Suggestions commonly asked for

[SwissFan91]

Man, if I ever meet this Map Array down a dark alley.. there's gunna be hell to pay. Seems to ruin every good plan on here

[Jacko]

I like the Curved bridges idea actually but i think the map array is the problem here and so we will never see it......

[Alberth]

- Could I add endless raw material with the option?

Have a look at Manual Industries.

- Is a nuclear power plant as a model in planning?

What's the point, with one transport driving 3km/h once every 100 years?

How it looks with firefighters, police, and patient transport?

You could add hospitals as industry, and have the player use ambulances. As for police and fire fighters, what would they transport?

- Current?
- A few are ever ask and suggestions made.

I don't understand this, sorry.

[iconstil]

Please, create a Hotkey for the "orders" menu (yellow arrow).
For example it opens the "last active veichle"s orders, if this possible.., or when some1 creates a new veichle while keep pressing Space (for example), then it automatically opens this veichle's orders menu.
It would be a very handy hotkey, in multiplayer competition games, and so on.
So please, lots of us would be very happy

[Sabre_Justice]

I'm new here, so would it be prudent to look through this thread before throwing out my featherbrained ideas? (been in a Suggestions forum before in City of Heroes, I know the drill- everything under the sun has been said, and if it hasn't, it's because it's too stupid)

It seems kind of funny to me that a lot of mods and suggestions are based on making the game more 'realistic'. I find that a bit futile, since the way TT is inherently set up doesn't really have any resemblance to real-life transport companies or economies, and that's the whole reason the game is fun instead of a ton of spreadsheets. Personally, I've got more ideas that verge on wacky and stupid. (on that note, it'd be interesting if they could turn the Toyland world type into something actually fun, I used to play the demo of that over and over when lacking the full game... kind of pathetic in retrospect)

Not saying realism doesn't improve the game massively in some areas, mainly adding some variety to planes, boats and road vehicles. (I think trains are served quite adequately in the original, in comparison)

[Emperor Jake]

(I think trains are served quite adequately in the original, in comparison)

I don't mean any disrespect, but I just have to disagree on this. Since trains are the most used form of transport in the game, it makes sense for them to have proper variety. For example, the default selection of trains lacks in just about everything apart from the best and fastest trains of the era. The tropic/arctic set has a huge gap between the 1970s and the future. The wagons don't match the engines. (this has been fixed in OGFX+) There is no way to make an electric commuter train, or a modern diesel freight train, or a modern non-high speed intercity train. The wagons look the same in the 1950s and the 2050s. The choice of monorails is ridiulous, forcing you to upgrade your tracks again after only two types of engine. There is hardly any variety as people tend to use only the locomotive of the era at a time. Some locomotives even look identical, despite having had big differences IRL. All in all, I hate the original train selection, along with their other vehicle counterparts (especially the planes - a 737 uses the same sprite as a 777!) and I have almost never used them since I discovered I could load GRFs in OpenTTD 0.5.0.
However, each to their own, and if you think the original trains are adequate, I'm OK with that.
But it brings me to my suggestion:

Integrate OpenGFX+ into OpenTTD (or at least automatically download/bundle them) and automatically load OGFX+ into every new game. There should also be a OGFX+ Aircraft set that fixes the fact that all 2 engined jets look identical, and extend the helicopter's availability.

[FooBar]

automatically load OGFX+

Why enforce something on everbody that you can easily do yourself?

[Emperor Jake]

automatically load OGFX+

Why enforce something on everbody that you can easily do yourself?

Because then everyone who doesn't normally bother with NewGRFs such as many multilayer servers will have improved vehicles! And the grid free land could be integrated as well... just saying.

[XeryusTC]

Sorry to say this, but that is the most stupid suggestion I have ever heard? How would you like it if you were forced to use UKRS, AV8 and all other newgrfs by Pikka every time you try to start a new game? Or all the Swedish newgrfs? It makes absolutely no sense to force a certain set of newgrfs upon new players/installations just because you prefer it and the newgrfs are somewhat endorsed by the devs. Let people choose for themselves, if they don't take the time to download any newgrfs then maybe they like it vanilla.

Some people also play with the original graphics BTW, do you want to force OGFX+ on them too? That would certainly be a clash of visual styles.

[Jacko]

I 148 million % agree.

For starters, i hate the Open GFX graphics, much less detailed and whatnot than original ( i do use those!).
You cant be forced to use a newgrf in a scenario unless its been made that way (who stopped the changing of Newgrfs in Scenarios and Games? its just darn silly).
People should choose what they want to play and how they play it.
(P.s. I love vanilla Ice Cream! )

[planetmaker]

Integrate OpenGFX+ into OpenTTD (or at least automatically download/bundle them) and automatically load OGFX+ into every new game. There should also be a OGFX+ Aircraft set that fixes the fact that all 2 engined jets look identical, and extend the helicopter's availability.

