Extended Cargo Scheme (ECS) discussion

[Oracle]

I think I did misunderstand you somewhat, Michael.

So, in general, you´d choose a couple of cargoes and industries from different .grfs or from one large .grf by setting a parameter in such a way that you´ll end up with a playable scenario.

What the scheme should be used for is that all those different .grfs would use the same cargo-IDs and bit flags to ensure compatibility.

That does explain it a lot. I assumed that this was what you were going to work towards with newcargo[w].grf but not with much choice about what you play or don't play. If it is intended that we have quite a bit of choice (with sensible and playable defaults, of course, to keep it simple for people who don't want to fiddle) then I would personally be quite happy with your scheme.

Furthermore I tried to leave 8 slots free for special .grfs, but due to the large amount of original cargoes that didn´t work out in the end. We´ll have to see if the available free slots are sufficient or if we´d have to strip down the list a bit further.

This is the only real problem that I have - I think it could get restrictive for specialised GRFs if the use of these standard cargos is unknown or highly variable. However, I find it difficult to see other GRFs using more than a few slots without overwriting the entire set of cargos because the game would again become too crowded and because the structure would become too complicated - so the free slots allocated might actually be enough in the end.

The point I´m most interested in ATM is if those "standard cargoes" given in the scheme would be regarded as "standard" by a majority. (I´m talking about tempereate climate)

Apart from what I've written above, yes, I would agree with your scheme.

My feeling is that there is no need or use for an overarching general industry scheme - that an industry scheme should be linked with a regional set.

I don't really agree here - if we agree on this as a "standard" then you can of course overwrite/disable the cargos with a regional set if you want to. I feel that this would be the best solution for everyone - and remember that it is only for temperate climate.

[krtaylor]

if we agree on this as a "standard" then you can of course overwrite/disable the cargos with a regional set if you want to.

I wonder if maybe there's the outlines of a compromise. MBs "scheme" becomes the standard, but the individual GRFs would specify the precise names. E.g. a train-set knows that it needs to provide tankers, boxcars, hoppers, etc., for use in bulk building-materials, bulk minerals, liquid primary, liquid secondary, etc., but the GRF would specify that liquid secondary is "gasoline" or "chemicals", and bulk-building-materials is "slate" or "cement" or whatever.

[George]

Well, full versions are here
http://ttd.cernun.net/temp/Cargo_vectors.png
http://ttd.cernun.net/temp/Cargo_vectors_2.png

Some thoughts:
1) Sulphur does not fit in. It makes the 5-level transportation. It’s too much. 4 levels are the max
2) Why not to unite sand and potash mines into one "open pit"?
3) Goods are produced only by oil refinery and printing works. Because oil refinery already produce petrol, goods are useless here. So, the only goods are printing materials. So we can replace goods with "Printings" or even remove the whole "paper"-"printing" line and allow towns to accept wood products (furniture) or make some kind of "furniture industry". Then the oil refinery can produce chemicals.
Such changing makes the schema looks simpler and allow adding more cargos and industries in it.

I'll send updated schema a bit later

2 Patchman and Csaboka:
Would it be possible to have different farm field graphics depending on the farm graphics?

[krtaylor]

George, can you post the link to your chart of the normal, ordinary, default industry vectors that we are all used to? That's what I'd like to print out.

[George]

Hope this one is mush easier. I hope it is ok. Now I'll try to make it harder.

The big version is here http://ttd.cernun.net/temp/Cargo_vectors_3.png

George, can you post the link to your chart of the normal, ordinary, default industry vectors that we are all used to? That's what I'd like to print out.

I never had it. I'll make a one for you. Can you work with Visio 2003 files? I can send a vsd file to you

[krtaylor]

No, I don't have Visio, but a PNG file like you have is perfect. I can just view it, and print it out. You should add it permanently to your website, it would be a great resource. Wanna do one for the other climates also?

