[OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha3

Find and discuss all the latest NewGRF releases for TTDPatch and OpenTTD here.

Moderator: Graphics Moderators

User avatar
acs121
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1901
Joined: 03 Nov 2017 18:57
Location: Courbevoie, near Paris, France

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha1

Post by acs121 » 18 Jul 2018 22:55

Rupso wrote:
acs121 wrote:
Rupso wrote:Hey folks !

I love playing this train set. Thanks for the good work! But now I have an issue. I started a game in 1850, transporting only passengers, now its 1892 and i can't buy any passenger cars for my trains.
Before that, I could only buy those available at the game start (1850) which have now expired. I can buy new trains, though.
I'm playing with all regions enabled. Any idea how to fix this ? Savegame is attached
edit : I use the current 3.0 alpha1 and OpenTTD 1.8.0
edit : From 1900 onwards, new wagons are available.

Thank You!
Rups
Did you use the region parameters ? What GRFs do you use ?
Hi acs121,
Thanks for the reply.
I used 2cc trams and 2cc trains.
I tested starting a game with only 2cc TrainsInNML active as GRF. Starting it between ~ 1890 and 1900, there are no passenger wagons avaible. Waiting it out should work though :)
All region parameters are active.

greetings
Okay, i know it now. Go in "Advanced Settings", and enable "Vehicles never expire".

h_c
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 3
Joined: 28 Jul 2018 21:42

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha1

Post by h_c » 28 Jul 2018 22:40

Hi!

First I want to say thanks for this great trainset! Just updated to the new 3.0-alpha1 version!

The new version seems to have issues with running costs:
  • For all engines and MUs the running costs are about 1/4 of version 2.0. For example, NS Mat'36 (EMU) was 7350 € in v2 and is now 1574 €.
  • MU wagons seem to have no running costs at all now. No matter, how many wagons you attach, the displayed running costs don't change.
Attachments
without_wagons.png
Engine only
without_wagons.png (9.72 KiB) Viewed 3257 times
with_wagons.png
With three wagons
with_wagons.png (12.81 KiB) Viewed 3257 times

Transportman
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 2683
Joined: 22 Feb 2011 18:34

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha1

Post by Transportman » 29 Jul 2018 15:33

h_c wrote:Hi!
For all engines and MUs the running costs are about 1/4 of version 2.0. For example, NS Mat'36 (EMU) was 7350 € in v2 and is now 1574 €.
The entire cost calculation has been overhauled as part of the recode between 2.0 and 3.0.
MU wagons seem to have no running costs at all now. No matter, how many wagons you attach, the displayed running costs don't change.
That's not right, when I look in the code it should have running costs... If you run the train, do the actual costs for the wagons also remain 0?
Coder of the Dutch Trackset | Development support for the Dutch Trainset | Coder of the 2cc TrainsInNML

Transportman
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 2683
Joined: 22 Feb 2011 18:34

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha2

Post by Transportman » 29 Jul 2018 17:03

I just released 3.0-alpha2, which fixes MU-wagons not having a capacity. There are some other known issues, but this was a big enough issue to get a separate release ahead of the other issues.
Coder of the Dutch Trackset | Development support for the Dutch Trainset | Coder of the 2cc TrainsInNML

h_c
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 3
Joined: 28 Jul 2018 21:42

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha1

Post by h_c » 31 Jul 2018 18:59

Transportman wrote:
h_c wrote:Hi!
For all engines and MUs the running costs are about 1/4 of version 2.0. For example, NS Mat'36 (EMU) was 7350 € in v2 and is now 1574 €.
The entire cost calculation has been overhauled as part of the recode between 2.0 and 3.0.
Ah, ok - my fault!
Transportman wrote:
h_c wrote:MU wagons seem to have no running costs at all now. No matter, how many wagons you attach, the displayed running costs don't change.
That's not right, when I look in the code it should have running costs... If you run the train, do the actual costs for the wagons also remain 0?
Yes, it seems so. I ran a game 3 times: once with the engine only, once with 12 powered wagos attached and once with 12 unpowered wagons attached. The running costs are the same.
Attachments
0Wagons.png
0 Wagons
0Wagons.png (27 KiB) Viewed 3148 times
12PoweredWagons.png
12 Powered Wagons
12PoweredWagons.png (30.65 KiB) Viewed 3148 times
12UnpoweredWagons.png
12 Unpowered Wagons
12UnpoweredWagons.png (30.1 KiB) Viewed 3148 times