Yes and no. Contrary to what others say it's IMHO not a stupid idea - if properly implemented. The base sets as they are lack a lot in functionality and coverage of what can be offered by current NewGRFs - even if those don't even change the way the game works.

The principle idea to add a few default NewGRFs has been toyed with, but it's far from any realisation. There are a few strong constraints:
- all newgrfs should remain operational. This means also those which want to re-define, say, all vehicles, this has to be possible. Thus the default NewGRFs have to be automatically removed - unless explicitly asked to remain active. And one should keep the also option to play really without NewGRFs, that is one has to have the option to disable the default NewGRFs.

These constraints must hold true for each NewGRF feature (trains, RV, cargos, industries, airports, industry tiles,...) separately. This easily might have unexpected effects, so at least would need careful NewGRF design for the default NewGRFs.

- OpenGFX itself still will need more contributors, both coders and artists. There can be done a lot more than currently is being done. In order to realise this idea probably one will have to create also add-on sprites for the TTD baseset as well.

My personal wishlist for areas where OpenGFX could be easily improved would include:
* less 'noisy' houses
* finish the revamped aircraft sprites. They mostly need coding
* continue with the trains. There are (some) 29px length wagons which need inclusion.
* Climates could become more distinct, esp. wrt stations, airports, roads, rails,...

[Sabre_Justice]

(I think trains are served quite adequately in the original, in comparison)

I don't mean any disrespect, but I just have to disagree on this. Since trains are the most used form of transport in the game, it makes sense for them to have proper variety. For example, the default selection of trains lacks in just about everything apart from the best and fastest trains of the era. The tropic/arctic set has a huge gap between the 1970s and the future. The wagons don't match the engines. (this has been fixed in OGFX+) There is no way to make an electric commuter train, or a modern diesel freight train, or a modern non-high speed intercity train. The wagons look the same in the 1950s and the 2050s. The choice of monorails is ridiulous, forcing you to upgrade your tracks again after only two types of engine. There is hardly any variety as people tend to use only the locomotive of the era at a time. Some locomotives even look identical, despite having had big differences IRL. All in all, I hate the original train selection, along with their other vehicle counterparts (especially the planes - a 737 uses the same sprite as a 777!) and I have almost never used them since I discovered I could load GRFs in OpenTTD 0.5.0.
However, each to their own, and if you think the original trains are adequate, I'm OK with that.

...when you put it that way, I see your point. I suppose I meant more, in comparison to the other default vehicle types (like two kinds of trucks and buses for all things with pathetically small capacity) trains have it pretty good. But I never really got up to monorails, so I'm not as experienced in that regard.

As for the pack-in NewGRF option, how about a compromise? You could pack in a few of what you consider 'essential' or at the best basic NewGRFs in the default download, but have them not activated by default. So the original download will be relatively vanilla, but if a player wants to try out some of the basic customisation, they have a few example options available without digging through a somewhat intimidating list.

[Transportman]

(I think trains are served quite adequately in the original, in comparison)

I don't mean any disrespect, but I just have to disagree on this. Since trains are the most used form of transport in the game, it makes sense for them to have proper variety. For example, the default selection of trains lacks in just about everything apart from the best and fastest trains of the era. The tropic/arctic set has a huge gap between the 1970s and the future. The wagons don't match the engines. (this has been fixed in OGFX+) There is no way to make an electric commuter train, or a modern diesel freight train, or a modern non-high speed intercity train. The wagons look the same in the 1950s and the 2050s. The choice of monorails is ridiulous, forcing you to upgrade your tracks again after only two types of engine. There is hardly any variety as people tend to use only the locomotive of the era at a time. Some locomotives even look identical, despite having had big differences IRL. All in all, I hate the original train selection, along with their other vehicle counterparts (especially the planes - a 737 uses the same sprite as a 777!) and I have almost never used them since I discovered I could load GRFs in OpenTTD 0.5.0.
However, each to their own, and if you think the original trains are adequate, I'm OK with that.

...when you put it that way, I see your point. I suppose I meant more, in comparison to the other default vehicle types (like two kinds of trucks and buses for all things with pathetically small capacity) trains have it pretty good. But I never really got up to monorails, so I'm not as experienced in that regard.

