IRC logs for #openttd on OFTC at 2025-07-28
⏴ go to previous day
00:07:55 *** Tirili has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
02:05:17 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
02:06:02 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
02:11:15 *** fingerf1cker42 has joined #openttd
02:11:15 <fingerf1cker42> peter1138[d]: yea i have this problem too, for some reason iron horses tracks fix those
02:45:01 *** gnu_jj_ has joined #openttd
02:48:15 *** emperorjake has joined #openttd
02:48:15 <emperorjake> That's because those bridges are designed to be used with railtypes. Any railtype GRF will do.
02:48:21 *** gnu_jj has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
03:44:25 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC (Remote host closed the connection)
03:44:29 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
03:44:30 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
03:44:46 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
04:48:27 <DorpsGek> - Update: Translations from eints (by translators)
07:09:03 <DorpsGek> - Add: summary for week 30 of 2025 (by OpenTTD Survey)
09:17:15 *** dh1 has quit IRC (Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
09:24:31 <peter1138[d]> Is it acceptable to cheat?
09:25:37 <peter1138[d]> The tubular bridge is already in fix_graphics, so I removed the baked in pillar.
09:42:51 <andythenorth> Will grf tiles get a min bridge height prop? Or is it “just don’t build that way”? 🙂
09:46:45 <peter1138[d]> This focuses on stations and roadstops. They get a minimum height property, and a pillar exclusion property.
09:47:28 <peter1138[d]> Pillar exclusion is a bitmask that holds the 4 corners and the 4 edges.
09:49:37 <peter1138[d]> Due to kuhnovic's comments which are usability-oriented, in vanilla I've gone for hiding the bridge pillars if they are excluded, which is different from JGRPP's behaviour.
09:53:04 <peter1138[d]> So yeah, there properties need to be documented of course. They are incompatible with JGRPP as JGRPP uses an extension system which we've not ported to vanilla.
09:53:33 <peter1138[d]> Same bridge without the cheated modified graphics.
09:53:41 <peter1138[d]> It's not terrible, to be fair.
09:54:33 <peter1138[d]> Might be sprite-sorting changes to look at though.
09:55:32 *** zanooda2000 has joined #openttd
09:55:32 <zanooda2000> tube bridges with column every2nd tile look way better anyway
09:59:02 <peter1138[d]> OpenGFX 2 uses a different pillar arrangement, so it's not quite a seamless.
09:59:17 <peter1138[d]> It's not exactly terrible, but...
10:00:37 <peter1138[d]> I don't consider that broken enough to change the concept at the moment.
10:03:24 <kuhnovic> peter1138[d]: I agree, this is good enough for now. I think the pro's clearly outweigh the cons, and the cons can be fixed later.
10:03:55 <zanooda2000> as I remember, such columns was a fix to another openttd-side bug regarding tube bridges, so if it will be fixed, through=-station columns will look better too
10:09:44 <peter1138[d]> If you like weird layouts...
10:10:09 <peter1138[d]> Though I think normall you'd use the small station without roof here 🙂
10:14:09 <zanooda2000> hmmmmm, npt that related to bridges, but still for a bit: how about adding a possibility to choose type of the vanilla stations? Or at least a tiny switch.Now you either build 1 platform at a time or full-area with roof, but
10:15:36 <kuhnovic> You'd expect a longer span for these cable stayed bridges, that's what's making it look funny. It doesn't look nearly as weird for the tubular bridge.
10:16:48 <kuhnovic> A road-deck-only segment might make it look better, but I don't think it exists and adding it would probably be a nightmare.
10:25:04 <kuhnovic> Oh, such a sprite seems to exist for vanilla suspension bridges at least. With a little help of good ol' MS paint:
10:25:32 <zanooda2000> both are pretty cursed
10:27:34 <zanooda2000> hehe, if it was an actual option...
10:27:36 <kuhnovic> (not realistic to have such sprites, I know that)
10:28:25 <zanooda2000> for vanilla bridges... why not?