Transportman
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 2683
Joined: 22 Feb 2011 18:34

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha1

Post by Transportman » 31 Jul 2018 19:06

h_c wrote:
Transportman wrote:
h_c wrote:Hi!
For all engines and MUs the running costs are about 1/4 of version 2.0. For example, NS Mat'36 (EMU) was 7350 € in v2 and is now 1574 €.
The entire cost calculation has been overhauled as part of the recode between 2.0 and 3.0.
Ah, ok - my fault!
Transportman wrote:
h_c wrote:MU wagons seem to have no running costs at all now. No matter, how many wagons you attach, the displayed running costs don't change.
That's not right, when I look in the code it should have running costs... If you run the train, do the actual costs for the wagons also remain 0?
Yes, it seems so. I ran a game 3 times: once with the engine only, once with 12 powered wagos attached and once with 12 unpowered wagons attached. The running costs are the same.
Thanks for the report, I'll have to check where it is going wrong.
Coder of the Dutch Trackset | Development support for the Dutch Trainset | Coder of the 2cc TrainsInNML

User avatar
MagicBuzz
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1159
Joined: 15 Feb 2003 17:32
Location: Villefranche-sur-Saône, France

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha2

Post by MagicBuzz » 22 Aug 2018 12:28

Hello,

I'm playing with this set (alpha 2) with the "western europe" set only and get some incoherent behaviours :
- When stating the game at the first age (1830 or so) there are many passengers carriares (the 3 first generations are available). Only the first generation should be available I guess
- On the 1890 years, there is not anymore passenger carriages*
- Then the "1st" generation wagons is slowly remplaced by 2nd generation. IMHO all the wagons of 1st gen, 2nd gen, etc. should be released at the same date. It's quite frustrating to need to upgrade a few wagons each time a new one is launched. There is already a lot of work with new engines. And most new engines are useless until all the new wagons are launched.
- During wagons replacement, there is also some cargo that are not transportable anymore : the 1st generation wagons should be available a few year more*
- After 1890 there are many new engines that are… far slower and powerless as previous models* : except for eye candy of historical gameplay, those engine have no chance to be used

* : As a result we must enable "vehicle never expires" and I think it's a bad think

User avatar
acs121
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1901
Joined: 03 Nov 2017 18:57
Location: Courbevoie, near Paris, France

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha2

Post by acs121 » 22 Aug 2018 14:03

I do agree that after 1890 there are almost useless vehicles.
Not talking about the steam railcars but the two 16 kph machines from South Africa really didn't need implementation.
And even if after 1960/1970 all vehicles coming out can be useful, you have like, 70 years of a lot of unneeded vehicles.


User avatar
acs121
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 1901
Joined: 03 Nov 2017 18:57
Location: Courbevoie, near Paris, France

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha2

Post by acs121 » 22 Aug 2018 16:33

Yeah, but it feels bad to have in the list vehicles ylou didn't bother to use once.
I tried to use all electrics and diesels from this set, so far so good i managed to do it. I don't mind speeds of 30 kph or above so yeah.


User avatar
Voyager One
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 11137
Joined: 28 Dec 2009 09:47
Location: Rijeka, Croatia

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha2

Post by Voyager One » 23 Aug 2018 19:11

As a author and wrt "useless" vehicles...

The idea behind this set isn't to have better and better vehicles as time goes on. The idea is to give a player a wide choice from realism to absolute "bigger-better-faster" game style. As kamnet said, it is always possible to hide unwanted vehicles. Some players actually use those "useless" vehicles as eye-candy as an example.
Leon

Image Image Image Image
"... all I ask is a tall ship and a star to steer her by..." - John Masefield

Transportman
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 2683
Joined: 22 Feb 2011 18:34

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha2

Post by Transportman » 26 Aug 2018 11:22

MagicBuzz wrote: - When stating the game at the first age (1830 or so) there are many passengers carriares (the 3 first generations are available). Only the first generation should be available I guess
- Then the "1st" generation wagons is slowly remplaced by 2nd generation. IMHO all the wagons of 1st gen, 2nd gen, etc. should be released at the same date. It's quite frustrating to need to upgrade a few wagons each time a new one is launched. There is already a lot of work with new engines. And most new engines are useless until all the new wagons are launched.
Don't these points contradict each other? Or is the first regarding coaches and the other for cargo wagons?

