FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Discuss, get help with, or post new graphics for TTDPatch and OpenTTD, using the NewGRF system, here. Graphics for plain TTD also acceptable here.

Moderator: Graphics Moderators

User avatar
kamnet
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 7298
Joined: 28 Sep 2009 17:15
Location: Eastern KY
Contact:

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by kamnet »

Rest in Honor, FIRS Extreme. You were a good economy.

No. You were the best economy.

User avatar
wallyweb
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 5742
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 15:05
Location: Canada

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by wallyweb »

kamnet wrote:
19 Jun 2020 14:25
Rest in Honor, FIRS Extreme. You were a good economy.

No. You were the best economy.
A feature of Extreme was that its integrated economy was quite a challenge. Reminds me of real life economies where even real life economists and politicians can't figure it out. :mrgreen:

User avatar
andythenorth
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 5219
Joined: 31 Mar 2007 14:23
Location: Lost in Music

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by andythenorth »

FIRS 4 Alpha 3
  • Added missing cargo icons (no more pink 'X' icons) :D
  • Renamed Long Products Mill to Wire and Section Mill
  • Adjusted station names for some industries
See FIRS 4 Alpha 2 release for more general notes about the v4 Alpha: viewtopic.php?p=1233420#p1233420

Should be savegame safe with FIRS 4 Alpha 2.
Attachments
firs-4.0.0-alpha-3.tar
(4.23 MiB) Downloaded 108 times


User avatar
wallyweb
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 5742
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 15:05
Location: Canada

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by wallyweb »

andythenorth wrote:
30 Jun 2020 10:06
This will be the new place ...
:D
WOW! I like it. Crisp, clean and really quite readable.Well done! :bow:

User avatar
George
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 4328
Joined: 16 Apr 2003 16:09
Skype: george-vb
Location: SPb, Russia.
Contact:

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by George »

andythenorth wrote:
30 Jun 2020 10:06
I bought a domain name! Hurrah :twisted:
http://grf.farm/firs/4.0.0-alpha-3/
This will be the new place I publish docs for the grfs I publish (replaces OpenTTD Coop Bundles).
I will add Road Hog, Iron Horse etc later.
Cool, would you host all the GRFs from openttdcoop.org ?
Image Image Image Image

User avatar
Captain Rand
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 105
Joined: 28 Jan 2012 07:35

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by Captain Rand »

Will you be leaving the old docs up on the coop for those of us who wish to continue with FIRS3/Extreme?

Pete.
There's nothing like a deadline to hone the concentration.

Good manners cost nothing, but earn respect.

" 'Impossible' is not in our vocabulary." Jack Chrichton, Farscape

User avatar
andythenorth
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 5219
Joined: 31 Mar 2007 14:23
Location: Lost in Music

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by andythenorth »

Captain Rand wrote:
01 Jul 2020 07:44
Will you be leaving the old docs up on the coop for those of us who wish to continue with FIRS3/Extreme?
Good point. 2 separate answers.

1) planetmaker has said that he would like to try and keep coop bundles going. I won't take FIRS docs off there, but planetmaker has limited time available to maintain coop :)

2) I'll copy some/all of the v3 docs to the new location, should do the job :)

User avatar
Captain Rand
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 105
Joined: 28 Jan 2012 07:35

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by Captain Rand »

andythenorth wrote:
01 Jul 2020 10:34
Captain Rand wrote:
01 Jul 2020 07:44
Will you be leaving the old docs up on the coop for those of us who wish to continue with FIRS3/Extreme?
Good point. 2 separate answers.

1) planetmaker has said that he would like to try and keep coop bundles going. I won't take FIRS docs off there, but planetmaker has limited time available to maintain coop :)

2) I'll copy some/all of the v3 docs to the new location, should do the job :)
That's great, thank you.

Although I'm sorry you won't be continuing with Extreme, I do understand your reasons for doing so. I haven't tried v4 yet but I've seen the docs and Steeltown looks amazing. I'm looking forward to trying that with the specialist wagons from Iron Horse.
It'll just seem a little strange without the agricultural operations.

