Back to Home / #openttd / 2017 / 07 / Prev Day | Next Day
#openttd IRC Logs for 2017-07-15

---Logopened Sat Jul 15 00:00:12 2017
01:06-!-Cubey [~Coobies@2601:14b:c203:7078:e431:8d51:23da:8b68] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
01:22-!-cosmobird [~cosmobird@106.51.227.161] has joined #openttd
01:22-!-cosmobird is "realname" on #communitydata #hot #josm #OpenRailwayMap #openttd #openttdcoop #openttdcoop.wiki #osm #open-maps-more-than-maps #osm-asia #coopetition
01:31-!-cosmobird [~cosmobird@106.51.227.161] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
01:36-!-sla_ro|master [~sla.ro@95.76.45.217] has joined #openttd
01:36-!-sla_ro|master is "slamaster" on @#sla #openttd #love
02:20-!-andythenorth [~andytheno@cpc87219-aztw31-2-0-cust178.18-1.cable.virginm.net] has joined #openttd
02:20-!-andythenorth is "andythenorth" on #openttd
02:36-!-Biolunar [Biolunar@dslb-092-073-186-118.092.073.pools.vodafone-ip.de] has joined #openttd
02:36-!-Biolunar is "Biolunar" on #openttd #suckless
02:36<andythenorth>o/
03:07-!-cosmobird [~cosmobird@106.51.227.161] has joined #openttd
03:07-!-cosmobird is "realname" on #communitydata #hot #josm #OpenRailwayMap #openttd #openttdcoop #openttdcoop.wiki #osm #open-maps-more-than-maps #osm-asia #coopetition
03:18-!-cosmobird [~cosmobird@106.51.227.161] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
03:21<Flygon>Uurrf. Every time, I forget to copy over OpenTTD to new Windows install.
03:21<Flygon>and I lose all settings along with.
03:21<Flygon>Maybe I should start setting OpenTTD to save shit to my desktop, not to My Documents. :V
03:22<Flygon>...can't afford the SATA > USB enclosure atm :VVV
03:26-!-andythenorth [~andytheno@cpc87219-aztw31-2-0-cust178.18-1.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Quit: andythenorth]
03:39-!-gelignite [~gelignite@x4db627aa.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #openttd
03:39-!-gelignite is "gelignite" on #openttd #openttdcoop.devzone
03:49-!-synchris [~synchris@139.138.202.72] has joined #openttd
03:49-!-synchris is "Synesios Christou" on #openttd
03:59<Eddi|zuHause>open the pc case, plug in sata directly?
04:04-!-wyldesyde [~oftc-webi@220.116.175.248] has joined #openttd
04:04-!-wyldesyde is "OFTC WebIRC Client" on #openttd
04:20-!-cosmobird [~cosmobird@106.51.227.161] has joined #openttd
04:20-!-cosmobird is "realname" on #communitydata #hot #josm #OpenRailwayMap #openttd #openttdcoop #openttdcoop.wiki #osm #open-maps-more-than-maps #osm-asia #coopetition
04:25-!-wyldesyde [~oftc-webi@220.116.175.248] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
04:54-!-gelignite [~gelignite@x4db627aa.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Quit: http://bit.ly/1kso8Ta]
05:05-!-Wolf01 [~wolf01@0001288e.user.oftc.net] has joined #openttd
05:05-!-Wolf01 is "Wolf01" on #openttd
05:05<Wolf01>Moin
05:20-!-debdog [~debdog@2a02:8070:418b:1400:7a24:afff:fe8a:d04d] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
05:21-!-debdog [~debdog@2a02:8070:418b:1400:7a24:afff:fe8a:d04d] has joined #openttd
05:21-!-debdog is "Wowbagger" on #openttd
05:33<Eddi|zuHause>GRÜẞE
05:33<Eddi|zuHause>(does that look as weird to you as it does to me?)
05:34<Flygon>Eddi: It's possible, but somewhat awkward.
05:34<Flygon>Because you have two boot drives fighting to be the master Hard Drive.
05:34<Flygon>And the one that's currently removed is actually failing.
05:34<Flygon>Stalled read/writes for 30 seconds at a time ect
05:35<Wolf01>Looks like a Sith fight
05:35<Eddi|zuHause>Flygon: just boot linux, it should deal with that fine
05:38<Flygon>Eddi: From a CD?
