Chill's patchpack v14_7

[damerell]

Anyway, there isn't much haste with it, and we all know you're a busy man, and I don't want to sound too demanding, but would it be possible (in the near future) to have a pack that is built against a higher version than r22555?

Don't hold your breath; I gather changing the underlying trunk version is about the hardest thing the patchpack demands.

Chill: if someone does me a large favour for free, I can hardly complain if they are busy and do slightly less of it than usual. :-)

[Eddi]

if someone does me a large favour for free, I can hardly complain if they are busy and do slightly less of it than usual.

yet people constantly do that

[Toni Babelony]

I'm not complaining, simply elaborating my motivation for my argument. It's more of a suggestion, rather than a strong desire, since OpenTTD moves on, as are the NewGRFs, which will eventually prove not to be compatible with this patch pack anymore, which would be a shame.

By the way, I don't get paid for the thousands of sprites I've made over the years for the Japan Set. On the contrary.

[damerell]

I'm not complaining, simply elaborating my motivation for my argument.

I'm sorry, I see where there has been a misunderstanding. I didn't mean to imply you were complaining; I was responding separately to Chill writing "Forgive me the slower advancement than you were used too see" and was too lazy to quote it. :-/

[Toni Babelony]

I'm sorry, I see where there has been a misunderstanding. I didn't mean to imply you were complaining; I was responding separately to Chill writing "Forgive me the slower advancement than you were used too see" and was too lazy to quote it. :-/

Apologies taken. Next time, don't try to be lazy, as you'll only end up with something you didn't want to happen. Have a good one! Cheers!

[ChillCore]

Toni Babelony,

No worries mate and no need to explain yourself neither.
I did not perceive your request/remark/concern as complaining at all and for what it is worth I share your opinion for 200%.

It is a fact that I am almost 1000 revisions behind trunk and a lot of the new goodies are missing from my patchpack.
Not only newer NewGRF support but also better AI support, the ingame readme viewer, river generation on game start, zoomzoom, etc, etc,
And then I did not even mention the immense amount of bugfixes Devs have blessed us with.

I have already tried bumping the pachpack three times but it was (silently) broken each and every time ... most likely because I took to large steps at once and missed some crucial thinghs while doing so. For good measures I should bump only a few revisions at a time and fix things along the way ... this will take a very long time; not so much in re-writing the code but more in testing inbetween bumps.
Therefore I have decided to restart the patchpack from scratch.

I will be using a different method however ... instead of a one_big_blob_of_code patch I will be using mercurial and its patch queque.
This will allow to continue as I was doing already but will also have the advantage that the changes I make to a given patch can be more easily exported; either towards individual patchwriters but also towards trunk.
For example I have applied a lot of coding style to some patches while merging them... there is no easy way to extract that at the moment so original patchauthors still need to do that themselves which means duplicated efforts; read: valuable time is lost that could have been spent on some thing else.
Also it should be easier to maintain the patchpack if I keep the individual patches separate from the merging code and the code to maintain savegame compatibilty.


I might try to bump my current version once more sometime in the future but I really do not know if it wil be worth the effort as in order to update some patches I have to break savegame compatibilty qnd rewrite a lot of code anyway. Also bumping will not split up the patches neither which, as explained above, has major advantages over my current method.
Might happen but don't hold your breath while waiting.


Finally
If someone is trying to bump the patchpack on his own and runs into trouble, feel free to ask me for advise or to help here and there.
Just be warned ... you have no clue what you are sticking your head in.

if someone does me a large favour for free, I can hardly complain if they are busy and do slightly less of it than usual.

yet people constantly do that

Are you implying that I should ask donations for my efforts?

I have/am considering to do that only to avoid having to accept a "regular" job, spend more time with my children and basically be able to "work" at the hours that are most convenient to me (in the wee hours) while doing something that I actually enjoy doing.
Reasons why I do not do that as of yet:
- I have no clue how much to expect (I have bills to pay and children to feed).
- I have no clue about legal requirements if it would be soul source of income. (taxes, social security, etc?)
- If I do that than I should give something to OpenTTD, dev.openttdcoop.org and the forums too?
- After all of the above I should be able to put something aside too for when I am old.

Then I am still struggling with my consience ... Is it really apropriate to generate income for oneself based on other peoples work?
I know it happens all over the net but still ...

I'm sorry, I see where there has been a misunderstanding. I didn't mean to imply you were complaining; I was responding separately to Chill writing "Forgive me the slower advancement than you were used too see" and was too lazy to quote it. :-/

You did quote Toni in that post so I can see where the "misunderstanding" is coming from.
Please be more careful next time.



ps:
Sorry for the spelling errors ... somehow english spelling correction is not activated in this version of Firefox.
Also on this computer the keyboard is configured correctly but I have grown used to typing qwerty on a azerty keybord and I do not type blind neither. Luxury problem I know.

