[NewGRF request] Ekranoplans for a ships set

Wolf01 · Post by **Wolf01** » 09 May 2007 19:01

I would like to see ekranoplans being part of a ship set, for who don't knows them, they are like aircrafts, or hydroplanes, and they fly over the water (some of them can really fly)
here are some models:
http://thrillingwonder.blogspot.com/200 ... wcase.html

i think these ekranoplans may revive a little the ships, with they fast speed but low capacity (low related to large and slow containers)

since i'm not able to draw, i ask somebody if he wants to do the job

RainierWatcher · Post by **RainierWatcher** » 09 May 2007 21:16

I'm going to say I wish I could draw them, as it would be great to have them. I must say they are some of the coolest aircraft/flying boats ever.

Wolf01 · Post by **Wolf01** » 09 May 2007 21:48

a friend of mine drew this, to see how it would see in ottd, the problem is that he doesn't have time and will to draw a full grf

Post by **PikkaBird** » 09 May 2007 22:11

The only problem with this that I can see is that ships are currently limited to 70-odd mph.

ZxBiohazardZx · Post by **ZxBiohazardZx** » 10 May 2007 06:52

PikkaBird wrote:The only problem with this that I can see is that ships are currently limited to 70-odd mph.

cant someone write a "shipspeed"patch (like for aircrafts)

Wile E. Coyote · Post by **Wile E. Coyote** » 10 May 2007 08:35

It's question for Patch devs too, because now you can change ship speed via Callback but depending variable is one byte sized.

michael blunck · Post by **michael blunck** » 10 May 2007 09:06

[ship speed limit]

> It's question for Patch devs too [...]

I don´t see much sense in increasing ship speed, be it for TTDPatch or OTTD. Emphasis should be different for different vehicle classes.

And yes, the use of Ekranoplans (and it´s implementation as "ships") had been discussed already years ago but to no avail, mainly because of game balancing issues.

regards
Michael

hertogjan · Post by **hertogjan** » 10 May 2007 09:31

Wile E. Coyote wrote:It's question for Patch devs too, because now you can change ship speed via Callback but depending variable is one byte sized.

However, you will have to make significant modifications to the ship movement code as well. The problem is that for speeds larger than 127 km/h, the vehicle needs to be moved more than one pixel per "tick". The current code only allows for 0 or 1 pixel of movement per tick.
Of course, there are ways to get around it. I have tried it for road vehicles before (which has the same limitation due to the same reason). The code is a bit awkward, but it works (i.e., I get road vehicles that go faster than 127 km/h). I guess that for ships it will be easier to code than for road vehicles.

Killer 11 · Post by **Killer 11** » 10 May 2007 12:57

michael blunck wrote:[ship speed limit]

> It's question for Patch devs too [...]

I don´t see much sense in increasing ship speed, be it for TTDPatch or OTTD. Emphasis should be different for different vehicle classes.

And yes, the use of Ekranoplans (and it´s implementation as "ships") had been discussed already years ago but to no avail, mainly because of game balancing issues.

regards
Michael

Actualy making trains lose they're current transport domination and be equal to ships(Ekranoplans) seems to actualy fix the balancing issue.
And besides if the thing is real and it DOES work and is actualy more efficient than other stuff then why can't we include it? Maybe not until something like 2015 but late years need more variation anyways.

Wolf01 · Post by **Wolf01** » 10 May 2007 17:16

Killer 11 wrote:Maybe not until something like 2015 but late years need more variation anyways.

why not 1970? the first famous ekranoplane (the caspian monster) was built in 1966

michael blunck wrote:I don´t see much sense in increasing ship speed, be it for TTDPatch or OTTD. Emphasis should be different for different vehicle classes.

And yes, the use of Ekranoplans (and it´s implementation as "ships") had been discussed already years ago but to no avail, mainly because of game balancing issues.

i can see some protectionism about ttdpatch, seem that you don't want that ottd implement grf things before ttdpatch, this happened to eyecandy too, we have the patch but we must wait for ttdpatch newobjects
i know that ttdpatch is the home of newgrf, but if we want make new things, you shouldn't lament, we don't support all the ttdpatch grf sets, why not the contrary?

belugas · Post by **belugas** » 10 May 2007 18:22

Wolf01 wrote:i can see some protectionism about ttdpatch, seem that you don't want that ottd implement grf things before ttdpatch, this happened to eyecandy too, we have the patch but we must wait for ttdpatch newobjects

For the record, I do not feel that this is true. Now and then, peter1138 and I have made some changes to the newgrf specs, whatever the level of modification. I've always felt that ttdpatch devs are open minded and willing to cooperate. The reason why you have to wait for newobjects is quite simple : the work has already been started. So i would say that just by respect of their work, we should at least wait for it to be completed. But nothing stops you to at least implement what can be done based on the specs of newobjets already provided.