Thanks for all your hard work!!

Pete.
There's nothing like a deadline to hone the concentration.

Good manners cost nothing, but earn respect.

" 'Impossible' is not in our vocabulary." Jack Chrichton, Farscape

User avatar
andythenorth
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 5219
Joined: 31 Mar 2007 14:23
Location: Lost in Music

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by andythenorth »

Docs are now moved for FIRS 1.4.4, and most of the v2 and v3 releases: https://grf.farm/firs/index.html

Some versions are missing from bundles, probably bad releases. Might be the odd broken link here or there also :twisted:

The grfs are still on bundles, not sure if I'll move those or not.

User avatar
andythenorth
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 5219
Joined: 31 Mar 2007 14:23
Location: Lost in Music

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by andythenorth »

Anyone use the FIRS option for secondary industry closures?

It's currently broken for v4 code, and I need to decide whether to update it or not.

Not actually sure it ever worked in v3 or is needed :twisted:

User avatar
kamnet
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 7298
Joined: 28 Sep 2009 17:15
Location: Eastern KY
Contact:

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by kamnet »

I've always enabled it, but honestly I don't remember if I've ever actually seen it because I stay focused on other stuff.

mak
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 117
Joined: 30 Sep 2015 13:16

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by mak »

I've always left it OFF. That makes it fifty, fifty so far. :shock: :)

LaChupacabra
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 111
Joined: 08 Nov 2019 23:54

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by LaChupacabra »

kamnet wrote:
11 Jul 2020 22:07
I've always enabled it, but honestly I don't remember if I've ever actually seen it because I stay focused on other stuff.
If you didn't turn it on, you would notice it, especially after a longer time. ;)
andythenorth wrote:
11 Jul 2020 19:49
Anyone use the FIRS option for secondary industry closures?
This is definitely a useful feature for long and very long games. Once on a Milek7 server where probably FIRS2 was used, this feature was not enabled. After two weeks (above 3000) there was almost no place to make any railway line, because everything was covered with some factories. After restarting and enabling this function, there was no problem.

Of course, the option of closing the industry leaves open the subject of a warning about a possible shutdown - here I still think that it would be best if it would be a common element of the game for each industry, because the problem of unexpected disappearance of factories occurs everywhere.
Another method would be limiting the number of companies of the same type on the map so that they do not appear too many over time. I don't know if this feature has already been added to the game? If not, the maximum quantity (e.g. steel mills) could depend on the size of the map and the number of enterprises set during map generation, and if this parameter cannot be checked, you could possibly add a setting limiting the maximum density of the industry - it would also be useful in scenario editors, where it can't be determined.

Since I am writing, I will add a few other comments. :D


More important

Scrap yard production is still too high compared to other companies
It's really easy to build a city to and above 20 000 inhabitants. Currently, with a linear method of generating passengers, cities with a population of 20 000 inhabitants generate around 2 500 passengers. To collect them, you need to build several stops, or significantly extend the range of the station. In the case of scrap yards, very large production is obtained in a banal manner. In addition, the city may have many scrap yards. In steeltown, the production of scrap metal could depend partly or entirely on the amount of cars or engineering supplies delivered to the city or nearby enterprise. Also scrap yards could be built near the cities where these cargoes are delivered. The same problem was even more relevant for recycling depot.

The cost of funding ports is far too low
Why is the construction of mines that produce not so profitable raw materials cost so much and the ports that produce very profitable and hard-to-reach goods so cheap to build? Instead of bothering and building the entire supply line, it is often better to dig a hole and fund a port. In a game where there is any competition, ports distort it quite strongly. In my opinion, they should be much more expensive than mines, the more that mines can be sought and ports can always be put wherever you want. Maybe it should not be possible to fund them anywhere, but for example near a city - lets say more than 10-20 fields from any houses.

