity rammed into an equally long freighter at a sing I expected it to stop at (i was wrong)
22:55:04 <MNIM> oh wait, not a 14-long ic, just a 5-long local double-decker.
23:05:19 *** Celestar_ has joined #openttd
23:58:23 *** Celestar has joined #openttd
23:58:37 *** goodger has joined #openttd
continue to next day ⏵