Agreed, there are some pieces undefined (or not completed) yet, but you can use some default values that will be easily changed by the real ones.

Further on, if ever your implementation superseeds newobjects with some cool new features or possibilities, it will be (i'm pretty sure) possible to incorporate them, given they are worth it and documented well enough.
Plus, you will be able to construct your own grf to prove that is does work, conceptually and graphically.

This been said, up to your keyboards, gentlemen.

And please... stop that silly war between ttdpatch and openttd... REALLY not worth it. And this is addressed to everyone, not only openttd users...

michael blunck · Post by **michael blunck** » 10 May 2007 18:28

Wolf01 wrote:
michael blunck wrote:I don´t see much sense in increasing ship speed, be it for TTDPatch or OTTD. Emphasis should be different for different vehicle classes. [...]
i can see some protectionism about ttdpatch, seem that you don't want that ottd implement grf things before ttdpatch, this happened to eyecandy too, we have the patch but we must wait for ttdpatch newobjects
i know that ttdpatch is the home of newgrf, but if we want make new things, you shouldn't lament, we don't support all the ttdpatch grf sets, why not the contrary?

I can see the usual unfounded insinuation, although I explicitly wrote "be it for TTDPatch or OTTD".

A russian-type ekranoplan had been on my to-do list quite some years ago. The reason why it didn´t make it into the game is in no way linked with bad-talking about OTTD or protectionism for TTDPatch.

Your conjectures are just plain silly.

Michael

eis_os · Post by **eis_os** » 13 May 2007 13:59

OT: Some sidenote: I haven't seen a newgrf spec for newobjects, I don't consider some action 5 system for it as usefully. Still there a things like the newobjects way of defining layouts unclear for me, so I haven't continued work and will only when I found a good system.

Aswell I used dword size years and will do internal range limiting so it isn't limited to TTDPatch years for the grf authors. (So compatibility with OTTD)
If there is an good way to define newobjects by OTTD the system can be used for TTDPatch aswell... (Thats true for other features too) Well if you define your own Action5 based system, go ahead... There are ways for grf authors to detect the System and switch systems in the grf so it will work on both...

Post by **peter1138** » 13 May 2007 14:17

Oskar, is there any more to the newobjects spec than is currently on the wiki? Currently there is no much to go on, but I wouldn't want to make any changes to it that would conflict with your work...

RainierWatcher · Post by **RainierWatcher** » 13 May 2007 16:31

michael blunck wrote: A russian-type ekranoplan had been on my to-do list quite some years ago. The reason why it didn´t make it into the game is in no way linked with bad-talking about OTTD or protectionism for TTDPatch.

Michael

So why could it not be done then? As OTTD is standalone apart from the graphics AFAIK (and the music), could it not be implemented even if there was some sort of problem that made it difficult in TTDP?

Ben_K · Post by **Ben_K** » 13 May 2007 20:50

I think you'll find the answer is yes... but you need someone to do it!

As with all the great suggestions etc.

RainierWatcher · Post by **RainierWatcher** » 13 May 2007 21:23

Yes, I wouldn't have a clue where to start frankly, i did AS level computing, and that was with Visual basic, not C.

Ben_K · Post by **Ben_K** » 13 May 2007 21:32

Then (sadly) you know more than me!

Post by **Dave** » 13 May 2007 23:32

RainierWatcher wrote:
michael blunck wrote: A russian-type ekranoplan had been on my to-do list quite some years ago. The reason why it didn´t make it into the game is in no way linked with bad-talking about OTTD or protectionism for TTDPatch.

Michael
So why could it not be done then? As OTTD is standalone apart from the graphics AFAIK (and the music), could it not be implemented even if there was some sort of problem that made it difficult in TTDP?

It can't be done in the Patch (yet). Michael was referring to the speed of ships remaining the same. Water-going craft don't often do over 70 (79?) mph, and changing this for the sake of one vehicle would be like spending hours slaving over a hot stove to end up with a plateful of baked beans.

But sure - if someone wants to change it in OTTD, neither MB nor Oskar have suggested you shouldn't.

Killer 11 · Post by **Killer 11** » 14 May 2007 13:58

it'sa not one but atleast 4 and only counting big stuff there are a lot of small sized ekranoplans that were built.

HYere's a chart including both fictional and real ekranoplans

So I guess this makes like a full ekranoplan set huh?

Transport Tycoon Forums

[NewGRF request] Ekranoplans for a ships set

[NewGRF request] Ekranoplans for a ships set

Who is online