Transport Tycoon Forums

Voyager One wrote:May I give you an opinion, a small remark: IMO you shoud change the name of the Hovercraft. Bakewell? Isn't that the "original" OTTD name?

It's the original hovercraft. I don't actually include it in FISH, I just don't disable the default vehicle. I guess it shouldn't be in the screenshot really

When I play with ships - and I often do - I most of the time refit them so they can bring another cargo back. However, sometimes I bring fuel from a refinery and bring back construction goods or something. Costs for this 'refit' are zero. I wonder if that can change, because it is not really realistic.

And might it be an option to carry two types of cargo with one vessel? I know some ships here which carry both gravel and sand.

Woutert wrote:And might it be an option to carry two types of cargo with one vessel? I know some ships here which carry both gravel and sand.

AFAIK, this is impossible due to OTTD game machine.

unless articulation is available for ships?

I think Andy said awhile back that this wasn't possible either.

I just like to ask, are the size tried to depend on capacity?
As I count the small coaster has 5 section of loading space, and has 720t capacity, but the large coaster has 10 section (twice as the small) and has 1080t capacity (not the twice as small). Shouldn't we get back the old medium coaster graphics for the small coaster?

colossal404 wrote:I just like to ask, are the size tried to depend on capacity? Shouldn't we get back the old medium coaster graphics for the small coaster?

Yes, kind of. Either the small coaster should be bigger, or the medium coaster graphics should be used but smaller. I'll figure out which when I start fixing it.

Number of hatches is one valid measure. The other is whether the small and large coasters look different enough to be interesting. It was boring to have lots of ships that looked the same, 'just a bit longer'

andythenorth wrote:

colossal404 wrote:I just like to ask, are the size tried to depend on capacity? Shouldn't we get back the old medium coaster graphics for the small coaster?

Yes, kind of. Either the small coaster should be bigger, or the medium coaster graphics should be used but smaller. I'll figure out which when I start fixing it.
Number of hatches is one valid measure. The other is whether the small and large coasters look different enough to be interesting. It was boring to have lots of ships that looked the same, 'just a bit longer'

My tests show me that capacity above 1000 is useful in ECS games. Hope to see more of them

George wrote: My tests show me that capacity above 1000 is useful in ECS games. Hope to see more of them

Why do you think so?

IMO, we should carry on that discussion in Andy´s thread over here.

As I already wrote there, ship capacities shouldn´t only depend on "realistic" numbers, but also on industry output, which might be quite different.

Maybe sort of an agreement between us could result in some progress on this issue.

regards
Michael

George wrote:My tests show me that capacity above 1000 is useful in ECS games. Hope to see more of them

How big?

andythenorth wrote:

George wrote:My tests show me that capacity above 1000 is useful in ECS games. Hope to see more of them

How big?

Up to 2500 tons (2500000 litres). Oil rig on the highest production level produces about 3000000 litres of oil a month. A trip would take 4 months (average), so it would require 5 ships of such huge capacity. Imho that is a good number of ships per oil rig. Of cause in the beginning, when the oil rig produces 32000 litres of oil a month, such sips would be totally useless, but smaller ships should operate there. When production grows, small ships go to the other oil rig, and large ships come in service. This way there would always be about 5 ships per oil rig, but it would be different ships according to production level. Current situation, when the only thing the player can control is amount of ships, leading to have 40 ships per oil rig in service looks totally unrealistic. Large ships are invented IRL for such transportations, and I see no reason to miss it in game.

michael blunck wrote:

George wrote:My tests show me that capacity above 1000 is useful in ECS games. Hope to see more of them

Why do you think so?

Because 40 ships servicing 1 oil rig looks odd.

michael blunck wrote:IMO, we should carry on that discussion in Andy´s thread over here.
As I already wrote there, ship capacities shouldn´t only depend on "realistic" numbers, but also on industry output, which might be quite different.

I did not test RL, I tested ECS and output of ECS industries.

michael blunck wrote:Maybe sort of an agreement between us could result in some progress on this issue.

Output of ECS industries is documented on the wiki. The thing you have balance is trip length in days (speed), capacity and a number of ships. Speed does not role a lot (I'd say it does not role at all). So the only thing is number of ships and capacity. IMHO, the best number of ships is 5 (suggest you number if you do not think so). So, capacity = IndustryProduction * DaysInTransit / DaysInMonth / BestShipsAmount. I get 2400

Improved the Large Trader (top is original version):

Imho, FISH ships are too cheap in comparison to New Ships, while New Ships are too expansive in comparison to JP train set.

George wrote:Imho, FISH ships are too cheap in comparison to New Ships, while New Ships are too expansive in comparison to JP train set.

Probably the easiest answer is a cost multiplier parameter, same as added to HEQS. Balancing against all sets is just impossible.

andythenorth wrote:

George wrote:Imho, FISH ships are too cheap in comparison to New Ships, while New Ships are too expansive in comparison to JP train set.

Probably the easiest answer is a cost multiplier parameter, same as added to HEQS. Balancing against all sets is just impossible.

Sounds reasonable!
Also, some default values can be chosen automatically when known sets are loaded.

Do you know of a bug where occasionally a part of (a long) ship temporarily is invisible? I'm having difficulties reproducing so asking here before I put all my time into things you already know!

Arie- wrote:Do you know of a bug where occasionally a part of (a long) ship temporarily is invisible? I'm having difficulties reproducing so asking here before I put all my time into things you already know!

Yes, some of the bigger ships have clipping problems, they're just too big for the game. Good spot

There is no fix, unless someone can patch the sprite engine, and even that may not be possible.

(Ships could be made smaller, but that's not interesting).

I want to express my appreciation to the developers. Finally a great addition to the ships of TTD, I noticed some neat details last week, my river boat was fully loaded with coal and it was laying deeper in the water indicating it was heavier, minor change in the sprite drawing but just making it all much more realistic. Keep up the good work!

Thanks

Eelco wrote:my river boat was fully loaded with coal and it was laying deeper in the water indicating it was heavier, minor change in the sprite drawing but just making it all much more realistic

I 'borrowed' that idea from Michael Blunck's NewShips grf which has had it for many years

The animated wake was 'all my own idea though'

A new release of FISH is being prepared. There are more improvements to existing ships, and *maybe* some exciting new ships, if we have enough time...