acs121 wrote:NML was an attempt to replace NFO, however most features of NFO still can't be done yet with NML.
Actually, NML is NOT an attempt to replace NFO. The NFO is still there under the covers as it were. Both NML and m4nfo are upper level languages that merely make NFO more human readable for ease of programming. My personal preference is to work directly from the NewGRF specs (NFO).
The only time I have to contend with OpenTTD or TTDPatch being slow is when I have a dozen programs open on my PC all at once. That's not the program's problem. That's just the idiot using his computer to do too many things at once.
Heh. The amazing thing is I actually got here from there.
ino wrote:Nice. Tried it in many configuration and I still haven't managed to brake this looks-fragile feature yet.
A question though: why not also for passenger? If the reason is realistic, there's actually a train line in Tokyo that does that... (Granted, not exactly the same. Basically a 8-car train pulled into 4-car platform. The first four car is boarded/unboared, then the first 4 cars is detached from the rear, goes to different destination, then the rear 4 cars pull into the station)
I have to draw the line somewhere. Disallowing passenger trains is a reasonable compromise between realism and having simple enough rules for end-users to understand.
ino wrote:And I think I manage one bug:
In other configuration it works as expected though (without conditional, or with next order conditional).
That should be fixed now, it hadn't occurred to me to use those two features together in that way.
JGR wrote:I have to draw the line somewhere. Disallowing passenger trains is a reasonable compromise between realism and having simple enough rules for end-users to understand.
There might not be much of a compromise. From my experience, passenger platforms tend to be long enough to accommodate most pax trains. On the other hand, for freight, especially hopper/gondola service, very long trains tend to move slowly past an unloader/loader. I like it.
Anybody up for patching in coupling/decoupling and shunting? (\me hides beyond the asteroid belt)
JGR wrote:I have to draw the line somewhere. Disallowing passenger trains is a reasonable compromise between realism and having simple enough rules for end-users to understand.
There might not be much of a compromise. From my experience, passenger platforms tend to be long enough to accommodate most pax trains. On the other hand, for freight, especially hopper/gondola service, very long trains tend to move slowly past an unloader/loader. I like it.
Anybody up for patching in coupling/decoupling and shunting? (\me hides beyond the asteroid belt)
Are there any technical difficulties regarding passenger trains? Because as I pointed out, there's an actual passenger train service that also operate like this. If it's technical difficulties, then I totally understand.
And I'd love coupling-decoupling-shunting, but to make it useful we likely need a whole new set of Order, and that's sound like it's going to be really complicated XD Also, allowing multiple trains per platforms (though in this case I remember reading that someone implement this in his/her personal version).
But really, after shunting we are going to need a gravity-based cargo wagon sorter!
JGR wrote:I have to draw the line somewhere. Disallowing passenger trains is a reasonable compromise between realism and having simple enough rules for end-users to understand.
There might not be much of a compromise. From my experience, passenger platforms tend to be long enough to accommodate most pax trains. On the other hand, for freight, especially hopper/gondola service, very long trains tend to move slowly past an unloader/loader. I like it.
Anybody up for patching in coupling/decoupling and shunting? (\me hides beyond the asteroid belt)
Are there any technical difficulties regarding passenger trains? Because as I pointed out, there's an actual passenger train service that also operate like this. If it's technical difficulties, then I totally understand.
And I'd love coupling-decoupling-shunting, but to make it useful we likely need a whole new set of Order, and that's sound like it's going to be really complicated XD Also, allowing multiple trains per platforms (though in this case I remember reading that someone implement this in his/her personal version).
But really, after shunting we are going to need a gravity-based cargo wagon sorter!
/me come back to reality
I'd love coupling, decoupling etc. It wouldn't need much work though. Just reconsider depots as rail yards, tell your train "attach 8 grain wagons here, take them to ... and decouple them to let them load, get back to depot and attach more grain wagons and so on"
This has been brought up many times before I guess... But this would actually be rediculously hard. Or the choices needed for it would be. The UI changes are fine, but what is the name of the 2 new trains formed if each part has a loco? How do you tell the train where to split? What does the game do if it's just wagons left over? How can the game predict what it will connect to? And how will coupling restrictions work with this? How would orders handle merging/splitting services? And what if one part of a service merge hadn't arrived but was caught in traffic? Many, many difficult choices to make and (I'd guess, not that I actually know) very difficult to code.