Basic volume of production is too large, especially for online games
The larger the productions, the more vehicles are needed to transport them. Large basic productions mean that the game quickly generates heavy loads on computers. Sometimes just a few years of play on the server and it's over! Almost nobody can enter the server anymore. I don't have this problem, but where is the sense to play alone "multiplayer" game?? Especially in the case of complex economies like steeltown, this is not good. When someone wants to create a larger network, especially in cooperation, these great productions spoil everything. Apart from the game performance problem, they force the construction of separate lines everywhere - it makes no sense to build any intersections, because immediately everything clogs.
It would be a good solution if you added a multiplier for the level of primary production similar to that for increased production.


Less important

Preventing the creation of new enterprises while maintaining the possibility of funding them
An additional option to the one that exists would be very useful, which would prevent the spontaneous creating of the enterprises, but would not prevent its founding.

Grouping of mines and farms
It was a very cool solution in FIRS 1

Production at the times of horse-drawn carriages
Is there any possibility for it to change production level over time? Maybe through enterprises generations?

Peatlands
In the nineteenth century it looks a bit like an alien landing place with this modern tractor. :D If there could be generations of enterprises affecting the volume of production, they could also have a slightly different graphics.

Steeltown's industry and cities are like two separate entities
There is practically no connection between them. It's a bit lacking. With all the complexity of the industry, cities look a bit like uninvited guests. Didn't you think about adding employees as one of the elements influencing production? Not so much, just for some correlation. Employees could replace mail or be passengers in the same way.

Hotels
Didn't you think about replacing their current graphics? I admit that it doesn't look very interesting compared to other buildings.
From what I noticed, this is a graphic that comes from TTRS or Japan Buildings Set. There are several other interesting graphics of hotels and other buildings that could be used. It could be several different graphics, another for each period and location - in the city and outside.
[+] Spoiler
New hotels from TTRS.png
New hotels from TTRS.png (32.13 KiB) Viewed 1307 times
Shops with limited acceptance of goods
I have already written about it in another topic. I don't know if such a thing would conflict with the concept of the other parts, but in general it could have an interesting effect on the game. There is simply no justification for not taking everything to one city. Cargodist doesn't change anything here.

Cargoes colors on the chart
Some of them don't really match. My guess is that matching the color to each cargo may not be easy, but I think a few things could be marked differently.
An example of color change in a group of 3 cargoes:
Currently: Salt, Slag, Rubber
Suggestion: Salt, Slag, Rubber (maybe Latex or Caoutchouc?)


Still important

FIRS Extreme
It would be a bad news if you gave it up. This industry is the most universal for maps mapping some regions and for multiplayer games - everyone will find something for themselves in it. Steeltown is very focused on one topic, while the others are a bit too simple. The bad news is also the removal of "In a Hot Country" because it was a pretty good alternative to "Extreme", which works well for maps of warmer regions.
I don't know how much work it would take to adapt it to the new conditions. Probably, apart from suggesting more and more tiring ideas ;) , I wouldn't help much, so I don't have much persfasion tools to convince you. :( But if you had left / added also such a more universal set enriched with new functions it would be nice.
Alternatively, if you would release FIRS 3 with such the most important changes, that would be a good option too. :)
I am sorry for may English. I know is bed.

User avatar
2TallTyler
Traffic Manager
Traffic Manager
Posts: 167
Joined: 11 Aug 2019 18:15
Contact:

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by 2TallTyler »

I'm sure Extreme is your favorite topic to hear opinions about, but here's a contrary opinion:

I'm no Apple fanboy, but I think they're onto something with their policy of removing features which don't align with how they intend their products to be used — disc drives, for example. It's usually wise to have an open mind and pay some attention to customers and the market, but not at the cost of diluting your vision. An alleged (but probably fictional) Henry Ford quote comes to mind: "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses." I've been enjoying the synergy of your NewGRFs — FIRS, Iron Horse, CHIPS, and Road Hog — and look forward to seeing your vision play out for new focused economies in FIRS 4.

