[OTTD] Monorail Infrastructure Conversion Set

[ostlandr]

Awesome work!

I really like the new sprites. The old monorail graphics looked as though they should be elevated, but weren't.

Too bad the existing bridge code doesn't allow for realistic elevated rail structures.

[lawton27]

In advanced grf coding I know it's possible to have buildings change there sprite depending on what's on the tiles next to them, it would be relay neat if this did this, say the new graphics where only applied if the monorail track was touching some patched road, a building, or another urban monorail track (sideways only or it would just all be changed).

Also, have you thought about doing something like this but for maglev?

[zero.eight]

Awesome work!

I really like the new sprites. The old monorail graphics looked as though they should be elevated, but weren't.

Too bad the existing bridge code doesn't allow for realistic elevated rail structures.

Thanks. I haven't worked on this for a while but I should be able to get back to it now. Speaking of bridges, I had a look at graphically replacing the default ones because they are the only part of the track infrastructure that hasn't been replaced. I concluded that it would be better to create a new set rather than fiddle with the existing ones. What I want to do is create bridges with concrete edges in the same style as the replacement track sprites. But that is a project for another day.

EDIT: something like this:

/EDIT

In advanced grf coding I know it's possible to have buildings change there sprite depending on what's on the tiles next to them, it would be relay neat if this did this, say the new graphics where only applied if the monorail track was touching some patched road, a building, or another urban monorail track (sideways only or it would just all be changed).

I don't think this is possible (yet?) with rail types, but it would be an interesting feature. Arguably, to give the player full control over how the tracks look, it would be better to create a new rail type that uses the new graphics, which would allow both the old and the new style tracks to be placed as desired (although not together on diagonals). I should be fairly close to releasing MICS as a new rail type - may need some graphical polish first.

Also, have you thought about doing something like this but for maglev?

I will get round to doing this at some point. It's either #2 or #3 on my to-do list.

[Drury]

And what about no bridges/TTO style/awesome stuff?

[openttd_rulez]

even better-make the bridges look like elevated MRT bridges. Let the concrete bases fade out on the bridgehead.
you can also use the "pipeline"-like tubular bridges from TBRS and add maintenance steps or something.

[kamnet]

Request: add Toyland support so that graphics can be used with Toyland 2 Mars conversion. Please?

[zero.eight]

Request: add Toyland support so that graphics can be used with Toyland 2 Mars conversion. Please?

Will do. Testing it now.

[zero.eight]

Updated to 2.0.0.

MICS has been re-implemented in NML using rail types and a few extra features have been added. Details in first post. Downloads from BaNaNaS.

Please let me know if anything's broken.

[V453000 :)]

Excellent! I always missed compatibility with bridges and all landscapes.

One thing to note, I find the "Urban Monorail Construction" name of the rails weird. I would just keep Monorail as for the railtype menu, eventually Monorail Construction for the railtype tool window.
It is shorter, standard and clear on the first sight what it is. Also, there seems to be a space missing before the string so does not quite align with the rest of the names properly.

... there are various name strings that can be changed, note that they are not all the same, some are "Monorail", some are "Monorail Construction" and so on. In the dropdown menu where you choose the railtype, name is enough I think - the Construction is obvious and just adds more text for confusion (same like Urban as mentioned).

name Name of this railtype
toolbar_caption Caption of the build rail toolbar. In earlier versions this is the same as the 'name'
menu_text string Shown in the dropdown menu for all railtypes
build_window_caption Caption of the build vehicle window
autoreplace_text String for the autoreplace window
new_engine_text String for the "We have invented a new <rail type> engine" news message

I would not use "Urban" mainly because when you have the original word Monorail, people automatically know what it is without even reading it, just seeing it. Also, because the newGRF only changes graphics, no functioning; it still is monorail.

I think this is worth considering

[AMX]

The new version can be used as an additional railtype.
It needs to have a distinct name for that.

[V453000 :)]

Would that be possible to rename it only when it does that? Also, the space in the front and "Construction" only in tools header comments still apply

[zero.eight]

I find the "Urban Monorail Construction" name of the rails weird. I would just keep Monorail as for the railtype menu, eventually Monorail Construction for the railtype tool window.
It is shorter, standard and clear on the first sight what it is.

I followed the same format that is used by the default strings ( <railtype name> + " construction" for the drop down menu; <railtype name> + " Construction" for the tool window ). MICS shouldn't care about any other rail types apart from MONO so it doesn't check whether other (custom) rail types are added (apart from whether it has space to add another) and therefore doesn't know what format is used by other rail types in the dropdown list or elsewhere, so I think it's best to be consistent with the default strings in this case.

Also, there seems to be a space missing before the string so does not quite align with the rest of the names properly.

Seems that NUTS has an extra space at the beginning of the rail type dropdown list string whereas the original strings do not. I'm not aware of any other rail type NewGRFs that start that start that string with a space.

I would not use "Urban" mainly because when you have the original word Monorail, people automatically know what it is without even reading it, just seeing it. Also, because the newGRF only changes graphics, no functioning; it still is monorail.

The "Urban" part is indeed to distinguish "Monorail" from "Urban Monorail", which may both be the names of buildable rail types depending on how the parameters have been set. In the default case of Monorail being converted to Urban Monorail and no additional railtype being added, I think it is still useful to rename Monorail to Urban Monorail in order to confirm that Monorail is being modified, especially since the documentation refers to parameters that affect "Urban Monorail" (the same rail type that you get if Monorail is modified or if it is added as a new rail type) and it would be require more explanation if Monorail's name wasn't changed.