[UNIV] ISR - Industrial Stations Renewal

[mart3p]

Those look good, mart3p.

Thanks Aegir.

And here is how they look re-coloured as copper.

copper non_track.png (23.13 KiB) Viewed 4979 times

Incidentally, when these cargo sprites are finished, anyone is welcome to use them, as cargo for vehicle sets as well as stations, industries etc.

[AndersI]

I know things are tiny in the TTD scale, but heavy metal things can't possibly be placed flat on the ground, there needs to be some (mostly wood) support to make it possible to lift the things (forklifts, slings around the slabs etc.).

Apart from that, the steel looks quite good except for the center hole. For some reson it looks more like something sticking out than a hole in the center. You've drawn them as a + sign, as if the view was perpendicular, maybe it should be a bit skewed to match the supposed angle of the view. Some shading instead of uniform black may increase the 'hole' experience. Maybe like this:

[mart3p]

... heavy metal things can't possibly be placed flat on the ground, there needs to be some (mostly wood) support ...

You're right, I will try adding wood supports.

Apart from that, the steel looks quite good except for the center hole. For some reson it looks more like something sticking out than a hole in the center. You've drawn them as a + sign, as if the view was perpendicular, maybe it should be a bit skewed to match the supposed angle of the view. Some shading instead of uniform black may increase the 'hole' experience.

Yes, I had already noticed this problem and was actually trying a few changes when I saw your post.

Thanks for your suggestions.

[Ammler]

We just had a little discussion about buffers at german forums and me is wondering now, if it is possible to turn them 90° around, it would make it possible to have buffers on foundations:


Michael Blunck meant it should be possible.

Greets
Ammler

[Beardie]

We just had a little discussion about buffers at german forums and me is wondering now, if it is possible to turn them 90° around, it would make it possible to have buffers on foundations:

I believe this was something that was going to be cover (fixed) in Version V0.8.0, mart3p?

[mart3p]

We just had a little discussion about buffers at german forums and me is wondering now, if it is possible to turn them 90° around, it would make it possible to have buffers on foundations.

The thing that stops buffers being built on slopes of that direction, is the TTDPatch/OpenTTD limitations of the type of slopes on which station tiles can be built. A station tile can only be built on a slope where a straight level rail could be built.

I guess that some trick could be done by making the grf draw the rail sprites rather than using the underlying TTD sprite. It would mean a number of additional sprites though, as monorail and maglev would also have to be included.

I will consider it further.

I believe this was something that was going to be cover (fixed) in Version V0.8.0, mart3p?

Ah, no Beardie it wasn’t. You’re probably thinking of the change in orientation of the facilities buildings.

[Beardie]

I believe this was something that was going to be cover (fixed) in Version V0.8.0, mart3p?

Ah, no Beardie it wasn’t. You’re probably thinking of the change in orientation of the facilities buildings.

Ah yes that was it, i thought maybe that came under to same problem, its all a bit confusing

[mart3p]

You’re probably thinking of the change in orientation of the facilities buildings.

Ah yes that was it, i thought maybe that came under to same problem, its all a bit confusing

Well it gives me a good excuse to show what I've been working on this evening.

The direction of the facilities buildings have been changed, so they can now be built along a slope. This was requested by Smaug some time ago.

[Smaug]

The direction of the facilities buildings have been changed, so they can now be built along a slope. This was requested by Smaug some time ago.

Ah, good work mart3p. Me very happy.

[Ammler]

We just had a little discussion about buffers at german forums and me is wondering now, if it is possible to turn them 90° around, it would make it possible to have buffers on foundations.

The thing that stops buffers being built on slopes of that direction, is the TTDPatch/OpenTTD limitations of the type of slopes on which station tiles can be built. A station tile can only be built on a slope where a straight level rail could be built.

Does it need to be track tiles for the automatic orientation thing?

Greets
Ammler

[mart3p]

Does it need to be track tiles for the automatic orientation thing?