More important than conceptual ideas about innovation is that of your obligation to users of your free software (none). If you want to replace Extreme in FIRS 4 with a more-focused industry set, that's your prerogative. I can get my Extreme fix in FIRS 3. There's no faster way to ruin a hobby than by taking on obligations you don't want. :)
LaChupacabra wrote:
12 Jul 2020 09:02
Preventing the creation of new enterprises while maintaining the possibility of funding them
Unless I'm misunderstanding you, this is possible by starting a game with your preferred industry density, then changing the settings in-game: World Generation > Industry Density > Funding only.
LaChupacabra wrote:
12 Jul 2020 09:02
Didn't you think about adding employees as one of the elements influencing production? Not so much, just for some correlation. Employees could replace mail or be passengers in the same way.
I asked about this recently, but after trying it in an industry set of my own, discovered some technical and conceptual problems with cargodist and station ratings that make this a lot harder than it sounds.

User avatar
Captain Rand
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 105
Joined: 28 Jan 2012 07:35

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by Captain Rand »

LaChupacabra wrote:
12 Jul 2020 09:02
Grouping of mines and farms
It was a very cool solution in FIRS 1
I liked this feature too, and was sorry to see it changed.
It made sense on a large map. I could imagine a region being "coal country" for example.

Pete.
There's nothing like a deadline to hone the concentration.

Good manners cost nothing, but earn respect.

" 'Impossible' is not in our vocabulary." Jack Chrichton, Farscape

User avatar
kamnet
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 7298
Joined: 28 Sep 2009 17:15
Location: Eastern KY
Contact:

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by kamnet »

Captain Rand wrote:
12 Jul 2020 20:59
LaChupacabra wrote:
12 Jul 2020 09:02
Grouping of mines and farms
It was a very cool solution in FIRS 1
I liked this feature too, and was sorry to see it changed.
It made sense on a large map. I could imagine a region being "coal country" for example.

Pete.
Huh, I didn't realize that changed, either.

User avatar
supermop
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1056
Joined: 21 Feb 2010 00:15
Location: Fitzroy North - 96

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by supermop »

LaChupacabra wrote:
12 Jul 2020 09:02
The cost of funding ports is far too low
Why is the construction of mines that produce not so profitable raw materials cost so much and the ports that produce very profitable and hard-to-reach goods so cheap to build? Instead of bothering and building the entire supply line, it is often better to dig a hole and fund a port. In a game where there is any competition, ports distort it quite strongly. In my opinion, they should be much more expensive than mines, the more that mines can be sought and ports can always be put wherever you want. Maybe it should not be possible to fund them anywhere, but for example near a city - lets say more than 10-20 fields from any houses.
I don't really agree here - Ports are not particularly cheap, and they primarily produce items that are otherwise unavailable in the economy - you can't build any full chain with only ports and factories. They also take very large quantities of inputs to achieve their maximum production. I generally feel that mines being expensive makes sense, as these are supposed to represent the locations of raw materials that are beyond the control of human actors

LaChupacabra
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 111
Joined: 08 Nov 2019 23:54

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by LaChupacabra »

