Transport Tycoon Forums

How about you have have the ability for two, very close cities merge, the smaller becoming part of the larger one. This would allow the creation of mega cities, and keep me from accidently placing stations in the wrong city when trying for subsidy.

There can be megacities with Marcin's larger cities switch.

eis_os wrote:We run out of space!

But I suggested before to combine some switches like new grfs for rvs, trains, planes and ships to one switch called new grf. That saves 3 switches already! Setting this type of switches on doesn't mean you have to use new grf. Only if you like them and then the patch wil find them for you. Same for maximum number of rvs etc. Just make it one switch, this doesn't mean you have to use all the 240 slots for rvs etc.

Actually, may I make a suggestion here as far as saving switches.

There are a good many of the switches that we could eliminate entirely - I mean, build them into the Patch so if you are using the Patch they're always on, because they do not affect gameplay in and of themselves. These are:

New vehicles - You could make it so it always looks in the /newgrfs/ directory for new grf files. If it finds any there, it uses them. If not, it doesn't. Simple as that. If you don't like some new GRFs, don't put them in the newgrfs directory. This saves all the new vehicles switches, and the new signals, etc.

More vehicles - You could make it so that the patch detected when you were running out of vehicles, and it automatically gave you more. Or maybe just make it so that having the patch gives you tons of possible vehicles. Mostly we have enough memory so this shouldn't hurt anything, right?

Office Towers Accept Food - What possible reason would there be not to use this one?

Win 2000/XP Compatibility - Ditto.

General Fixes - Ditto.

Show Vehicle Speed - Ditto.

Show Full Date - why wouldn't you want this?

Faster Debt Management - It doesn't change anything if you don't want to use it.

Long bridges - If you don't like them, don't build any.

Go To Depot - If you don't like using this, just don't use it.

There are several more that I would argue fall into the category of "if you don't like it, don't do it, but the Patch lets you anyway."

Large Stations

Mammoth Trains

Keep Small Airports

Extra Dynamite

Selectable Cargo

Refit Trains

Engine Persistent

Bribe Option

Manage Companies

Signals on Traffic Side.

I think you could just get rid of all those switches and make them an integral part of the Patch - when you're using it, that's what you get. That would both make the Patch less intimidating to use, and free up switches for use in further testing and new developments.

Thoughts?

I agree with you for all of those, although some people who don't have them "on" may protest.

See, the point I'm making is, all the switches on that list don't affect anything directly. They make certain actions possible, but they don't force you to make them. If you don't like long bridges, OK, don't build any. If you don't like making depots a destination, OK, don't tell any of your trains to go there.

The switches that actually do affect gameplay, like mountains and curve handling, that sort of thing, well, we can leave those as switches.

I disagree. Several of the switches do alter gameplay quite significantly. Persistent engines, small airports (for the AI especially!), selectable cargo, long bridges (also for the AI)...

You'd have to disable them for the AI if you aren't going to use them.

Unless there's a real good reason to remove a switch, I'm not going to. It's not going to save any space either, because the code to do the patching is in there whether it's a switch or not. It being a switch makes maybe 20 bytes difference...

Well, I activate most of the switches so they don't bother me afterwards, I say if they are there invented then they must be good

The first time I used the patch, some switches were difficult, but there's a clear manual on the patchsite and I found my way to this forum where I could ask about those I didn't understand. Once you're in the community, new switches are very easy to use, there's an explanation with every alpha release

Think about it, a lot of the hardcore players aren't even on this forum, they are on the newsgroup or on the mailinglist, just ask the patchman
I'm sure not all of them activate all switches, so suddenly removing them could cause some aggravation

Anyway, that's why I like this patch, using some switch is your choice

And think about Andrex and Shadow, now they can indulge themselves in creating a big newbies tool, don't take away their hobby

Just reading a post by krtaylor on cost of electrified rails and in it he had a bit about offloading at the end of a diesel line and reloading on electric line for realistic game play. This got me to thinking about different gauge lines.

