Transport Tycoon Forums

THANKYOU!!!

uzurpator wrote:the magic "station roof" yellow

That yellow is not magic, and never has been.
The "magic" is in how the sprite is drawn on the screen, not the colors that the sprite contains.

Toni Babelony wrote:That reminds me, there are also some 3rd rail lines in France, one even with freight traffic if i'm correct.

Yes, you're totally correct. Third rail was used in the region around Paris since the beginning of the century as an alternative to steam, and was also adopted in the Maurienne line (south-east of the country) until the Seventies.
For this reason, even the FRSet will have to use 3rd rail tracks quite extensively.

Ideally, we would need to code engines that work both under catenary and with 3rd rail, as there used to be locomotives with pantos and third rail shoes mounted simultaneously.

Poke Aegir. At one point, he had a little patch that permitted all trains on the third track type, or something like that. Obviously, it won't be quite that simple, but it's a good start.

Or maybe just wait for newroutes, which should support this.

Oi, no poking me...

And yes, I was screwing with the elrails patch at one point to allow trains to drive on the third rail type, and vice versa. Well, not quite vice versa, my logic as a little screwy at that point, didn't know exactly what piece of code I was hitting with a hammer at that point.

I see... we might need something of the like though. More specifically, some trains should be allowed to drive under catenary or third rail (either should be fine).
Going one step forward, I was planning to draw two sets of sprites for each engine of this type: one with pantos up to display when running on catenary-powered tracks, and one with pantos down to display with 3rd rail. Will it be possible (with newroutes or other features)?

It should be possible with newroutes, though you may have to make an explicit request for a variable that contains the tile's track type.

Bastiaan wrote:Like Purno said, the third rails should be coded as catenary, so that diesel trains can use them too.

Forgot that point indeed. At the current system third rail can be used replacign the third rail type in TTD (monorail/maglev), which means it'll be a completely independant system. We'd need a patch feature to let ordinary trains drive on third rail, but that reminds me, it should also be possible to have both catenary and third rail on the same track, shouldn't it? The 'handle-thirdrail-like-catenary' suggestion was only for graphical issues, so 3rd rail could be drawn at switches.

iNVERTED wrote:See screenshot.

I would suggest reversing the places of the GRF's involved here. So, for example, if the viaduct was ABOVE the shikansen tracks, you would put it BELOW. If the reverse is current, then reverse it again.

Also for some reason the viaduct has a maximum speed of 20 mph. Not very practical.

Thats because it replaces the wood bridge, and is designed to be the "early" bridge between 1921 and 1930. Making it any faster than that would render the game too easy - it's a challenge starting in the early years, not a cakewalk.

And finally, show a bit of respect, don't just stomp in here making demands, it's very rude. How about EXPLAINING your problem more than you did, and actually noticing that there is probaby REASOING behind why it has such a speed limit, rather than assuming that Pikka has done this to annoy you.

Enableing new bridge support could help aswell....

Raichase wrote:Thats because it replaces the wood bridge, and is designed to be the "early" bridge between 1921 and 1930. Making it any faster than that would render the game too easy

Er, actually, the viaduct is supposed to have a speedlimit of 80mph. If it doesn't, it's either because he has newbridges off or because another grf is changing it back.

eis_os wrote:Enableing new bridge support could help aswell....

You're right, it works perfectly now.

Snail wrote:

Toni Babelony wrote:That reminds me, there are also some 3rd rail lines in France, one even with freight traffic if i'm correct.

Yes, you're totally correct. Third rail was used in the region around Paris since the beginning of the century as an alternative to steam, and was also adopted in the Maurienne line (south-east of the country) until the Seventies.
For this reason, even the FRSet will have to use 3rd rail tracks quite extensively.

Ideally, we would need to code engines that work both under catenary and with 3rd rail, as there used to be locomotives with pantos and third rail shoes mounted simultaneously.

The Class 92 that operates the Channel Tunnel freights is a dual-collection locomotive - it's got the DC shoe and the AC catenary - it runs both sides of the Channel.

DaleStan wrote:That yellow is not magic, and never has been.
The "magic" is in how the sprite is drawn on the screen, not the colors that the sprite contains.

Indeed - any chance to use the same trick for bridges to create an under-bridge shadow?

Actually - any chance to use the same trick for all sprites (imagine live shadows on vehicles!)

["shadows"]

> any chance to use the same trick for bridges to create an under-bridge shadow?

That must be possible, see Oskar´s test bridge.

> Actually - any chance to use the same trick for all sprites (imagine live shadows on vehicles!)

Yeah. Almost two (?) years ago, Oskar and me had carried out some experiments on this. However, shadows for train vehicles are very small in most directions and hence hard to see (only for the first/last vehicle, due to the angle of light) and therefore have been found to be unnecessary at that point in time.

In any case, this would need some coding work.

regards
Michael

TTD has no concept of realistic or physical correct shadows (or near correct)
The screenshots you mention are spritestream experimental shots. (showing recolor tinting, like for stations.)
With seperate sprites you can do that aswell, however I can say you that the sprite sorter won't be happy.

http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?p=279266#279266

And about physical correctness problems:
http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?p=282677#282677

Ah yes, I even forgot the name. "Spritestreams".

> I can't currently reveal the internal logic of it, otherwise some OpenTTD folks will write it and claim it's their Code...

ROFL

regards
Michael

Looks good, but personally I would have made them less yellow.

i have suggested this to pikka, but he is unsure on whether this idea would look good see attachment
So I'm asking users opinions on whether this would look nicer than the current system

'to justify the dig' wrote: Henry says:
shall i dig the viaduct thread?
David says:
if you like

You could do the new system for bridges with lengths 2, 4, 6, 8, etc., and the old system for lengths 1, 3, 5, 7 etc., perhaps?