No, any station tile can use station variable 45 to respond to surrounding rails. But the build on slopes limitation applies to any station tile. Even if the tile is a ‘non-track’ tile, it still has a track direction.

[Beardie]

Whilst playing around with the set i came across an idea, as you may know when building the station roads they take up the whole tile. When the road comes to an end it may not end at a building etc, but the roads still looks like it wants to carry on, (see below pic), was wondering is there way that i wouldn't do that so that it would look better, by the road not taking up the full tile (like the normal road seen below).

But rather not just end like the normal road below i was wondering is there no like a barrier or something that could be used to show the end.

Thanks Beardie

[mart3p]

Well it might be possible, but...

With normal roads you can build a half-length road on the last tile to give the road end. As this is not possible with station tiles, doing this would mean having special road end tiles. So, as well as the additional sprites these would need to use another station id...


There was some discussion previously (which I agreed with), that the container non-track tiles have far too many red containers. As Sanchimaru is busy with real life at the moment, I have had a go myself, at reducing the number of red containers:

container colours.png (77.3 KiB) Viewed 3667 times

Please compare with Beardie's screenshot which started the discussion. Does the new colour selection look better?

[Beardie]

Well it might be possible, but...

With normal roads you can build a half-length road on the last tile to give the road end. As this is not possible with station tiles, doing this would mean having special road end tiles. So, as well as the additional sprites these would need to use another station id...

Well it was an idea, i just didn't like how the roads just ended, well least the idea is there maybe for the future,

Regarding the container colour changes, i think they look A LOT better now with less red, its a good improvement

[andythenorth]

With normal roads you can build a half-length road on the last tile to give the road end. As this is not possible with station tiles, doing this would mean having special road end tiles. So, as well as the additional sprites these would need to use another station id...

Out of interest, when the road junctions are added, how is that it done? I am guessing you look at the adjacent tiles and set sprite overlays appropriately?

I am wondering if the road markings can be split in two, and then only applied if there is an adjacent road tile? So there would be no special road end tile as such, just a tile which is half road markings, half base colour.

It's a thought anyway.

cheers,

Andy

[mart3p]

Out of interest, when the road junctions are added, how is that it done? I am guessing you look at the adjacent tiles and set sprite overlays appropriately?

Yes, that's how it's done.

I am wondering if the road markings can be split in two, and then only applied if there is an adjacent road tile? So there would be no special road end tile as such, just a tile which is half road markings, half base colour.

That would be fine if you always wanted a half-tile when the road ends. In many cases though, you want the road end to join up with (for example) a building on the next tile.

[Beardie]

In many cases though, you want the road end to join up with (for example) a building on the next tile.

I was thinking the same thing when i thought of the idea, but i solution to that is the have the road take up at least most of the tile, enough to allow a connecting building and enough to allow an end.

[andythenorth]

I was thinking the same thing when i thought of the idea, but i solution to that is the have the road take up at least most of the tile, enough to allow a connecting building and enough to allow an end.

When is enough polishing enough?

[mart3p]

While personally I don't like playing with maglevs to haul coal, iron ore etc., what I dislike even more, is seeing the ISR mineral unloader graphics used on maglev or monorail tracks. The track overlay was designed to fit normal track, if used on maglev or monorail tracks it looks awful.

So, I have made a few modifications to the graphics and the mineral unloader now has compatibility with monorail or maglev tracks.

mineral unloader 3_railtypes.png (38.58 KiB) Viewed 3416 times

If any users of the Canadian set or Narrow Gauge Rails, are worried that this will break compatibility with NG, fear not. ISR will detect one of these is being used and will continue to use normal rail overlays over the NG tracks. For future compatibility, I have also added a parameter, which allows the overlay selection to be set by the user.

[Beardie]

I was thinking the same thing when i thought of the idea, but i solution to that is the have the road take up at least most of the tile, enough to allow a connecting building and enough to allow an end.

When is enough polishing enough?

There is never enough polishing!, ,

Anyway nice changes mart3p, looks weird though with the holes in the maglev, but as you said its better, but is it me or does it look like the maglev track is floating?