Future of newcargos

[DaleStan]

Why should you work in a separate set pikka?

Why should we have USSet and DBSetXL and UKRS and NARS and JapanSet and ... and ... and ... and ... &c.?

Why is the answer to the latter any different than the answer to the former?

[Csaboka]

And even if they didn't, that wouldn't give you a reason to start hounding him for them to do so. Pikka's industry* set worked perfectly well with several sets before he made them ECS compatible. The UKRSI worked with the UKRS, NARS, etc.

Well, that's no wonder since both UKRS and NARS are coded by PikkaBird. On the other hand, try UKRS with George's ECS vectors, and you'll find some surprises, like the mineral wagon carrying cereals, the tanker wagon carrying fish or the grain wagon carrying limestone... I'm sure UKRS could support the ECS specs correctly, but right now, it likes it's "own" industry set only.

[PikkaBird]

Well, that's no wonder since both UKRS and NARS are coded by PikkaBird. On the other hand, try UKRS with George's ECS vectors, and you'll find some surprises, like the mineral wagon carrying cereals, the tanker wagon carrying fish or the grain wagon carrying limestone... I'm sure UKRS could support the ECS specs correctly, but right now, it likes it's "own" industry set only.

The UKRS has a very small selection of wagons, and was designed before newcargos even existed. As long as at least one wagon can carry every cargo, it's "compatible" as far as I'm concerned. The upcoming version of NARS should support ECS much better as it has a wider variety of wagons.

[gmyx]

To avoid a super long post with many quotes to answer the many questions, a simple post instead.

On the questions of sets. Any complete file is a set regardless of how many implementations are included whether it be one train, one wagon, etc. How many still don't have ECS support even after 2 years? But that is beside the point. Everyone has the choice to do what they want here.

As for my comment of not know about labels (or not enough), I knew about that page. You must understand that I thought that ECS was a specific industry set implementing many vectors. I thought was stood for "Enhanced Cargo Set". I know better now.

Now, on to Zimmlock's industries. I was not aware that you said you were going to code his industries. I apologize as my intention was not to step on anyone's toes. I still plan on coding it, but I can also include in the appropriate ECS vector if you will allow me. That would alleviate the double coding issue, and I can help on other things as well. I am not *hard* attached to my own coding set.

My goal was never to harm/insult/annoy anyone. I just had an idea on what I wanted to use and started to implement it. I hope we won't have this every time someone whats to be different.

On a side note, I hope I'm not getting a bad name here. All my recent post has causes arguments.

[wallyweb]

On a side note, I hope I'm not getting a bad name here. All my recent post has causes arguments.

In my book you have a good name here. Everything you have done is good and proper. You took the initiative on something you were interested in and that is always good. Your posts did not cause arguments; rather, they provoked discussion and discussion is always good. Every now and then this topic comes up and that allows people to clear the air about new questions and concerns that have come up since the last time. Everybody in this topic has been very civil. There has been no name calling and there has been no flaming. This topic is a fine example of how to resolve our differences. Stay the course gmyx. You're doing good.

[gmyx]

On a side note, I hope I'm not getting a bad name here. All my recent post has causes arguments.

In my book you have a good name here. Everything you have done is good and proper. You took the initiative on something you were interested in and that is always good. Your posts did not cause arguments; rather, they provoked discussion and discussion is always good. Every now and then this topic comes up and that allows people to clear the air about new questions and concerns that have come up since the last time. Everybody in this topic has been very civil. There has been no name calling and there has been no flaming. This topic is a fine example of how to resolve our differences. Stay the course gmyx. You're doing good.

Your right. I'm happy that it has stayed civil. Somewhat surprised even. I just fell like I'm stuck defending myself because I want to be different and asking questions. Anyways, that is beside the point. Thank you for the encouragement.

[Dave]

And even if they didn't, that wouldn't give you a reason to start hounding him for them to do so. Pikka's industry* set worked perfectly well with several sets before he made them ECS compatible. The UKRSI worked with the UKRS, NARS, etc.

Well, that's no wonder since both UKRS and NARS are coded by PikkaBird. On the other hand, try UKRS with George's ECS vectors, and you'll find some surprises, like the mineral wagon carrying cereals, the tanker wagon carrying fish or the grain wagon carrying limestone... I'm sure UKRS could support the ECS specs correctly, but right now, it likes it's "own" industry set only.

Is that a problem?

Since there appears to be a few people making the rules around here, and since Pikka has abided by those rules (he's developed his own sets to use his own industries), I don't see the issue Csaba.

