Tram Id discussion [Split from UK Tram set]

[michael blunck]

From the internal design it wouldn't make much sense to actually enlarge the id range arrays but generally do a totally different system to have private internal id ranges [...] However the action0 system we now have with the complicate callbacks and cache (which is very important) would need to be changed quite much.

OTOH, especially that "complicate callback" system allows to have much more "virtual" vehicles inside the "real" vehicle ID range. Meanwhile we have CBs to change vehicle properties (at least for trains), like power, speed, TE, cost, ... so all we´d need is support for action 4 to be able to change vehicle´s names.

And then, "all" we need would be the expansion of that system to RVs (trams).

And I have to agree with George that there was atleast a guideline everyone should follow.

AFAIR, that was even close to an agreement. Problem is that meanwhile too many people are "inventing their own system" without care for compatibility.

regards
Michael

[Dave]

AFAIR, that was even close to an agreement. Problem is that meanwhile too many people are "inventing their own system" without care for compatibility.

Then perhaps now is the time to get agreements like this made and set out EXPLICITLY for everyone to see.

As long as the agreed specification isn't dominated by one person or another, of course.

[peter1138]

This sort of stuff should probably be on the NewGRF specs wiki somewhere, even if it is just suggestions.

For UKTS, so far I just used Toyland slots, but there's no problem as there is no release yet.

[wallyweb]

AFAIR, that was even close to an agreement. Problem is that meanwhile too many people are "inventing their own system" without care for compatibility.

Then perhaps now is the time to get agreements like this made and set out EXPLICITLY for everyone to see.

As long as the agreed specification isn't dominated by one person or another, of course.

The time has come for some player input.
We must keep in mind that TTDX is not a simple passenger transportation game. Industrial cargoes are a very big part of the game. I have seen several RV sets drawn, and expected to see a reasonable mix of trucks and buses. Instead, what I see is everybody having a love affair with buses and now trams, forgetting completely that trucks make a lot more sense to the intent of the game ... moving cargoes. The original unpatched version of the game had a lot more trucks than buses for a reason. Now, with recent developments in the patch, refitting has allowed for fewer trucks but in most cases set designers have gone overboard with this. In the game, trucking is more appropriate for the short hauls with trains being used for longer runs, but the set selections of short trucks available throughout the game is abysmal. If the IDs are to be allocated according to RV type, please do not take away from trucks to accommodate trams. If anything, add a few slots for trucks. After all, trams are a form of bus that happens to run on tracks set into a street and we only need so many buses in a game. In fact, I would go so far as to say do not differentiate between trams and buses. They serve the same purpose and with a couple of exceptions they are the same type of vehicle. If I want a tram route in my game, I will in all probability eliminate a bus route by replacing one with the other. So, in conclusion, if we are to reseve IDs, I would recommend a 50-50 split between passenger/tourist and cargoes. As far as compatibility goes, we have two directions here. Someone who designs a complete RV set which serves ALL cargoes with a good mix of vehicles should have the freedom to apportion as they see fit. They will get my support as I will need only one grf file to manage. The second group consists of those who draw specialized sets such as buses only or trams only (Strange ... why has nobody done a trucks only set?). They need to cooperate with one another so that their sets cooperate nicely. George's LV sets, in spite of our thoughts about the scale of his vehicles, have broken a lot of new ground. His work with refitability is simply amazing. He could very easily have designed his set to use all IDs but he took the initiative to reserve a block of IDs for trams even though he did not have any of his own. Perhaps you all might want to give credit where credit is due and in the process, take care not to go overboard lest your excesses ruin a very good game.

[michael blunck]

[full quote]

Well spoken, Wally.

May I add that the recent hype about "cargo trams" for every cargo is, IMO, (both historically and game-wise) unnecessary and makes things even more complicated?

regards
Michael

[Marshy]

I'd personally never use cargo trams, in fact i dont use trams either because i'm perfectly happy with buses and trucks for my services. The only way i would use trams is for a 'realistic' purpose or a bit of 'eye candy'.

I think a few designers a going a bit overboard with the graphics; they are forgetting the 'playing' part of the game and instead focusing on designing graphics that may be pointless and un-nessescary or just to be pleasing to the eye. TTDP is a game, not a graphics show.

[nilsi]

Some people see it the other way round - more as a model railroad pleasing the eye then as a game. Both views are equally valid and if artists like to add eyecandy I personally like it that way.

[athanasios]

Wallyweb set matters straight. And yes as Marshy said trams should be considered more as an eye candy.

If 'cargo tram' project proceeds then we will have something more. We should be realistic. Buses are a more common means of transportation. Only a few cities have trams. We have tram lines but I never use them (with the exception of driving my car on top of the tram rails for fun sometimes... ), even though I buy a monthly ticket that covers access to buses, trolleys and trams. And don't be in a hurry to say that it is my personal choice. It is that of >95% of the people using public transportation. They view the tram more as an eye candy and a tourist attraction. Or at least a means of transportation for pensioners and mothers with their kids. Buses are much faster. It is simple: If tram takes 45-50 minutes from terminal to terminal and express bus makes it in 35 minutes which will you prefer? A tram can carry many more passengers but is limited from having to go only on rails. This is a big disadvantage in modern cities with heavy traffic. When an accident happens, all tram system is blocked for hours... That is why buses are prefered for transportation. Even trolleys have a disadvantage compared to buses. Reason they are used is that they do not pollute.
To conclude: Trams have their role in the game and I thank the coders for their hard work as well as the artists. Yet their role in trasportation is of minor importance, it is more a cosmetic one. (I don't think anyone will disagree that they make the game look more nice )

[Carlo Ghega]

Hello!

First please let me say that to me it is really very sad, to see a developer of some of the games absolutely standard-features not being in the forums any more.

On topic - from the players view -yes of corse i think we do need harmonised standards for the vehicle-ids. Not only for the road-vehicles, but also for trains: So - for example - every SG-developper would know if he wants to let the space for an optional NG-Set or not. And even if not, he still could manage the choice of vehicles that would be overwritten by NG. So the chronology and the kind of traction of vehicles could still be balanced. And the loss of a handful assorted SG-engines probably wouldn't bother any ng-player - espacially in comparison to having no compatibility and balance at all. It is the same thing here: With this solution, the player had the choice to decide whether he wants to have another bus on ID-Number-x or a Tram, by loading or not loading a grf-file.

So: To get the most out of the game, harmonised standards would probably be very merciful thing - always optimistically assuming that the discussion about what the standards should look like finds an end in a overviewable time and the standards are as generally accepted as possible.

Yet their (Trams) role in trasportation is of minor importance, it is more a cosmetic one

Don't know where you live, but in Vienna where I come from (or Amsterdam, or Praha, or Munich, or Budapest, or Brussels, or Belgrade, or...) the Tram is an indespensable mean of transportation for more than 1 million passengers a day.
And I also think that it's comeback in London and Paris and a lot of other cities nowadays, is not because the mayors there do want to build an eye-candy from the citizens taxes, but to get transport going. Because one day - in TTD as in real life - you just don't get all the passengers in a small bus any more. So the Tram, to me, is really an urgent needed increase of game-functionality and nothing else.

Best regards,

Carlo

[athanasios]

...Because one day - in TTD as in real life - you just don't get all the passengers in a small bus any more.

I side with metro.
Politicians do not, since it is far more expensive than tram, and they want to use the money in a more 'decent' way.

Of course it would be inconceivable to imagine your city and the ones you mentioned without tram.