[bokkie]

I've enjoyed your patchpack for a long time (not too many hours though because of RL). IMO you should make it 'easy' for yourself: just start over as you said, and add one patch at a time. Patchpacks seem to 'die' because it becomes to cumbersome to update and everybody can enjoy more of your patchpack if it stays manageable. If people want to continue to play their old savegame they can use the current version. Also, the number of patches you've added is humongous and adds extra burden I guess, reducing that could help as well.

I would personally probably not donate because I don't play that much (I do appreciate the effort!), but only adding the option wouldn't hurt anybody I guess. You've spent a lot of hours so you've added value so to speak and for that it wouldn't be weird to charge money. People can donate to the forum themselves if they want to. I guess you really couldn't live from donations and you'd have to pay taxes probably, because it's income. And your children will take care of you when you're old, won't they?

[ChillCore]

Sorry for quoting a few posts at the same time ... I left some things unanswered due to that minor misunderstanding that we can leave behind us now.

Hello and thank you for making this patch pack possible! Me and my friends have had tons of fun with it on LAN/online games.

Chill: if someone does me a large favour for free, I can hardly complain if they are busy and do slightly less of it than usual.

I've enjoyed your patchpack for a long time (not too many hours though because of RL)

Thank you all three for your kind words, much apreciated.

Maybe when OpenTTD 1.2 comes out, you may be able to build Chill Patch Pack against that one (which is probably much more stable than a recent trunk).

Releasing a patchpack against a stable release is something I have never done; nor will I ever do that for the simple reason that as soon as something is changed it is not a stable release anymore.
Stable releases is the Devs domain IMHO and whenever possible I only work against trunk and with the latest version of patches (except when things come up that keep me from bumping to trunk or updating a patch).

IMO you should make it 'easy' for yourself: just start over as you said, and add one patch at a time.

That is how I have done things in the past too. I have/had no problems with my previous way of working.
The main reason to restart, besides the patchpack getting broken if I try to bump (which has been the case a few times before), is keeping the patches separate. This is just a very sane thing to do. As explained before.

Patchpacks seem to 'die' because it becomes to cumbersome to update and everybody can enjoy more of your patchpack if it stays manageable.

That indeed seems to be the main reason for patchpack to die ... That and people giving up, it is an insane amount of work sometimes ...
Luckily for me I keep learning new things almost all the time which keeps it interesting for me to do this.
There is really no fun in doing the same thing over and over again ...

If people want to continue to play their old savegame they can use the current version.

True ... but when I start over I might still keep this version going for a while (read: fixing bugs and maybe still add a few patches).
I already feel sad just thinking about abandoning my precious.

Also, the number of patches you've added is humongous and adds extra burden I guess, reducing that could help as well.

The number of patches included only causes/d problems if they overlap somewhere. Or when trunk changes drastically, which sometimes happens. A "normal" player does not notice these codechanges except for the fact that OpenTTD runs faster than before.

I would personally probably not donate because I don't play that much (I do appreciate the effort!)

That would be perfectly fine.

but only adding the option wouldn't hurt anybody I guess. You've spent a lot of hours so you've added value so to speak and for that it wouldn't be weird to charge money.

I do not really like the term charge in this context ... voluntary donate would be more appropriate. I have no intention of selling my version anytime soon. I am not a business. I had independant status 10 years ago and I promissed myself I would never get it again unless I found something to get filthy rich with.
[Joking]
OOh wait ... ... Maybe I could include a micro-transaction thingy like they do with them silly facebook games:
- You get the game for free and can play it for free.
- Still for free are roads and busses.
- To activate the railbuilding tool there's a small fee that gives you the ability to build a shed with a few train available.
- Per 100 tracktiles there is another small fee.
- you want junctions and signals? *ka-ching*
- Additional trains? *$$$*
- Maglev too? *$$$$$$$$*
- .......
[/Joking]

I guess you really couldn't live from donations and you'd have to pay taxes probably, because it's income.

Maybe, maybe not ... I never tried so I would not know.
I'll have a another looksie to see what my options are but if most of it would be going towards taxes than I will most likely not bother setting it up.
One way or the other I will always give away my version for free, without limits, and donating would be optional only.

And your children will take care of you when you're old, won't they?

I can only hope that whenever the time comes that they will help me doing groceries and change my diaper (*) but I really hope from the bottom of my heart that they will never have to support me financially.
Anyway the smallest is 3 now and I have not yet hit 40 so that time is still very very far away ...

(*)
I am actually looking forward to that ... payback for all the times I had to retain myself from throwing up all over them when I changed theirs.