As for the pack-in NewGRF option, how about a compromise? You could pack in a few of what you consider 'essential' or at the best basic NewGRFs in the default download, but have them not activated by default. So the original download will be relatively vanilla, but if a player wants to try out some of the basic customisation, they have a few example options available without digging through a somewhat intimidating list.

But which NewGRF's should be considered 'essential'? And who determines that a NewGRF is 'essential'? The game plays perfectly without them, so none of them are 'essential'. Of course they can improve/personalize things, but none of them are 'essential' to have. I think there shouldn't be any NewGRF's come with the download, because it will lead to the discussion of which NewGRF's should be included (not to forget the people who have their NewGRF not included, unfair competition?).

[Sabre_Justice]

Point taken. I was thinking, the 'default' NewGRFs shouldn't be major game changers, but the ones that are intended mainly to improve on flaws with the original game and fix bugs. But the NewGRF interface is already as simple and clear as it's gonna get, with the tags making for decent easy to find categories, so maybe it's not that big an issue. (and as downloads go, the things seem to be pretty tiny file-size wise so it's not like it's a lot of work)

[betawave]

Greetings.

Here's what he's got. While adding/removing NewGRF's from the list, there was something missing, like TTRS3. Went to the Content Download, got the file. Right. Now, when returning to 'NewGRF Settings', clicking the .grf file to add, some basic information did show up, not like in the Content Download area(meaning there is more information in the download area, than is in the newgrf settings window). Made him feel kinda awkward, so came up with this idea.
First comes illustration:


Second, explaining:
Everybody knows, when messing around wih newgrf's before starting a game, clicking on every each grf in the list, shows it's detailed information.(I wonder this information is provided by grf developers,so the should add these information or what?!)
Regarding this information I'm having a suggestion, that it would be fine to have all that information about the respective grf, what kind of graphics does it contain and, for what it may be useful and last, but not least, the compatibility issues, if there are any(not being compatible with some newgrf's thus slots or whatever the reason may be).
In the second circle, is the BIG BLAST!!!(sorry for flaming ), to have an eye-candy of the graphics itself, at least one sample from the work.

It would make things easier to choose, not only trivially, but visually as well. Furthermore, the compatibility issue would save us time of reporting problems to developers. I mean, there's a need of a somesort of a grf-slot-verifier, to see if it would work upon loading into a game.(I had as many others did have problem,s such as incompatible newgrf's, like NuTracks with Metro Rail Set 1.1.0 oslt ). If, not possible to implement such code, then newgrf developers should add extra information(if it's not resolvable) compatibility issues.

That's all for now folks.

Let me hear your feedback.

Cheers, betawave.

[FooBar]

I do like the idea of the screenshot in the NewGRF window.

(I wonder this information is provided by grf developers,so the should add these information or what?!)

Yes, the NewGRF developers provide both the content download description and the NewGRF description. It is up to that very same developer to make sure the information in both is the same. (I must admit that my grfs also have different descriptions in either window).

Compatibility is a difficult subject. In your example of NuTracks with Metro Track Set it was actually the 2cc Trainset that broke compatibility between the two. Both track sets work fine together with for instance UKRS2. With all these kinds of exceptions you have a lot of text to add to the window; which probably doesn't fit at some point. So that's why you can find this information in the readme instead.


This made me think of a suggestion of my own:
An ingame option to display the contents of the readme file which was downloaded with the content-download. I'm sure that should be not too complicated with text-based readmes. As for the occasional pdf readme, it could display the path to the tar file which contains the pdf file, so the user can look it up there. In case no readme in the tar or in case of grfs that are not tarred, the "view readme" button will be greyed out.

[Lord Aro]

An ingame option to display the contents of the readme file which was downloaded with the content-download. I'm sure that should be not too complicated with text-based readmes. As for the occasional pdf readme, it could display the path to the tar file which contains the pdf file, so the user can look it up there. In case no readme in the tar or in case of grfs that are not tarred, the "view readme" button will be greyed out.

Already being worked on, by myself (with lots of help from Alberth)

[FooBar]

Already being worked on, by myself (with lots of help from Alberth)

That's great! Keep up the work!

[betawave]

In-gamge readme or .pdf reading, wow! It's going to be very nicely informative. Wonderful idea FooBar! Keep up the good work Lord_Aro!

Then I still stick to my point as well as for the screenshot in the NewGRF window(quoting FooBar).

I let this on for public voting!

[FooBar]

No need to vote. I think everybody agrees that an ingame screenshot is a nice addition.

Wonderful idea FooBar!

Yes, let's say it's my idea

Also I don't think the game will be able to display pdf's, just text files. I think it's a bit excessive to add a complete pdf viewer to OpenTTD.