10:28:33 <reldred> if you gave authors the options they'd use it 😛
10:29:19 <peter1138[d]> The suspension bridge does have a "blank" piece, but the bridge piece to use is calculated only based on position in the bridge, it does not take account of pillar flags.
10:29:29 <reldred> anyways, I think some of these examples are a tad extreme, I usually don't build bridges over roofed stations 😛
10:30:54 <peter1138[d]> Trying to calculate which piece to show based on the pillars underneath would probably require testing all the tiles underneath all of the bridge for each tile.
10:30:57 <kuhnovic> They are taller too so harder to do
10:31:25 <zanooda2000> reldred: regarding this... automatically choose non-roofed stations beow the small bridges?
10:31:58 <peter1138[d]> No, because NewGRF stations don't have that separation.
10:33:47 *** dh1 has quit IRC (Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…)
10:34:00 <peter1138[d]> Plus build-order would affect how gets constructed.
10:34:51 <reldred> I had to go looking for a save where I had actually built bridges over stations, I found this from before we had road stops lol, overlaps...
10:39:27 <reldred> most cases where I want to create a bridge it's only one height unit above a station, so I generally use station tiles without any decoration and let the bridge if it wants to build pillars build them unimpeded.
10:40:02 <reldred> not always, but mostly it's only 1 or 2 height units taller
10:41:18 <peter1138[d]> I wonder if we can relax the height constraints. Probably not without sprite sorting issues.
10:45:48 <reldred> I mean for instance in that shot above, being sensible with the station tiles used under the bridge, there's no clipping or flickering.
10:46:30 <reldred> some flickering happens with that overlapping tile *over* the bridge head, but that's a seperate problem altogether that's now been resolved with road stops.
10:53:23 <peter1138[d]> Could possibly get away with 4 instead of 5. 3 is definitely too low.
10:56:41 <talltyler> “We’ve run aground on the glass station canopy”
10:57:14 <peter1138[d]> A 5-high bridge is rare, I think. But then so is 4-high.
10:57:26 <talltyler> Can you bridge one height level over the roof-less vanilla station?
10:59:35 <peter1138[d]> Up until now, no.
11:00:09 <peter1138[d]> It looks fine to me, though.
11:00:26 <peter1138[d]> But having too many different allowable heights might get confusing?
11:00:58 <peter1138[d]> The small building needs 2.
11:01:35 <talltyler> I don’t know, it makes sense to me 🤷
11:02:09 <talltyler> Assuming the error message is “station too tall” or something that tells me to use my eyes
11:02:18 <peter1138[d]> Perhaps the drive-through stop should need 2 as well.
11:02:36 <peter1138[d]> "Bridge is too low for station"
11:03:17 <talltyler> GRF stations need to be updated to be bridgeable?
11:04:01 <peter1138[d]> Yes, they'll need to have the properties set. A default min-minimum height of 0 means old behaviour.
11:06:55 <michi_cc> Given the fact that one height bridges are almost too low for plain old vehicles, I'd have no problem with a default min height of 2 for structures.
11:10:32 <zanooda2000> peter1138[d]: wondering why train stations require at least 2x height, train rails itself fits under the bridge, station tile does not raise land, isn't it? Simple station tile quite fits. Not sure about simple station piese with house"
11:14:25 <zanooda2000> is "platform with building" has another properties? 1 for platorm, 2 for builing, 4 or roofed seem reasonable
11:19:06 <emperorjake> TT-forums and wiki hosting provider is having some problems atm
11:22:15 <peter1138[d]> michi_cc: That argument also works the other way for me. It's enough fake-height for a train or RV, the platform is lower than that, so it should fit.
11:23:25 <peter1138[d]> Hmm, seeing as we are adding new properties at the same time, I could probably remove some of the fallback stuff that JGRPP has.
11:24:36 <peter1138[d]> I think it's been complicated a bit by needing to maintain compatibility with things that were created before the pillar flags property was added.
11:24:48 <peter1138[d]> But we don't have that.
11:27:23 <talltyler> When I’ve played JGRPP, one-height bridges over stations are by far the most common use case. I think it’s important to allow that wherever possible.