[Snik]

Hi,

Me and some friends are playing OpenTTD with this patchpack. We would like to turn off the feature that lets you buy out other companies. I've been scouring the list of console commands and variables, but I can't find anything relevant.

A friend joined me and another friend who was already playing, and just as he was getting his economy going his company got put up for sale, and in the TTD-daze we were, one of us misclicked and bought him up, leaving him as a spectator.

Thanks in advance

[Eddi]

that's actually a very old feature, and can be set from advanced settings->opponents->allow buying company shares.

[ChillCore]

Hi Snik,

You can disable buying shares like Eddi mentioned, but AFAIK you can not prevent a company that is a about to go bankrupt to be put up for sale.


I think/guess your friends company was about to go bankrupt and if nobody would have bought it he would have ended up as spectator anyway; in addition of his infrastructure being removed from the game (roads excluded).

To prevent going bankrupt he could have increased his loan (and if not possible to do that, save the game, stop the server for a moment and cheat money in singleplayer for him; then load that savegame on the server again after which you all can rejoin and continue).

[Level Crossing]

Warning: I'm using v 13.5, but just in case you didn't fix this in v14 or the author of the IS patch did not...

On railways, trains of different companies do not collide. Instead, they glide through each other.

GlitchIS.PNG (203.44 KiB) Viewed 1998 times

[ChillCore]

They wut?

I never was aware of this as I always play singleplayer, I will look into this as soon as I have I have time. This has not been fixed in v14 or later.
Thank you for reporting Level Crossing.

[Level Crossing]

They wut?

I never was aware of this as I always play singleplayer, I will look into this as soon as I have I have time. This has not been fixed in v14 or later.
Thank you for reporting Level Crossing.

There's a later? Or was that an unintended spoiler?

[bokkie]

My guess is that's there to prevent abuse.

[ChillCore]

There's a later? Or was that an unintended spoiler?

No unintended spoiler ...
I have fixed the compiler warnings that appear on 64bit systems only (not yet pushed because untested ingame).
Also: http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?f=29&t=57482 (please take a little time to visit the link in the first post too)

My guess is that's there to prevent abuse.

Now I remember ... I should play a few multiplayer games, if only I found the time to do so.
Indeed it is a "feature" to stop people destroying other people's trains by forcing trains through signals.
IIRC from the code, you can also start/stop trains that are not yours but are on your rails to unblock your tracks.

I am not going to "fix" this as it is not a bug.

[romazoon]

Hello there

I m enjoying a lot the recent versions you released ! thanks again for your work !

I have though a little critic against the reduction of possibilities to create underwater tunnels... now they need to be starting so near from the shore that they lost a lot of their flexibility and utility... but well that was just a rant , i m pretty sure this was made for a reason !?

Also i have a bug report to do, i m using hca7f5804.

There is link being created even though i never sent any vehicules with the cargo specified by the link (goods from Orleans fret to Romoranthin Woods)... I ve been waiting a lot before reporting this cause i wanted to make sure even though i was sure i din t made any mistake on my side as the destination was a simple wood truck station, anyway with the time i simply forgot about and/or didn t notice about it again for a while... But then the other day while i play i realise it happened again but to another destination, again with the same cargo: "goods". This time routed to "Avallon forest", again a small wood truck station wich had no reason to be part of a goods links since only wood truck go there (and it haven t changed for very long). Anyway deciding to wait to see if it disapear, i again didn t noticed it after a (long) while. Now today while i play i saw it happened again this time on the route Orleans Fret to Romoranthin Woods.

You will be able to download the savegame here (its too big for the forum) : http://dl.free.fr/mOjZnKLYP

Note that i ve added grf midgame... so i ll understand if you simply ignore my report . If you do ignore it, you could still have a looksie and tell me what you think about my savegame

Thanks

[ChillCore]

I m enjoying a lot the recent versions you released ! thanks again for your work !

Thank you for your kind words.

I have though a little critic against the reduction of possibilities to create underwater tunnels... now they need to be starting so near from the shore that they lost a lot of their flexibility and utility... but well that was just a rant , i m pretty sure this was made for a reason !?

This was done for performance reasons. I do not mind tweaking this (a 'littlebit' ) but note that I will not re-enable terraforming sea above chunnels.

How far from the shores do you want chunnel entrances for it to be enjoyable again?
If so, do you want it to be configurable ingame? (-> only for the server or singlepleplayer mode though.)

Also i have a bug report to do, i m using hca7f5804.

