Transport Tycoon Forums

I agree with both the posts above... it's much more fun to play with a set that has "differentiated" trucks, i.e. that includes at least one "big" and one "small" truck series at any point in the game. It would be even more interesting to let trucks from an older series be still competitive in terms of purchase or running costs, so that players will be encourage to carefully choose which truck series to use according to the service type. Otherwise, we'd just be using the same one model for our entire truck fleet and that would be boring...

George how many truck series are you planning to include in total? Now that we can have more IDs in OTTD, we can add many additional truck types...

Snail wrote:George how many truck series are you planning to include in total? Now that we can have more IDs in OTTD, we can add many additional truck types...

As soon as DaleStan provides support for extended byte in action 3 in NFORenum, I plan to provide about 25 truck series.
The main problem I have now is to plan the future of the set and define trucks to provide. The main problem is that I have doubts about number of trailers to provide. We can't attach them as wagons, so I have to provide more and more trucks in the list, and that makes the list really huge now.
On the other side, as soon as this patch http://bugs.openttd.org/task/1941 is implemented, the list would become small and I could provide all the possible road trains.
And then I come to the problem with acceleration model. Unfortunately, currently OTTD does not provide it, and we can't have powerful and week models. This makes the capacity the only characteristic to compare, making the player to choose the RV with the highest capacity.
That's why I'd like to know players point of view for the characteristics according to the current and future possibilities.

GEORGE!! I downloaded your truck demo and this has apeared next to my manger. LRV truck demo is the only Grf.

comm Cody wrote:GEORGE!! I downloaded your truck demo and this has apeared next to my manger. LRV truck demo is the only Grf.

Small advertising of the JP set

George wrote:Small advertising of the JP set

Hahaha Thanks man! Nice easter egg. благодарю вас!

George wrote: And then I come to the problem with acceleration model. Unfortunately, currently OTTD does not provide it, and we can't have powerful and week models. This makes the capacity the only characteristic to compare, making the player to choose the RV with the highest capacity.

It's a really difficult problem to solve. I have the same issue in the Heavy Equipment (HEQS) RV set. Without realistic acceleration, there's no reason to choose a slow but powerful truck versus an underpowered but fast truck with the same capacity. I haven't spent much time balancing running costs, but as far as I can see RV running costs need to be quite low to make money, so it's not easy to make some vehicles a *lot* more expensive to run. Purchase price is a useful variable though.

@ George, I'll be interested in your solution as HEQS hasn't been balanced yet and needs work

If i may, as planning a vehicle set of my own, variation is definitely a problem, but there are two other variables which can make for interesting choices during gameplay -- operation costs and lifetime. Consider those, George, to provide balance in vehicle choices...

George George George, Look at the OpenTTD Changelog!!!!!
Darn you Mr. Mann But I was in a rush.

What do toilets have to do with this

comm Cody wrote:George George George, Look at the OpenTTD Changelog!!!!!

frosch wrote:in r16042. Build&Refit might follow later, when newgrf support is ready for that.

What GRF support is required?

comm Cody wrote:George George George, Look at the OpenTTD Changelog!!!!!
Darn you Mr. Mann But I was in a rush.

My pleasure

George wrote:

frosch wrote:in r16042. Build&Refit might follow later, when newgrf support is ready for that.

What GRF support is required?

Basically http://bugs.openttd.org/task/2581, i.e. support for CB 15 in purchase list, so the actual capacity and purchase cost (including refit cost) can be displayed. I doubt that all newgrfs will support that out of the box. However this task is also highly required for NoAI.

Furthermore there are these questions:
[*] Display refitted capacity/purchase cost additionally to the non-refitted stuff. Might look complicated, so maybe replace the other texts.
[*] What about cargo-subtypes? These could only be selected when the actual engine is already selected. Might make sense for RV, ships and aircraft, but less for trains when subcargos of wagons usually depend on the front engine. In summary: Maybe no support for subcargo in purchase list, as quite complicated to use.
[*] Buttons for "buy" and "buy&refit", or only "buy" and ctrl+"buy". (I guess the latter)
[*] ...

There is no version of 16043 for win32?

afaik no. Check in half an hour for todays nightly.

in first place, i like very much the trucks! and a personal poit of view, i think that truks with trailers, the cabin of the truck shoud be fix with the attached boxvan, and only the trailer following the fix cabin-boxvan part. and only for the boxvan shoul follow curving the cabin (my point of view). however, apart little visualisation bugs (specialy in tunnels) the LV5 is a great succes.

After a lot of doubts I've decided to return to LV4's schema for vehicles. At least trucks. They would be represented as a single sprite. Whose trucks, who do not fit 8/8 template, would be represented as a two part vehicle, where the front part would be transparent part. I understand that it would keep tunnels, bridges and slope problems, but I do not see any solution nor any devs plan to provide some new code to provide something better. The view of bending RV makes me sick

I think the current vehicles of LV5 is very nice, and do not throw away these beautiful drawings. It "simple" needs to code properties to them.
But if you code the LV4 sprites to a visible-invisible part, it would be nice too, because my main problem with the current LV4 is the trucks is intersect with each other, the tunnel and bridge glitches are secondary.
I prefer the first way, but it's Your choice, and I like any option.
Good luck and keep up the good work!

Long vehicles v4 introduses amazing trucks and buses. And changes costs of HEQS and eGRVTS So far it isn't problem for me, because now I try to make "nice and realistic" map. But in normal game it is a big problem (cost of HEQS RV's changed from 3k to 25k or even 45k).

What I need in v5?
! No diving vehicles into another (some small vehicles, like generic cars can hide into big busses)
! No levitating on slopes
- Articulated vehicles should be articulated
- No bridge glitches
- Better view on curves (but it could be impossible with nonarticulated vehicles)

That set is great!

Kogut wrote:Long vehicles v4 introduses amazing trucks and buses. And changes costs of HEQS and eGRVTS So far it isn't problem for me, because now I try to make "nice and realistic" map. But in normal game it is a big problem (cost of HEQS RV's changed from 3k to 25k or even 45k).
What I need in v5?
- No bridge glitches

I made many tests. It works well for model with bending in curves. I think it is not the right way.

So. There would be some bridge glitches.

But what with trucks articulated in reality?