05:38<Flygon>It's deal withable either way. It's just... kinda problematic.
05:38<Flygon>And I need to get a 3.5in SATA enclosure somepoint anyway.
05:44<Eddi|zuHause>"in the last year, german police shot at 52 humans, wounding 28 and killing 11, which is a slight increase over the previous years"
05:48<Wolf01>Those are rookie numbers compared to our democracy overlords
06:00-!-Cubey [~Coobies@2601:14b:c203:7078:fc35:3e4f:8101:fcc7] has joined #openttd
06:00-!-Cubey is "Jaybar" on #openttd
06:07-!-Progman [~progman@p5DC5F24B.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #openttd
06:07-!-Progman is "Peter Henschel" on #openttdcoop.dev #openttdcoop #openttd
06:19<Eddi|zuHause>yeah, about a factor of 20 (scaled for population)
06:20<Eddi|zuHause>(maybe scaled for amount of policemen might be an interesting statistics)
06:20<Eddi|zuHause>(or policewomen)
06:25<@Rubidium>or amount of prisoners
06:31-!-mescalito [~mescalito@10-178-191-90.dyn.estpak.ee] has joined #openttd
06:31-!-mescalito is "realname" on #openttd #openttdcoop
06:31<Wolf01>https://img-9gag-fun.9cache.com/photo/a7DdrRq_460sv.mp4 >_>
06:32<Eddi|zuHause>Wolf01: after that weird "straddle bus" thingie, it wouldn't surprise me if some chinese startup actually tried to build this
06:33<Wolf01>:D
06:33<Wolf01>The bus might have worked
06:34<Eddi|zuHause>afaik they built a prototype in some "minor" chinese city (where "minor" means "less than 2 million inhabitants")
06:34<Eddi|zuHause>and then the bosses left with all the investment money, leaving the prototype there clogging the road
06:36<__ln__>that's modern day communism
06:36<Eddi|zuHause>do they still call it communism?
06:38-!-andythenorth [~andytheno@cpc87219-aztw31-2-0-cust178.18-1.cable.virginm.net] has joined #openttd
06:38-!-andythenorth is "andythenorth" on #openttd
06:38-!-Hiddenfunstuff [~Geth@e137.ip11.netikka.fi] has joined #openttd
06:38-!-Hiddenfunstuff is "Geth" on #openttd #/r/openttd #openttdcoop
06:38<Wolf01>o/
06:41<andythenorth>hi
06:42-!-Cubey [~Coobies@2601:14b:c203:7078:fc35:3e4f:8101:fcc7] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
06:45-!-Gja [~Martin@93-167-84-102-static.dk.customer.tdc.net] has joined #openttd
06:45-!-Gja is "Martin" on #bcache #openttd
06:56<andythenorth>Wolf01: so how would combined catenary work?
06:56<andythenorth>I can’t figure it out
07:02<Wolf01>When different types of roadbits merge or when they are built together?
07:09<andythenorth>either
07:09<andythenorth>I guess the question is, how is the vehicle powered?
07:11<Wolf01>The main problem might happen only when you have just 2 catenaries as you can't tell visually which one is present, if you have a third rail you should be able to see it there or missing
07:12<Wolf01>But is the same problem that we already have
07:12<@planetmaker>andythenorth, I can't imagine how two concurrent catenaries would work at all
07:12<Wolf01>^ that's a point too
07:12<@planetmaker>neither ingame nor in real-life
07:12<andythenorth>wait for Eddi to post his photos :)
07:13<andythenorth>I’m not proposing two catenaries :)
07:13<andythenorth>I just don’t understand how one can function, at the spec level
07:13<andythenorth>it means building tram changes the label of the road
07:13<andythenorth>it’s at least deterministic I guess, but it’s fricking weird
07:15<andythenorth>hmm
07:15<andythenorth>unless the approach changes more fundamentally
07:15<andythenorth>ach
07:15<Wolf01>If we move the electrification to a bitmask, then we should decide if the catenary powers both types at the same time or they must be set indipendently
07:15*andythenorth thinks it’s all futile :D
07:15<andythenorth>we’re boxed in by railtypes
07:16<Wolf01>Yeah
07:16<andythenorth>so once again, NRT goes back on the ‘not possible’ pile :)
07:16<andythenorth>that’s what, the 4th failed attempt? o_O
07:16<Wolf01>Nah
07:17<Wolf01>Just don't fall in the trap "keep the same behavior of.."