There is link being created even though i never sent any vehicules with the cargo specified by the link (goods from Orleans fret to Romoranthin Woods)

This will take some time to check. My kids are having a holiday this week and the next one ... I will need to start a test game to see if sending a vehicle from A to B and one from B to C creates a link from A to C without a vehicle doing A-C ...
Just a quick question for now to speed up testing: Do you have vehicles that are doing "Orleans Fret <-> Is-sur-Tille Usine" and others " Is-sur-Tile Usine <-> Romoranthin Woods" ... if so can you tell me the vehicle numbers please.
You have a lot of vehicles in that game and I do not really feel like checking orders of them all.

Also see the attached screenshot and comment; I will need the correct versions and/or links to the GRFs. When I unpause the game it crashes on me. (PM them to me if you must )

Note that i ve added grf midgame... so i ll understand if you simply ignore my report . If you do ignore it, you could still have a looksie and tell me what you think about my savegame

It is your game and most likely you will get into trouble sooner or later. However doing the dirty deed should not influence the creation of linkgraphs. I will look into your bugreport.
I like your screenshot thread a lot and the resulting savegames are pretty awesome I might give you some feedback on it, If I find the time that is.

[romazoon]

This will take some time to check. My kids are having a holiday this week and the next one ... I will need to start a test game to see if sending a vehicle

Take your time, no rush on that, it s not hurting my game

This was done for performance reasons. I do not mind tweaking this (a 'littlebit' ) but note that I will not re-enable terraforming sea above chunnels.
How far from the shores do you want chunnel entrances for it to be enjoyable again?
If so, do you want it to be configurable ingame? (-> only for the server or singlepleplayer mode though.)

Well to allow tunnels to start 15 to 20 tiles away from shore i think would be great as i sometimes wants to cross a sea plus a city next to the shore... but that s exceptionnal and since you metionned performances issues... I think something between 5 or 10 tiles would be fine allready for most case.
I d of course would really appreciate to have it configurable ingame, and in single player only that would be fine (that still allow a multiplayer game to be loaded as single game and change the setting then reload it as multiplayer, isnt it ?)

I will need to start a test game to see if sending a vehicle from A to B and one from B to C creates a link from A to C without a vehicle doing A-C ...

well... i wonder if my problem is not appearing cause there is really many many links... and i m affraid you won t reproduce it as simply with just "ABC", let me try to be more clear than in my report: there is vehicules going from A (only producing wood), wood trucks bring it to B (wich produce paper with the wood), paper is sent to D with an other group of trucks, now there is a "goods" link created from C (being ORleans Fret) via A to go to D (being Is sur Tille Factory).... now the problem is there were never any vehicule doing that route "C-A-D".

Just a quick question for now to speed up testing: Do you have vehicles that are doing "Orleans Fret <-> Is-sur-Tille Usine" and others " Is-sur-Tile Usine <-> Romoranthin Woods" ... if so can you tell me the vehicle numbers please.

for the first there is trucks from "FRET" (company 9), a group called : "GO - Dijon Factory - Orleans Fret", for the second there is no vehicules going from Is sur Tile Usine (alias Dijon factory) till Romoranthin woods.

as i keep playing that game, i can tell you that "wrong" link is disapearing again, and i seems to have the problem to another place now... also a truck station "with a depot sticked to the back"...it s tilting right now in my brain. Is it possible that those link get created cause some of the trucks on the highway are sometimes going to those depot for servicing (and sometimes get stuck for a while behind waitng trucks)..hmm another Tilt in my brain..i usually only use "without stop order".... I just checked that Group "GO - Dijon Factory - Orleans Fret", and there is indeed a mistake with that... one of the order was not "without stop", wich surely result in creating links in those stations that have the depot on their back (those stations where i ve seen this problem are indeed very near from an highway "exit")...i guess my problem is now solved, sorry for the wrong bugreport.
(note i really found out what is my problem while i wrote you back)

Missing NewGRF: GRF ID 43415000, filename: climate_dependant_airports-0.1.0/airportsplus.grf (matches GRFID only)
Missing NewGRF: GRF ID 444EFF04, unknown GRF
Missing NewGRF: GRF ID 27711003, filename: 2cc_trainset-2.0.0beta3/2cctrainset.grf (matches GRFID only)
Missing NewGRF: GRF ID 414E0101, filename: newgrf/fish.grf (matches GRFID only)
Missing NewGRF: GRF ID FBFB0102, filename: dutch_tram_set.rc1/dutchtramsetw.grf (md5sum matches)
Missing NewGRF: GRF ID 56430001, filename: newgrf/ttrs3w-3.11/ttrs3w.grf (matches GRFID only)
S.N.C.F and South British Rail, 11 Mei 2127.png

I ll prepare you a pm right away

I like your screenshot thread a lot and the resulting savegames are pretty awesome

those words are going rights to my heart

Wish you some nice time with your kids

[NekoMaster]

Would it be possible to just allow chunnels to be placed in between a certain area? like 3-5 tiles from the shore?