11:28:45 <peter1138[d]> Give me an example NewGRF station set to test 😉
11:29:10 <peter1138[d]> It is possible that it works (and sets the property) in vanilla, but unlikely.
11:30:15 <peter1138[d]> . o O ( Sandbox mode: Ignore all bridge height restrictions )
11:31:28 <talltyler> CHIPS is a good one, especially to make sure cargo sprites fit below the bridge.
11:32:46 <talltyler> There’s also a modified Industrial Stations Renewal that sets the JGRPP property, it has plain and platform tiles which should fit, in addition to buildings.
11:33:16 <talltyler> For passenger stations, I’m a big fan of Chuffing Stations. 🙂
11:34:05 <talltyler> (Which is on GitHub in plain NML so you can modify it if needed for testing)
11:35:13 <talltyler> I realize you probably have not patched NML, no idea if there’s a modified version for JGRPP
12:10:07 <andythenorth> bridges over stations only with a newgrf bridge spec? 👀
12:41:02 <wensimehrp> does anyone know what's going on here?
12:42:05 <kuhnovic> Now you see why some companies ban recursing in their coding styleguide 😛
12:42:26 <wensimehrp> api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/gs-api/
12:43:41 <kuhnovic> peter1138[d]: As a fallback, would it be possible to determine the height of a station based on the sprite height? A bit crude but IMO it's better than "no height specified so no bridge allowed".
12:44:02 <wensimehrp> bounding box height perhaps
12:45:36 <wensimehrp> a station variable that returns the bridge height would also be nice
12:49:41 <pickpacket> peter1138[d]: if I have a bridge already and want to build a station under it, would that work?
12:56:22 <peter1138[d]> kuhnovic: Difficult because it doesn't exist before building it so getting the correct layout would be tricky.
12:57:03 <wensimehrp> and I think it also could change?
12:57:25 <wensimehrp> it's not a property
13:24:15 *** dwfreed_ is now known as dwfreed
13:50:25 *** Smedles has joined #openttd
14:25:23 *** Wormnest has joined #openttd
14:31:41 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
14:31:42 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
15:59:56 <andythenorth> can I station over a bridge?
16:02:42 *** BLUELESS has joined #openttd
16:11:47 <LordAro> i suppose if you consider that tunnels are also bridges...
16:12:35 <emperorjake> andythenorth: Sure, kinda
16:38:01 *** Smedles has joined #openttd
16:51:23 <kale91> You can fake it a little bit
16:51:52 <kale91> would be really nice if you could do it for reals though
16:54:47 *** notluke2578 has joined #openttd
16:54:47 <notluke2578> i suppose it pushes for creativity if these things dont come to the game
17:02:05 <kale91> I like Jake's bridges for this a lot but I'm not sure if them matching the NK platforms is the best choice, limits your options for decorations a bit
17:02:44 <kale91> One that matches JP stations and/or Dutch stations would work a bit better
17:13:03 <emperorjake> I only chose NK platforms because it has overlap tiles for both stations and waypoints. Once JP+ Stations becomes a thing I'll change that
17:29:27 <kale91> emperorjake: mmm I see, figure it had to do with a functionality thing
17:34:16 *** firepup650 has quit IRC (Read error: No route to host)
17:42:13 *** firepup650 has joined #openttd
18:28:26 *** Flygon has quit IRC (Quit: A toaster's basically a soldering iron designed to toast bread)
20:16:42 *** Smedles has joined #openttd
20:55:21 *** Smedles has joined #openttd
21:04:10 *** Wolf01 has quit IRC (Quit: Once again the world is quick to bury me.)
21:50:17 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
21:50:18 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
21:50:32 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
21:50:32 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
21:50:39 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
21:50:40 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd
22:11:06 *** lobster has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
22:32:22 *** toktik is now known as Guest22983
22:38:35 *** Guest22983 has quit IRC (Ping timeout: 480 seconds)
23:08:08 <talltyler> CI appears to have CMake/vcpkg issues, 14469 is failing build checks. 🙂
continue to next day ⏵