Your points regarding no wagons being available around 1890 and a period of not being able to transport all cargoes are things I do need to fix.
Coder of the Dutch Trackset | Development support for the Dutch Trainset | Coder of the 2cc TrainsInNML

yellyFish
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 8
Joined: 04 Oct 2018 20:22

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha2

Post by yellyFish » 04 Oct 2018 23:25

Hi. I have been trying to play in a server that uses JGR patchpack version 0.27.0. and several newgrfs, one of them being yours. Everytime the map gets loaded the game gets super slow, my CPU usage goes to 100% and the only clue i get about this is using debug mode. i get this error spammed in console.

Code: Select all

dbg: [grf] Unhandled vehicle variable 0x61, type 0x0
After digging around in the code i could find that the newgrf responsible for this error was yours. I wanted to know if you know how to fix this or if you have any idea what could be causing this. I'll be leaving a savefile of the server i get the error so you can see it.
Attachments
autosave15.sav
(4.99 MiB) Downloaded 41 times

Transportman
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 2683
Joined: 22 Feb 2011 18:34

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha2

Post by Transportman » 05 Oct 2018 18:43

Thank you for the report, but I don't know how to fix it, as removing the switches that depend on it would break this set completely. I'm also unsure why it would throw these errors and if they really are errors or just are regular warnings that are part of normal behavior.

I'm also not sure if the slowness is a result of this set, or changes in the JGR-patchpack, or even in OpenTTD itself, or one of the other loaded NewGRFs. I made an issue for it, but without a reproduction in normal OpenTTD with only this set loaded I don't expect much to happen with it.
Coder of the Dutch Trackset | Development support for the Dutch Trainset | Coder of the 2cc TrainsInNML

yellyFish
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 8
Joined: 04 Oct 2018 20:22

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha2

Post by yellyFish » 23 Oct 2018 16:18

Transportman wrote:Thank you for the report, but I don't know how to fix it, as removing the switches that depend on it would break this set completely. I'm also unsure why it would throw these errors and if they really are errors or just are regular warnings that are part of normal behavior.

I'm also not sure if the slowness is a result of this set, or changes in the JGR-patchpack, or even in OpenTTD itself, or one of the other loaded NewGRFs. I made an issue for it, but without a reproduction in normal OpenTTD with only this set loaded I don't expect much to happen with it.
Any news about this? And can you link me to the issue so i can help with it? Would love to help fixing annoying warnings, even if it is not critical to the problem i have.

Transportman
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 2683
Joined: 22 Feb 2011 18:34

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha2

Post by Transportman » 25 Oct 2018 15:37

yellyFish wrote:
Transportman wrote:Thank you for the report, but I don't know how to fix it, as removing the switches that depend on it would break this set completely. I'm also unsure why it would throw these errors and if they really are errors or just are regular warnings that are part of normal behavior.

I'm also not sure if the slowness is a result of this set, or changes in the JGR-patchpack, or even in OpenTTD itself, or one of the other loaded NewGRFs. I made an issue for it, but without a reproduction in normal OpenTTD with only this set loaded I don't expect much to happen with it.
Any news about this? And can you link me to the issue so i can help with it? Would love to help fixing annoying warnings, even if it is not critical to the problem i have.
The issue is here, no news on it as I have been extremely busy.
Coder of the Dutch Trackset | Development support for the Dutch Trainset | Coder of the 2cc TrainsInNML

User avatar
jfs
Director
Director
Posts: 516
Joined: 08 Jan 2003 23:09
Location: Denmark

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha2

Post by jfs » 31 Oct 2018 23:15

I need to ask, is there any particular reason the DSB MF (IC3) DMU is not included, while the SJ Y2 and RENFE 594 are? The IC3 is the model that was developed on order from DSB, and then later also sold to SJ where it was labeled Y2, and the concept later marketed internationally as "Flexliner".
Seeing that the IC3 has been the backbone of all national rail traffic in Denmark since around 1990, and still is today, it hurts my national pride to have it left out ;)
(The only difference between DSB MF and SJ Y2 should be livery and ATC system, and the latter isn't modeled at all by TTD.)