07:17<andythenorth>as per railtypes?
07:17<Wolf01>Yes
07:17<andythenorth>I can’t see it being acceptable for NRT to work differently to railtypes
07:18<andythenorth>it’s already nearly impossible to understand railtypes
07:18<Wolf01>That's because the whole powered thing is chinese, imho
07:19<andythenorth>I don’t understand it
07:19<andythenorth>but that’s a sign of it being clever no?
07:20<Wolf01>It would be better if the powered thing is "I need a 1.5kv catenary to work" in a vehicle, and query the tile
07:21<Wolf01>Instead of "hey, I have a catenary, vehicles of type x, y, and z can run on me"
07:22<andythenorth>that’s not how railtypes do it afaik
07:22<andythenorth>it’s via the label
07:23<andythenorth>catenary is arbitrary eye candy, no? o_O
07:23<Wolf01>You can have microwave powered vehicles, which is eletrification too, but invisible
07:23<Wolf01>It's not the graphic which powers a vehicle
07:24<@Rubidium>andythenorth: definitely, see this Diesel driven train: http://www.eurailscout.com/global/eurailscout/afbeeldingen/news/2014%20news/ufm120-r8_.jpg
07:24<andythenorth>Rubidium: why is it thermal cutting the rails at the front? o_O
07:25<Wolf01>Removing ice?
07:25<Eddi|zuHause>it's probably a construction/maintenance vehicle
07:25<andythenorth>checking for mice
07:25<@Rubidium>it's light for a lightscan camera
07:25<andythenorth>Wolf01: also your blue tow truck has now got reviews on EB
07:25<@Rubidium>that make 1 mm slices at 120+ km/h
07:25<andythenorth>your name is on the door
07:26<Eddi|zuHause>like measuring rail alignment
07:26<Wolf01>:D
07:26<@Rubidium>so it has a very short shutter time which means you need loads of light
07:27<andythenorth>how about “roads can’t have catenary” Wolf01 ?
07:27<andythenorth>that solves the problem completely
07:27<@Rubidium>www.rene-rail.nl/images/Op pad met de Eurailscout UFM 120/album/medium/0003.jpg <- better angle for the catenary being eye candy
07:27<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: depends on your definition of "the problem" :p
07:28<Wolf01><andythenorth> how about “roads can’t have catenary” Wolf01 ? <- do you want to anger supermop?
07:28<andythenorth>all newgrfs die
07:30<Wolf01>It isn't a problem, we could make it print all the electrifications on a tile, and just leave the hassle to grf designers
07:30<@Rubidium>andythenorth: interesting fact is that the first versions of that line scan system could not be stationary with the lights on for a long time or it would start igniting dried grass
07:30<andythenorth>oops
07:30<andythenorth>what does it do to the mice?
07:30<@Rubidium>but newer systems use more efficient lights
07:31<@Rubidium>mice probably have no problem, except when the train is stationary but then they start getting hot and arguably attempt to find a cooler place themselves
07:31<andythenorth>Wolf01: that seems to mean abandoning labels?
07:31-!-grossing [OujYuccvLT@0001792a.user.oftc.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
07:32-!-grossing [xi6Y602AUu@2a00:d0c0:200:0:b9:1a:9c1c:3e0] has joined #openttd
07:32-!-grossing is "Florian Gross" on #openttd #centos #openbox #oftc #osm-de #osm #kaschemme
07:33<Wolf01>Yes, but not entirely, we'll keep them for the pavement/track
07:33<Wolf01>Just drop electrification and speed limit
07:34<Wolf01>And that should be done for rail too, maybe with backward compatibility
07:34*andythenorth can’t understand it :)
07:34<andythenorth>how is compatibility determined except via the label?
07:34*andythenorth misses something
07:34<andythenorth>maybe we need a pastebin spec
07:35<Wolf01>As I said before, I see it as the vehicle which should look for the features of the tile where it wants to travel
07:36<andythenorth>so we’d have labels for catenary?
07:36<andythenorth>separately?
07:36<Wolf01>Sort of
07:36<Wolf01>An extensible system would be cool
07:37<Wolf01>Also should be easier to check if an electrification mean is present in the game and throw a warning if not
07:38<andythenorth>how does it solve the confusion problem when two types of catenary are needed on the tile?