2TallTyler wrote:
12 Jul 2020 16:28
...There's no faster way to ruin a hobby than by taking on obligations you don't want.
Whenever I write such a list of comments, I am a bit afraid that they will not be too pretentious or sheartening sometimes...
Anyway, I have not written the word "must" anywhere either. All these are still just loose suggestions and thoughts, maybe with some reservation that I care more about the first three. :)
2TallTyler wrote:
12 Jul 2020 16:28
LaChupacabra wrote:
12 Jul 2020 09:02
Preventing the creation of new enterprises while maintaining the possibility of funding them.
Unless I'm misunderstanding you, this is possible by starting a game with your preferred industry density, then changing the settings in-game: World Generation > Industry Density > Funding only.
I don't know how, but I have never noticed this setting during the game ... This game is so complex that even after a few years you can learn something new. :oops: :D
Perhaps I was confused by the title of the option in the FIRS settings. I think if there is a setting in the game that can block the creation of new enterprises, maybe this setting should only prevent funding? It doesn't make much sense for an offline game, but for an online game it can be very useful.
2TallTyler wrote:
12 Jul 2020 16:28
LaChupacabra wrote:
12 Jul 2020 09:02
Didn't you think about adding employees as one of the elements influencing production? Not so much, just for some correlation. Employees could replace mail or be passengers in the same way.
I asked about this recently, but after trying it in an industry set of my own, discovered some technical and conceptual problems with cargodist and station ratings that make this a lot harder than it sounds.
Yes, the cargodist is actually quite troublesome in this regard. It would be nice to make some significant changes to make it more useful, but that's another topic.
Captain Rand wrote:
12 Jul 2020 20:59
LaChupacabra wrote:
12 Jul 2020 09:02
Grouping of mines and farms
It was a very cool solution in FIRS 1
I liked this feature too, and was sorry to see it changed. It made sense on a large map. I could imagine a region being "coal country" for example.
On the one hand, it referred to reality in an interesting way, because very often different mines are found in clusters forming basins, and on the other hand, such a solution was simply playable and created interesting possibilities for combined transport. In my opinion it would be especially suitable for steeltown, but also in other economies would be good.
supermop wrote:
15 Jul 2020 03:15
LaChupacabra wrote:
12 Jul 2020 09:02
The cost of funding ports is far too low
I don't really agree here - Ports are not particularly cheap, and they primarily produce items that are otherwise unavailable in the economy - you can't build any full chain with only ports and factories. They also take very large quantities of inputs to achieve their maximum production. I generally feel that mines being expensive makes sense, as these are supposed to represent the locations of raw materials that are beyond the control of human actors
And why play with increasing production in a port, when it is cheaper and faster to fund a new port nearby?

Maybe the specifics will convince you...

The cost of building a wharf is $5,5 million. For this you get:
80-350t of manganese (low rates)
70-290m3 of rubber (mid rates)
70-290t of plastic (high rates)
60-260t ferrochrome (mid stakes)
50-220m3 of fuel (very high rates)

The cost of building the mine is $59-70 million. For this you get:
80-360t of mining raw materials (low rates)

For the price of one mine, you can fund 11-13 ports that will produce a total of 3600-18000 tons of other, much more profitable goods.
It won't matter to "eyecandy" players, but to those who like to compete in the game, this discrepancy spoils the fun.

In the case of mine exploration, their cost is $ 7.3-8.9 million. On the surface, it looks much better. However, there is still a question: why fund mines unknown where, if you can build a port in a chosen place, which produces much more and is in addition almost twice cheaper?

Another disproportion is that processing enterprises that do not produce anything by themselves often cost the same or even more than ports.

This is what the profit disproportionate looks like after funding one mine and twelve wharfs (the cost of funding the ports was still $ 6 million lower).
To show that green earns whatever, its mine is additionally supplied by an external company.
FIRS - Funfing cost.png
FIRS - Funfing cost.png (211.8 KiB) Viewed 845 times
FIRS 4 - Funding Cost, 2030-07-28.sav
(490.88 KiB) Downloaded 26 times
Result: The profit from the 12 founded ports was over 28 times higher than from the one mine (assisted with resupply) and still no further gains are included here.

I like this kind of crazy ports farms, probably not just me, so restricting this style of play wouldn't be cool. For players who build for a visual effect, restrictions on the ability to freely locate ports will also not be good. Therefore, I think that some changes in the costs of founding enterprises, so that they are adequate to the production volume and the potential impact on the company's income, would be the best solution.
I am sorry for may English. I know is bed.

gpalo
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 1
Joined: 18 Aug 2020 14:26

Re: FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development & Translations

Post by gpalo »

Hello
I've prepared Slovak translation for 3.0.12 version - what is the procedure for uploading changes? Git pull request or just attaching patch here?

Post Reply

Return to “Graphics Development”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], kamnet, Quast65 and 17 guests