(Please don't take this for "making demands" or anything like that. The work that has gone into this set is amazing, and I'm just curious about the process.)

Transportman
Tycoon
Tycoon
Posts: 2683
Joined: 22 Feb 2011 18:34

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha2

Post by Transportman » 15 Nov 2018 17:25

jfs wrote:I need to ask, is there any particular reason the DSB MF (IC3) DMU is not included, while the SJ Y2 and RENFE 594 are? The IC3 is the model that was developed on order from DSB, and then later also sold to SJ where it was labeled Y2, and the concept later marketed internationally as "Flexliner".
Seeing that the IC3 has been the backbone of all national rail traffic in Denmark since around 1990, and still is today, it hurts my national pride to have it left out ;)
(The only difference between DSB MF and SJ Y2 should be livery and ATC system, and the latter isn't modeled at all by TTD.)

(Please don't take this for "making demands" or anything like that. The work that has gone into this set is amazing, and I'm just curious about the process.)
There is no real reason for it, might even have been in the original set like that.
Coder of the Dutch Trackset | Development support for the Dutch Trainset | Coder of the 2cc TrainsInNML

User avatar
Valle
Transport Coordinator
Transport Coordinator
Posts: 267
Joined: 15 May 2007 11:35
Location: Germany

Re: [OTTD] 2cc TrainsInNML - Current version: 3.0-alpha1

Post by Valle » 19 Nov 2018 17:45

Transportman wrote:
Diesel Power wrote:This has been my go-to train set for ages and is still the best one by far.

I've spotted a few balance issues,

I think the capacity on the 4th Gen Box needs increasing. the 3rd Gen Box has a capacity of 40 and a length of 0.4 giving it a capacity per tile of 100. The 4th Gen Box has a capacity of 42 and a length of 0.45 giving it a capacity per tile of 93.3 (less than the 3rd gen). An increase to 48 would give a capaicity per tile of 106.6 (a small inprovement over the 3rd Gen).


There's a few speed limits I would like to highlight also,

The 4th Gen Heavy Flat has a speed limit of 63mph which is the same as the standard 4th Gen Flat. I think it needs reducing to 50mph to compensate for it's higher capacity.

The same could be said about the 5th Gen Super Heavy Flat Vs the 5th Gen Heavy Flat. Also i think the Super Heavy Flat should be refittable to the same cargos as the other heavy flats.

The 5th Gen Box has the same speed limit as the 4th Gen Box. If this was increased to 100mph, It would differenciate it from the 4th Gen Box. You could reduce capacity to, say, 55 to compensate?

I see the incorrect weight on the 4th Gen Container Carrier has been fixed (good work), but i think it needs a speed increase to 100mph to compensate for it's low capacity vs the 4th Gen Box Car.

The Speed on the 5th Gen Container Carrier could then be incereased to 125mph as an improvement over the 4th Gen Container Carrier.

EDIT: Just spotted another bug. The capacity of all the wagons with "Goods" as thier default cargo drops by half when refitted to any other cargo. Found this with FIRS 3.

I love the powerful diesel engines in this set (i got a thing for diesels, hence the name!).

I've tried other train sets and i always come back to this one. Great work!
Great to hear you like this set. I made a note regarding your balancing proposal, and will consider it at a later moment.

Regarding the capacity drop with "Goods", that might be some (unwanted) behaviour from OpenTTD, but I can fix that by setting the capacity callback in this set.
At the risk of gravedigging an obsolete discussion, I'd like to remind you guys that the stats - back in version 2.0 - were based on actual real-life vehicles of different vintage, picked as blueprints that reflect real-life innovation. I would advise against overriding realism of fact-backed vehicles in favor of heavy artificial upgrades or performance cuts. That said, it might be worth it to double-check whether the chosen real-life vehicle data matches the selected sprite lengths and which effects any capacity/speed adjustments since 2.0 had on the balance. Not having seen the old and new spreadsheets side by side yet, I feel like some changes since 2.0 might have adversely impacted a balance that already existed with the real-life-based data I had researched and provided back then. If you can point me towards the latest spreadsheet for vehicle capacities and their respective real-life sources once more, I'd be more than willing to look into it and make suggestions (e.g. alternative real-life counterparts) that assist balancing while maintaining realism.