[michael blunck]

Some thoughts:
1) Sulphur does not fit in. It makes the 5-level transportation. It’s too much. 4 levels are the max
2) Why not to unite sand and potash mines into one "open pit"?
3) Goods are produced only by oil refinery and printing works. Because oil refinery already produce petrol, goods are useless here. So, the only goods are printing materials. So we can replace goods with "Printings" or even remove the whole "paper"-"printing" line and allow towns to accept wood products (furniture) or make some kind of "furniture industry". Then the oil refinery can produce chemicals.
Such changing makes the schema looks simpler and allow adding more cargos and industries in it.

1) Well, from the scheme, "sulphur" isn´t a "standard" cargo but it´s a ".grf specific" cargo.

2) because potash isn´t normally open-pit mined.

3) In the long run, "goods" should be removed or kept as a "default". I don´t now ATM. And yes, the whole "printing" line is questionable, OTOH we do have the "printing works" graphics but in principle "paper" could be delivered directly to towns as well, given that we´ll have specific buildings for accepting it.

3a) [furniture]. ATM (w. NewCargo .grf), the "factory" produces "goods" from "steel" and "wood". This has to be changed anyway.

3b) [oil refinery] The problem is that we want to have "fertilizer" for boosting farms. "Chemicals" and "fertilizer" could be produced easily by a single industry type, namely "chemical plant". O/c we could make the refinery producing "chemicals", but not "fertilizer", IMO.

regards
Michael

[Hyronymus]

And what if you introduce the harbour industry (as was suggested) that produces goods as if they are imported (much like the RRT series solution).

[George]

No, I don't have Visio, but a PNG file like you have is perfect. I can just view it, and print it out. You should add it permanently to your website, it would be a great resource.

I'll wait until I'll solve the hosting question

Wanna do one for the other climates also?

It is not hard to do with visio. I'll think about it

This is what you asked for
http://ttd.cernun.net/temp/Cargo_vectors_0.png

[George]

Some thoughts:
1) Sulphur does not fit in. It makes the 5-level transportation. It’s too much. 4 levels are the max
2) Why not to unite sand and potash mines into one "open pit"?
3) Goods are produced only by oil refinery and printing works. Because oil refinery already produce petrol, goods are useless here. So, the only goods are printing materials. So we can replace goods with "Printings" or even remove the whole "paper"-"printing" line and allow towns to accept wood products (furniture) or make some kind of "furniture industry". Then the oil refinery can produce chemicals.
Such changing makes the schema looks simpler and allow adding more cargos and industries in it.

1) Well, from the scheme, "sulphur" isn´t a "standard" cargo but it´s a ".grf specific" cargo.

But it makes 5 levels

2) because potash isn´t normally open-pit mined.

What can be mined open-pit except send?

3a) [furniture]. ATM (w. NewCargo .grf), the "factory" produces "goods" from "steel" and "wood". This has to be changed anyway.

You wanted 3 cargos to produce autos and the wood was not in that list.

3b) [oil refinery] The problem is that we want to have "fertilizer" for boosting farms.

Why can't we use chemicals for that? We can call them chemical products.

[krtaylor]

You could have cities produce excrement, which is transported to farms to increase production (fertilizer). They actually do this, by rail, from New York City to the Midwest.

[wallyweb]

You could have cities produce excrement, which is transported to farms to increase production (fertilizer). They actually do this, by rail, from New York City to the Midwest.

hmmm ... can odours be patched into the game?

[GoneWacko]

You could have cities produce excrement, which is transported to farms to increase production (fertilizer). They actually do this, by rail, from New York City to the Midwest.

I hope you're joking

Just having cities produce Junk would be better. You can make compost out of it.

[George]

Well. New step. we got 24 industries, 26 cargos

Level 1 industries
1. Coal mine
2. Iron ore mine
3. Oil rig
4. Oil wells
5. Forest
6. Open pit
7. Fishing grounds
8. Farm

Level 2 industries
9. Power plant
10. Steel mill
11. Oil refinery
12. Sawmill
13. Cement works
14. Glass works
15. Animal farm

Level 3 industries
16. Paper mill
17. Textile mill

Level 4 industries
18. Automobile plant
19. Construction industry
20. Printing works
21. Food plant
22. Brewery

Level 5 industries
23. Bank
24. Tourist centre

Special Cargos
1. Passengers
2. Mail
3. Tourists
4. Valuables

Raw materials
5. Coal
6. Iron ore
7. Oil
8. Wood
9. Sand
10. Fish
11. Silage
12. Grain
13. Wool
14. Livestock

Products
15. Steel
16. Petrol
17. Chemicals
18. Glass
19. Cement
20. Paper
21. Textile
22. Machinery
23. building materials
24. Printings
25. Food
26. Beer

Fullsizу picture is here http://ttd.cernun.net/temp/Cargo_vectors_4.png

[krtaylor]

No joke.

http://www.biosolids.com/Features/archives/000009.shtml

It's quite popular with farmers, apparently it makes superb fertilizer and is highly cost-effective, because you only have to pay the transport costs (and those may even be subsidized), you don't have to pay anything to purchase it.

Making compost out of junk? Eh? You don't get anything biologically useful from a pile of broken TVs and smashed cars. (You could bring Junk from cities to a steel mill, though, for re-melting down.)

[George]

Well. New step. we got 25 industries, 28 cargos
If you don't want to produce cemeте from sand open-pit can be changed to produce sand and lime and use lime to produce cement. Then we will have 29 slots used, 3 slots reserved.

I think that represented schema is rather full, has rather unicue cargos and industries. Anyway, there is a possibility to save one cargo and one industry slots. We can remove sawmill and make woods produce wood products. From my point of view, the resulting schema is Ok.

Level 1 industries
1. Coal mine
2. Iron ore mine
3. Oil rig
4. Oil wells
5. Forest
6. Open pit
7. Fishing grounds
8. Farm

Level 2 industries
9. Power plant
10. Steel mill
11. Oil refinery
12. Sawmill
13. Cement works
14. Glass works
15. Animal farm

Level 3 industries
16. Paper mill
17. Textile mill
18. Chemicals plant
19. Construction industry
20. Food plant
21. Brewery

Level 4 industries
22. Automobile plant
23. Printing works


Level 5 industries
24. Bank
25. Tourist centre

Special Cargos
1. Passengers
2. Mail
3. Tourists
4. Valuables

Raw materials
5. Coal
6. Iron ore
7. Oil
8. Wood
9. Sand
10. Fish
11. Silage
12. Grain
13. Wool
14. Livestock

Products
15. Steel
16. Petrol
17. Chemicals
18. Glass
19. Cement
20. Paper
21. Textile
22. Machinery
23. Building materials
24. Printings
25. Food
26. Beer
27. Fertilizer
28. Ink

Fullsize picture is here http://ttd.cernun.net/temp/Cargo_vectors_5.png

[broodje]

what will happen now if you have a powerstation and steelmill near one station? or the glass and brewery+automobile? etc etc. It would make sence to have multiple industries served at once, but that is rather dificcult if they al use the same base material. Or am I completly mistaken about this?

[nicfer]

In this post I suggested electric cables for transport electricity from distants power stations to towns: http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php? ... ht=#321939
In the near future, will be possible this?
And until that feature arrives, it can be a cargo more, although this will be very unrealistic.

[Csaboka]

what will happen now if you have a powerstation and steelmill near one station? or the glass and brewery+automobile?

The whole amount goes to the closer industry (the one TTD thinks is closer, that is).

[Wile E. Coyote]

May I suggest one important industry: electronic? Is it place to add it to list? It could accept glass, copper (so probably copper mill is needed) and plastic (produced in chemical industry or refinery). It could produce electronic products or simply goods.