In Australia all states are on different gaugese (eg NSW- Standard, Vic- Broad, Qland -Narrow, SA- Broad). This was basically put into place pre federation to stop transporting goods from one state to another. If something was going from one state to another it would have to be trans shipped from one gauge to another (manually shifted) or the cars would have their bogies changed. Eventually a Standard gauge track was put in between states but they still use their own gauges.

My suggestion? Different gauge tracks. Probably impossible but thought I would add it to the list.

Patchman wrote:I disagree. Several of the switches do alter gameplay quite significantly. Persistent engines, small airports (for the AI especially!), selectable cargo, long bridges (also for the AI)...

You'd have to disable them for the AI if you aren't going to use them.

Unless there's a real good reason to remove a switch, I'm not going to. It's not going to save any space either, because the code to do the patching is in there whether it's a switch or not. It being a switch makes maybe 20 bytes difference...

I may agree to remove a few 'always-on' switches, not to save space, but to make more room in TTDXC and make it easier to find the important switches in that ocean of checkboxes that is TTDXC 1.6.

Madmick wrote:My suggestion? Different gauge tracks. Probably impossible but thought I would add it to the list.

TTD can only have 3 types of track maximum so this would be impossible without getting rid of at least one of the other track types (and I, for one, wouldn't want to do that).

krtaylor wrote:Show Full Date - why wouldn't you want this?

I prefer the old way, so I don't have this turned on. If I want the full date, I'll press F1. It's just the way I'm used to it, like the litres thing.

I understand what you're saying, but I'm with Josef on this. TTDPatch is good for a number of reasons, but one main reason is that nothing is forced on you, you can have what you like.

Andrex wrote:

Patchman wrote:I disagree. Several of the switches do alter gameplay quite significantly. Persistent engines, small airports (for the AI especially!), selectable cargo, long bridges (also for the AI)...

You'd have to disable them for the AI if you aren't going to use them.

Unless there's a real good reason to remove a switch, I'm not going to. It's not going to save any space either, because the code to do the patching is in there whether it's a switch or not. It being a switch makes maybe 20 bytes difference...

I may agree to remove a few 'always-on' switches, not to save space, but to make more room in TTDXC and make it easier to find the important switches in that ocean of checkboxes that is TTDXC 1.6.

I have the other opinion. I'd like to have as much switches as possible for every thing in the game. And I'm not afraid of a number of switches, because I edit them in the text editor. For tools like TTD configurator there is a possible solution - to crate tabs (property pages) and to group switches to pages by their effect. For example, vehicles tab, towns tab, and so on.

OK, here's a compromise.

I had gotten the impression that we were "running out" of switches somehow, that there were only so many "slots" and we had used them all up. Apparently this isn't so, you can't run out of switches.

All right then, we just leave all the switches as they are. But for the TPS/TPC gurus, they could have a page with the switches that people are "most likely to change" - that is, the ones I didn't list - and then have an "advanced" tab with the rest of the things, which would be previously set to the most common settings, but if you really wanted you could go there and change them.

Nice idea, krtaylor. And Josef, I don't know how to say it polite, but you seemed pissed off in your reply? Am I correct or am I viewing the world through a blurred pair of glasses? It surely was no offense on your work but krtaylor and me really got the impression that finding new switches was getting difficult.

I prefer to have tabs for different types of switches, like a tab for vehicles, one for economic patches etc.

There must be trams in it
(extra tab for road construction)

Trams are impossible.

How about building railway or roads on a slope. Just like the new busstation that you can build on a slope.


An example of my idea:

George wrote:I have the other opinion. I'd like to have as much switches as possible for every thing in the game. And I'm not afraid of a number of switches, because I edit them in the text editor. For tools like TTD configurator there is a possible solution - to crate tabs (property pages) and to group switches to pages by their effect. For example, vehicles tab, towns tab, and so on.

It seems you still have the old TTDXC 1.4 or something. I have added tabs and everything is more or less organized since TTDXC 1.5, released long ago.

I already had the 'most used' and 'advanced' switches idea for TTDXC, and I don't discard it.