On a seperate note, it'd mostly remove the need for depots for sorting trains.
i think i managed to break the custom bridgehead...i wasn t very cautious, and i managed to replace a bridge wich had a custom bridge head while a tram already started to enter the custom tile. now it s stuck, can t do anything, i can t redo the custom bridge head because it says vehicle is on the bridge, i can t demolish it cause vehicle on the bridge...
good luck smashing that bug
KeldorKatarn wrote:@JGR I already fixed this in my version. Bridge upgrades preserve custom bridgehead for road and signal for rail data. Check my fork for that. Unfortunately, that won't help this player out It can'T be fixed AFTER the fact.
i think i managed to break the custom bridgehead...i wasn t very cautious, and i managed to replace a bridge wich had a custom bridge head while a tram already started to enter the custom tile. now it s stuck, can t do anything, i can t redo the custom bridge head because it says vehicle is on the bridge, i can t demolish it cause vehicle on the bridge...
good luck smashing that bug
p.s : for the newgrf you will miss, send me a pm, but probably you won t need them as they are not involved in that situation
Totally OT, but at least i don't have to ask for the savegame now
I know a while ago there was a setting for 'same_industry_close', true means you can basically build lots of the same industry next to each other to create a huge production line.
This setting appears to have no effect anymore, and i'm stuck at the "too close to another industry" error - has this feature being intentionally removed, or is it renamed or done in another manner now?
Attachments
gaghs.png (135.22 KiB) Viewed 3013 times
Need some good tested AI? - Unofficial AI Tester, list of good stuff & thread is here.
I THINK there're a setting called "multiple industries per town" or something, that prevents the same town from having multiple industries of the same type. but the NewGRFs themselves also can define certain restrictions on where industries can be built so... not sure exactly which is preventing that here.
KeldorKatarn wrote:I THINK there're a setting called "multiple industries per town" or something, that prevents the same town from having multiple industries of the same type. but the NewGRFs themselves also can define certain restrictions on where industries can be built so... not sure exactly which is preventing that here.
I don't have any GRFs that affect industries - unless for some reason a station or vehicle newgrf is affecting placement for some reason.
Need some good tested AI? - Unofficial AI Tester, list of good stuff & thread is here.
My device is mac book pro earlly 2011 13-inch
Version macos High sierra Version 10.13.4
Processor 2.3 GHz Intel Core i5
Memory 8gb 1600 mhz ddr3
grphics Intel hd Graphics 3000 512 MB
Loving the patch pack, absolutely thrilling to have network sharing back again.
Quick question though. Is there any plans to have an option to disable the Income/Transfer/Loss figures that rise from the trains as they finish unloading. It seems that when there is enough vehicles on screen to do so, it does cause a monumental slowdown on the system.
another suggestion i realised would be quite handy playing today;
As you know, if you click a train, it will give a quick GUI overview of where it calls, with little numbers over all its stops.
Is it possible, that when you click on a station, it gives a similar overview, but for all trains that call there - this would quickly help me identify where this station has direct links to, and spot any missing useful links for passengers to get to and from there.
Need some good tested AI? - Unofficial AI Tester, list of good stuff & thread is here.
Redirect Left wrote:Is it possible, that when you click on a station, it gives a similar overview, but for all trains that call there - this would quickly help me identify where this station has direct links to, and spot any missing useful links for passengers to get to and from there.
When you click to open the station's window, there are little engine/RV/ship/airplane images on the bottom right. Clicking on one of these will show all the respective vehicles which have that station on their schedule. Perhaps this could be modified to show something similar to the industry chains.
Redirect Left wrote:Is it possible, that when you click on a station, it gives a similar overview, but for all trains that call there - this would quickly help me identify where this station has direct links to, and spot any missing useful links for passengers to get to and from there.
When you click to open the station's window, there are little engine/RV/ship/airplane images on the bottom right. Clicking on one of these will show all the respective vehicles which have that station on their schedule. Perhaps this could be modified to show something similar to the industry chains.
This is currently what I am using, and going through each vehicle or group of vehicles. However, its is rather tedious. if we can have the same sort of display, just a little balloon above all stations with trains that call there and also at the station you clicked on, i'd be happy with pretty much anything that wasn't quite as tedious as the current best way.
Need some good tested AI? - Unofficial AI Tester, list of good stuff & thread is here.
Good idea with vehicles links to the station. In my opinion, if station is clicked, it should show all direct links to the other stations. It would be great for debugging cargodist.
My device is mac book pro earlly 2011 13-inch
Version macos High sierra Version 10.13.4
Processor 2.3 GHz Intel Core i5
Memory 8gb 1600 mhz ddr3
grphics Intel hd Graphics 3000 512 MB
Can you post the crash.log file?
Redirect Left wrote:another suggestion i realised would be quite handy playing today;
As you know, if you click a train, it will give a quick GUI overview of where it calls, with little numbers over all its stops.
Is it possible, that when you click on a station, it gives a similar overview, but for all trains that call there - this would quickly help me identify where this station has direct links to, and spot any missing useful links for passengers to get to and from there.
Isn't this more or less what the cargo dest link graph overlay does?
The departure boards can also be quite useful here.
My todo list is currently very long, so developing this sort of feature is not likely to occur soon.
If you/someone else can develop a reasonable quality patch to implement it that may be a more pragmatic way to go.
It can'T be fixed AFTER the fact.