[Csaboka]

It's not a problem. It's just that your post seemed to suggest that Pikka's industry set is compatible with a "lot of sets", and your only examples were Pikka's own sets. Those two sets don't demonstrate anything about the compatibility of PBI, since they are coded specially to support it. If you really want to demonstrate how compatible PBI is, you should come up with third-party sets that work flawlessly with PBS.

[athanasios]

The upcoming version of NARS should support ECS much better...

Good news!

My opinion is that if someone implements a nice new feature in his set this should be available for other sets too. There cooperation will benefit all of us. I like lighter than ECS sets, especially local sets (like Pikka's), but to make a rival set is by no means honorable and practically waste of time.

E.G.: George has made LVs. It is huge has vehicles from many countries and with great variety. Should it be wise to start another similar project? No. Wouldn't it be more usefull to cooperate with George, since he doesn't have enough time to work further, and improve that set? (More vehicles, articulation, more liveries...)

[gmyx]

My opinion is that if someone implements a nice new feature in his set this should be available for other sets too. There cooperation will benefit all of us. I like lighter than ECS sets, especially local sets (like Pikka's), but to make a rival set is by no means honorable and practically waste of time.

Interesting argument. I fail to see how this is valid. Look at Linux. How many distributions exists? It is not a waste of time for other to be creative and to push the boundaries.

E.G.: George has made LVs. It is huge has vehicles from many countries and with great variety. Should it be wise to start another similar project? No. Wouldn't it be more usefull to cooperate with George, since he doesn't have enough time to work further, and improve that set? (More vehicles, articulation, more liveries...)

I agree that cooperation leads to a faster release, but not to the point of killing new ideas.

I am doing my best to align my cargoes with ECS but find myself with one third not fitting into ECS. Some, but not many have a close enough approximation. I don't know what other sets have done, but I finding it very difficult to be ECS compatible. This is why I have suggested expanding the list of labels.

ECS is two years old, is it not time to review? I believe it time to do an ECS2.
Bring in all the set developers in and see why they are not compatible? Maybe it is just a simple matter of expanding what we know as ECS.

Side note: I have agreed to work with George on his GRFs in respect to Zimlocks' industries and any other he wants me to help him with.

[Dave]

My opinion is that if someone implements a nice new feature in his set this should be available for other sets too. There cooperation will benefit all of us. I like lighter than ECS sets, especially local sets (like Pikka's), but to make a rival set is by no means honorable and practically waste of time.

Interesting argument. I fail to see how this is valid. Look at Linux. How many distributions exists? It is not a waste of time for other to be creative and to push the boundaries.

E.G.: George has made LVs. It is huge has vehicles from many countries and with great variety. Should it be wise to start another similar project? No. Wouldn't it be more usefull to cooperate with George, since he doesn't have enough time to work further, and improve that set? (More vehicles, articulation, more liveries...)

I agree that cooperation leads to a faster release, but not to the point of killing new ideas.

I am doing my best to align my cargoes with ECS but find myself with one third not fitting into ECS. Some, but not many have a close enough approximation. I don't know what other sets have done, but I finding it very difficult to be ECS compatible. This is why I have suggested expanding the list of labels.

ECS is two years old, is it not time to review? I believe it time to do an ECS2.
Bring in all the set developers in and see why they are not compatible? Maybe it is just a simple matter of expanding what we know as ECS.

Side note: I have agreed to work with George on his GRFs in respect to Zimlocks' industries and any other he wants me to help him with.

Excellent words.

If ECS is for the good of the whole community, then let the whole community set its boundaries.

-EDIT-

If that is already the way it works, then make it easier or clearer that it is possible to do that. That's a request more than anything.

[gmyx]

Excellent words.

If ECS is for the good of the whole community, then let the whole community set its boundaries.

-EDIT-

If that is already the way it works, then make it easier or clearer that it is possible to do that. That's a request more than anything.[/quote]
Nice way to sum up what I said in much fewer words. (Must be too much time in government). ECS was built 2 years ago with the community fully participating. I remember following that discussion. It's only logical to me that any extensions, what ever it gets called, be built with the entire community, especially the industry coders, arriving at a consensus.

Of course, it will need to be fully backwards compliant! That would existing sets easier to maintain should they wish to upgrade at the appropriate time.

I hope we can get everyone on board.

[Zimmlock]

Gentlemen,

After reading this entire topic the confusion is complete. I never play TTDX so i have one advantage here, i dont have to make a choice what set i have, can, want to use.
I am a artist, and i think that for all industry ill produce ill just deliver a sheet with sprites and a humble discription. Leave it somewhere so any coder/ developement group can pick it up and use it at will.
The major problem with the entire TTDXpatch project is that you cant see the forest because there are so many trees. I know i have added a few trees to
But i am not unhappy and keep on drawing.