As a general rule of thumb for vehicles of equal topspeed and payload across different generations (e.g. from 4th to 5th generation), I would suggest to reduce the newer generation's operating costs to reflect innovation regarding efficiency improvements. This would maintain an incentive to upgrade to a newer generation vehicle while respecting the guardrails set by reality. Alternatively, I would suggest to consider axing a newer generation altogether if it's no better in any measurable way in real life instead of nerfing or upgrading vehicles artificially for the sake of inserting a generation jump.

For higher-speed freight cars like the fast container carriers, payloads in real life tend to be pretty low, while the acquisition costs are very high compared to their conventional counterparts. Case in point, when Deutsche Bundesbahn launched its InterCargoExpress freight trains, their 160 km/h / 100 mph rolling stock offered a significantly lower payload than conventional freight cars, at a cost that added +67% to the costs of conventional 120 km/h / 75 mph rolling stock. Among other things, these price spikes and payload reductions came from safety requirements - especially braking performance (e.g. mandatory electro-pneumatic braking systems - AKA ep-brakes) and more complex bogies rated to run at such speeds. These types of general limitations for high-speed freight rolling stock remain valid to this date and they are a core reason for why very fast freight cars are a rare niche in real life.

Case in point, below you have a direct comparison of relative and absolute payload, weight, length and speed between all 100 mph container flatcars I'm aware of, pitched against a typical state-of-the-art continental european container flatcar with a split chassis and 3rd bogie to get a 2'2'2' axle layout. I'm not aware of any container flatcars rated to run at more than 100 mph / 160 km/h.

1) High speed example 1: Talbot Sgss-y 703, the longest and highest-payload 100 mph container flatcar I'm aware of.
Axle layout: 2'2'
Length over buffers: 19.74 m
Empty weight: 22 tons
Payload: 50 tons
Top speed: 100 mph / 160 km/h
Payload per m: 2.53 tons
Example 1 was developed from the Sgns 694''' and lost 20 tons off its original payload of 70 tons carried at 100 km/h when loaded (120 km/h unloaded).

2) High speed example 2: Transmashholding type 13-6954 with passenger coach bogies and electropneumatic brakes.
Axle layout: 2'2'
Length over buffers: 15.27 m
Empty weight: 24 tons
Payload: 36 tons
Top speed: 100 mph / 160 km/h
Payload per m: 2.36 tons
Data source: Page 1

3) High speed example 3: Kockums Industrier Lgss-y055, a lightweight mail container carrier from Sweden.
Axle layout: 1'1'
Length over buffers: 17.12 m
Empty weight: 13 tons
Payload: 27 tons
Top speed: 100 mph / 160 km/h
Payload per m: 1.57 tons

4) Regular example: Sggrs(s) 80', a conventional split-chassis design in wide use across continental europe
Axle layout: 2'2'2'
Length over buffers: 26.7 m
Empty weight: 28 tons
Payload: 107 tons
Top speed: 75 mph / 120 km/h
Payload per m: 4.01 tons

As you can see, the conventional 120 km/h split-chassis container flatcar completely crushes its 160 km/h opposition when it comes to the specific payload per length - and most likely, it's significantly cheaper to acquire and operate than these high-speed designs as well.

In my opinion and based on real-life data, the player should not expect that a 160 km/h container rake can offer a better relative payload per length than a 120 km/h container rake - and especially not at similar or lower costs. While gradual cost increase curves certainly make sense for earlier progress, high speeds beyond 120 km/h lets costs of freight rolling stock rise exponentially for safety reasons (e.g. mandatory electropneumatic brakes and more sophisticated high-speed bogies), while also significantly cutting down on the specific payload per length. I feel like in the spirit of this set's concept, this cost/payload behavior for high speed wagons should be reflected here. High-speed freight cars are built for a rare niche that transports items at high speed, heavily trading specific and absolute payload, as well as expenses in order to achieve that. Deutsche Bundesbahn's ill-fated 100 mph InterCargoExpress freight trains were limited to a laughable total weight of 1000 tons including a payload of no more than 600 tons, even though they only hit 100 mph under LZB protection and were limited to 87 mph on conventional lines equipped with PZB/Indusi.

Post Reply

Return to “Graphics Releases”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests