UKRSI and ECS compatability

[George]

Pikka

May I ask you to change some internals of your grf to make it compatible with ECS vectors. I mean to follow the ECS specification by Michael Blunck and me. According to the main ECS idea, every new industry and cargo set should use the most suitable cargo from ECS and use its' ID.
For lumber and petrol it was done correct and they use IDs 13 and
19 as intended. But cargos
1027 * 10 00 0B 01 01 17 17 "PLAS"
1029 * 10 00 0B 01 01 18 17 "CLAY"
1030 * 10 00 0B 01 01 1A 17 "GRVL"
are not correct, because they conflict with refined products, vehicles and bricks. I write conflict because I do not think that these slots are suitable ones.
I suppose sand (ID 11) is the best slot for Gravel (reminder - slot does not meat the cargo name, it is correct to have lumber and fuel oil for wood products and petrol, but the ID that is used by the other grfs). Limestone (1E) is the best slot for Clay. Sulphur (1B) is good for plastic (should be discussed).

EDIT by Raichase: Split from the main UKRS thread.

[Dave]

Pikka is free to design his set how he wants to, surely?

Stop pushing such things on people.

[Hyronymus]

Dave, where did you get stupid idea ? We're all tied to the preferences of our Great Leaders, naturally!

[George]

Pikka is free to design his set how he wants to, surely? Stop pushing such things on people.

I hope Pikka would read my text more careful than you did The thing I ask should help all the players much more, than me.

[Dave]

From a playing side, I couldn't give two flying squirrels whether Pikka's industries conform to ECS or not - as far as I'm concerned, I play with them, and they work.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it, as they say.

EDIT: What I'm saying is - I've played Pikka's set probably more than any user on this forum (except maybe Pikka himself in testing), and I've never EVER encountered a problem where a conflict with ECS is a cause.

[DaleStan]

1) It will do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING for the players. Nothing at all. I'm not even convinced it'll do anything to make NFO coder's jobs easier, unless they're trying to add cargos that conflict with neither ECS nor UKRSI.

2) What exactly is the point of making UKRSI and ECS compatible in the first place? Are you suggesting that someone might load both at the same time? If so, having a power-plant produce plastic seems a little non-intuitive, so having plastic overwrite sulfur is a Bad Thing.

[George]

1) It will do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING for the players. Nothing at all.

Mistaken. It will allow to run both of them in the same game.

2) What exactly is the point of making UKRSI and ECS compatible in the first place? Are you suggesting that someone might load both at the same time?

Yes, I do. And I don't think it is a good idea to prevent it, unless it is impossible (now it is possible to make them compatible)

If so, having a power-plant produce plastic seems a little non-intuitive, so having plastic overwrite sulfur is a Bad Thing.

You are wrong here because ECS power-plant will not produce plastic (I suppose you know how translation table work), because cargo PLAS would not be translated to SULP. It will produce nothing instead. This is what would happen if UKRSI is loaded after ECS. If ECS is loaded after UKRSI, there might be problems with UKRSI industries, because they do not use translation table. But I can explain Pikka how to fix it.

[George]

From a playing side, I couldn't give two flying squirrels whether Pikka's industries conform to ECS or not - as far as I'm concerned, I play with them, and they work.

And they will work futher. What's wrong?

If it ain't broke, don't fix it, as they say.

If you do not see the problem that does not mean that there is no problem. I can point where the problem is and how to fix it.

EDIT: What I'm saying is - I've played Pikka's set probably more than any user on this forum (except maybe Pikka himself in testing), and I've never EVER encountered a problem where a conflict with ECS is a cause.

Did you try to run UKRSI and ECS at the same time? I did and I found the problem.

[Dave]

But why would you WANT to? Both implement certain commodities (such as gravel etc.) in a totally different way.

And as I said at the outset - maybe it's just the way you say it - you seem insistent that it is Pikka's set that is incompatible with ECS.

Why not the other way round? Perhaps your set is incompatible with the UKRSI?

(I have also spotted you said the same to Michael Blunck about Newcargos which is surely older than ECS and thus even less likely to be the incompatible one...?)

[DaleStan]

If it ain't broke, don't fix it, as they say.

If you do not see the problem that does not mean that there is no problem. I can point where the problem is and how to fix it.

Well, I haven't seen it. So show me. And by "show me" I mean "show me a savegame that demonstrates the problem in such a way that any player could see the problem", not "show me the NFO code where Pikka is using the 'incorrect' IDs for his cargos".

[michael blunck]

Gentlemen, could we please return to a productive discussion style? Thank you.

@DaveWorley

I have also spotted you said the same to Michael Blunck about Newcargos which is surely older than ECS and thus even less likely to be the incompatible one...?

Since NewCargos had been released there were some updates to the ECS framework, namely to make "beer" a sub-cargo for "food" (in order to avoid certain problems for gamers w. delivering "beer"). However, the next version of NewCargos will implement the current ECS standard and thus be 100% compatible.

regards
Michael

[George]

But why would you WANT to?

To allow using both sets? Because it is better than leaving them partly incompatible.

Both implement certain commodities (such as gravel etc.) in a totally different way.

And? Having translation table allows to hold it correctly.

And as I said at the outset - maybe it's just the way you say it - you seem insistent that it is Pikka's set that is incompatible with ECS. Why not the other way round? Perhaps your set is incompatible with the UKRSI?

Because the ECS specification was published in the early time of newindustries as soon as first incompatibilities appeared. And it was supposed, that every coder would follow it as much as possible.
It is possible to add additional code, that fix the wrong code in UKRSI in ECS vectors, but all the other industry sets would also require the code for fixing the wrong code in UKRSI. A more correct solution is fix it once in UKRSI, don't you find it?

I have also spotted you said the same to Michael Blunck about Newcargos which is surely older than ECS and thus even less likely to be the incompatible one...?)

That was discussed with Michael and I'm sure that he will fix new cargos as soon as a new version will be out. My question was - when would it be out?

If it ain't broke, don't fix it, as they say.

If you do not see the problem that does not mean that there is no problem. I can point where the problem is and how to fix it.

Well, I haven't seen it. So show me. And by "show me" I mean "show me a savegame that demonstrates the problem in such a way that any player could see the problem", not "show me the NFO code where Pikka is using the 'incorrect' IDs for his cargos".

Screenshot is Ok?

[DaleStan]

If the cargo translation table can keep the power plant from producing plastic, why can't the same translation table keep the vehicle factory from producing clay?

[Dave]

I see your other points, but I think you miss my point with this:

But why would you WANT to?

To allow using both sets? Because it is better than leaving them partly incompatible.

They're not meant to work together - some things in life will always be incompatible because they're meant to be kept apart.

[George]

If the cargo translation table can keep the power plant from producing plastic, why can't the same translation table keep the vehicle factory from producing clay?

You’ve mixed two questions
The first question was how could the player see. The answer is "wrong industry production on screenshot".
The second question about what is wrong and how to fix it It is possible to prevent the industry to produce wrong cargo (small changing in the car factory would fix it), but it is impossible to make it produce right cargo! So, the main idea of my request is to make all these incompatibilities less significant as possible.

I see your other points, but I think you miss my point with this:

But why would you WANT to?

To allow using both sets? Because it is better than leaving them partly incompatible.

They're not meant to work together - some things in life will always be incompatible because they're meant to be kept apart.

Who designed UKRSI and ECS incompatible? Pikka used at least two ECS labels. That means he planned to make things as compatible as possible. So, the current situation is a small bug (I suppose) and would be fixed by him.
The fact, that you use UKRSI and does not use ECS does not mean anything here.

That all for today. I'll wait Pikka's answer

[Dave]

So you're saying because Pikka used some tags of ECS he wanted to be ECS compatible?

So you're claiming you have some sort of ownership over the use of such tags in TTDP and anyone that uses these tags MUST conform to ECS?

How very devious.

[Snail]

Guys, let's try to calm down. George politely asked a question to Pikka, and supported it with a reason. Pikka has yet to answer. So let's just wait for him and listen to what he has to say.

[michael blunck]

> Guys, let's try to calm down.

Yeah. Mr Worley, could you please abstain from using your keyboard if you don´t have something useful to contribute? Thanks very much.

regards
Michael

[Dave]

If I don't have something useful to contribute? I think it was useful to contribute - I'm not sure where it became unuseful. You might see your work from the eyes of the developer.

I see it from the eyes of the player, and will let you know as such. I don't let reputation get in the way of telling people what I think. Respect for people like you and George, I have; quivering climbdowns just because I might have said something that's bordering on opinionated, I don't.

EDIT: Though of course, without wanting to cause a frenzy where every man and his dog has their say, I implore a moderator to remove the sticky part of this thread, if they would be so kind. Thank you.

[Raichase]

Gentlemen.

Please, just discuss things sanely. I've been busy at work, and hadn't had a chance to check my e-mails this morning, and I come home to find a mess.

Firstly, can we keep discussion on-topic in TTDPatch sections, and if we can't keep to topic, just not post. It's easier on the rest of us.

Secondly, can we all be civil? Yes, we all have different opinions over ECS and it's implementations, but surely working together without insults will be better for the forums and the community as a whole. Disagree? State WHY, in a way that is keeping with normal discussion.

I'll post a seperate post detailing my personal thoughts on the matter, but this is just a post to say "enough" sillyness in this thread.