[wallyweb]

... I never play TTDX ...

Now I know why you have so much time to draw.

I am a artist, and i think that for all industry ill produce ill just deliver a sheet with sprites and a humble discription. Leave it somewhere so any coder/ developement group can pick it up and use it at will.

I think that is a good idea, however I suggest you have one coder to work with you on your choice of system, be it ECS or whatever else you choose. Then if your coder feels up to coding for a second system as well, then fine, but if not, then your sprites would be available to another coder to code.

The major problem with the entire TTDXpatch project is that you cant see the forest because there are so many trees. I know i have added a few trees to
But i am not unhappy and keep on drawing.

This is why I think that rather offer your sprites in general, they should be offered as a package as in "Code all my industries or code none". Your work is excellent and it has a unique style that may not blend well with somebody else's style.

[gmyx]

I am a artist, and i think that for all industry ill produce ill just deliver a sheet with sprites and a humble discription. Leave it somewhere so any coder/ developement group can pick it up and use it at will.

I think that is a good idea, however I suggest you have one coder to work with you on your choice of system, be it ECS or whatever else you choose. Then if your coder feels up to coding for a second system as well, then fine, but if not, then your sprites would be available to another coder to code.

The major problem with the entire TTDXpatch project is that you cant see the forest because there are so many trees. I know i have added a few trees to
But i am not unhappy and keep on drawing.

This is why I think that rather offer your sprites in general, they should be offered as a package as in "Code all my industries or code none". Your work is excellent and it has a unique style that may not blend well with somebody else's style.

I agree with this. As you may or may not know, I'm working on the coal mine with George's help. It will be included the ECS basic vector. As for Zimmlock's other industries, making them fit into ECS will be difficult. This is one of my reasons (other than my industry set) to push for a ECS2.

[DanMacK]

I'm going to throw my 2 cents worth into this. The issue I see with ECS at the moment is it defines ALL cargoes with no room for expansion. The concept is great, but if I want to add another chain/vector with cargos other than the ones defined, what then? As George and Michael say, ECS isn't a set, it's a set of standards. Should industry/vehicle sets support ECS? I say yes. It's good to have a standard, so that for example the label for Coal or Wood is universal. that said, ECS should have options for alternate cargoes as well. Not all cargoes will fit neatly into the existing labels. Nitrates for example would be shipped from farms to fertilizer plants. Nowhere is that option available currently. Same with an aluminum chain. Nowhere in the current scheme is it possible to add new cargoes other than those defined by ECS.

ECS is an excellent proposal and while some people may complain about "adapting to ECS", ECS as a standard is a good idea. I think there just needs to be some room for additions of new cargoes above the current ones.

[George]

I agree with this. As you may or may not know, I'm working on the coal mine with George's help. It will be included the ECS basic vector. As for Zimmlock's other industries, making them fit into ECS will be difficult. This is one of my reasons (other than my industry set) to push for a ECS2.

As we discussed, there are 3 Industry slots left in the schema. Only cargoes have achieved the limit.
So, the main problem is the output of a cokes plant. Also, there is a problem with amount of coal produced.

Coal is already used in steel mill and brick works, would we have enough coal to supply all the industries?

With the cokesplant operational, no more coal is shiped to the steelmill (in my case the blastfurnace) it is replaced with the limestone, in RL blastfurnace use ironore, cokes and limestone to make "pigiron". the steelmill is not more than a sort of refinery for rawsteel. So you have left powerplant and cokesplant to deliver coal. cokesplant consume vast amounts of it, so i was thinking that if you ship 30% of the coal produced to the powerplant this has enough to make all electricety, the other 70% has to go to cokesplant to make 30% gas and 40% cokes, once deliverd to the blastfurnace this is its 100% cokes input. (blastfurnace 100%= 40%cokes + 50% ironore + 10% limestone)

This means we have to find 1 cargo slot for cokes.
According to cargoes in basic vector, I'd suggest 2 solutions
1) to replace Sulphur with general coal products, assuming both the sulphur and cokes.
2) to remove Sulphur and add cokes.
What do you think?

p.s. Looks like this discussion should go to ECS discussion thread?

[michael blunck]

[on ECS]

The concept is great, but if I want to add another chain/vector with cargos other than the ones defined, what then? [...] ECS should have options for alternate cargoes as well. [...] Nowhere in the current scheme is it possible to add new cargoes other than those defined by ECS.

[...] Thirdly, you may define a "mod" which would replace a whole "cargo vector". See George´s ECS implementation.

http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?p=629061#p629061

regards
Michael

[wallyweb]

With reference to the "coke" question as an example and similar situations that occasionally arise, please see my post in the Extended Cargo Scheme (ECS) discussion