07:39<andythenorth>if bus is 1500v DC and tram is 25kv AC for example?
07:39<andythenorth>routing is still broken
07:39<andythenorth>player sees catenary, but either bus or tram don’t drive
07:39-!-cosmobird [~cosmobird@106.51.227.161] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
07:39<Wolf01>1. just allow one: "place trolleybus catenary | place tram catenary", not both; 2. print both graphics and place both.
07:39<Eddi|zuHause>you mean extensible system like https://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=59379 ?
07:40<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: that doesn’t contain upgrade rules, unless I missed them?
07:40<Wolf01>No, I mean you can add electrification types as objects via newgrf
07:40<andythenorth>if I build ‘tram with 25kv AC’, the tile has to know how to upgrade the road to that
07:40<Wolf01>And use them indipendently from the base road
07:41<Eddi|zuHause>Wolf01: well, you can have that, if you completely abandon the concept of "store this information within X bits of an array"
07:41<Wolf01>The base road should only tell if you can build catenary, third rail or whatever on it
07:42<Eddi|zuHause>Wolf01: which means both storage space and access time of a tile will skyrocket
07:42<Wolf01>Like maglev doesn't allow to build catenary on it, for example, but a DIRT road might allow 15kv to power mining trucks
07:44<Wolf01>It might be, it needs to be designed very well
07:48<andythenorth>what’s the benefit of splitting off catenary?
07:49<Wolf01>Removing half of road/railtypes
07:49<Eddi|zuHause>exporting the combinatorial explosion to make it someone else's problem
07:49<andythenorth>hmm
07:49<Wolf01>Also like Eddi said
07:49<andythenorth>it’s ‘moved’ rather than ‘removed’ no?
07:49<andythenorth>the information is the same, the complexity is higher? o_O
07:50<Wolf01>TBH, it's already a combinatorial explosion, just limited to 16 types
07:50*andythenorth wishes OpenTTD was just a game
07:50<andythenorth>and not some half-assed simulator
07:51-!-Gja [~Martin@93-167-84-102-static.dk.customer.tdc.net] has quit [Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com)]
07:52<Wolf01>You grf devlolopers started that :D
07:52<Wolf01>(and we also asked for that)
07:52<@Rubidium>is 25kV actually safe in tram lines?
07:54<Eddi|zuHause>probably not
07:54<Eddi|zuHause>most trams run 600V-ish
07:55<Eddi|zuHause>easier to keep a safe distance
07:55<@Rubidium>so, effectively all are 1kV DC (+- 0.5 kV)
07:55<Eddi|zuHause>it's probably rare to see trams >1kV
07:56<andythenorth>ach
07:56*andythenorth wondered if vehicles could check for tram label to determine powered
07:57<andythenorth>but that’s not how it works
07:57<andythenorth>how about the roadtype checks the tramtype?
07:57<Wolf01>Nope, they check on their own label and it's compatibility list
07:57<andythenorth>yeah, the roadtype should check the tramtype
07:57<andythenorth>that’s the solution
07:57<Wolf01>Not entirely sure
07:58<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: so if you build unelectrified tram on a trolleybus road, electrified trams should go there?
07:58<Wolf01>^
07:59<Eddi|zuHause>that does not sound like The Right Thing (tm)
07:59<Wolf01>Also tram and road types are in separate lists
07:59<Wolf01>And can have same labels
08:00<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: no the tram wouldn’t be electrified
08:01<andythenorth>we should ban overlapping labels
08:01<andythenorth>unless
08:01<andythenorth>ha
08:01<andythenorth>maybe the labels have to match? o_O
08:01<andythenorth>for road and tram?
08:01<Eddi|zuHause>??
08:01<andythenorth>you can only build tram over road with same label
08:01<Eddi|zuHause>???
08:02<Eddi|zuHause>so to build tram on a cobblestone road, you need to have a cobblestone tram?
08:02<Wolf01>XD
08:02<Wolf01>Stonerail
08:04<andythenorth>yes
08:05<andythenorth>then the catenary will match
08:05<andythenorth>ach, we should merge tram and road
08:05<andythenorth>and just make them boolean toggles in the construction UI
08:06<andythenorth>single bit
08:08<Eddi|zuHause>i have an idea
08:08<Eddi|zuHause>reduce the whole problem to one single bit. so bit=0 means "road" and bit=1 means "tram"
08:09<Eddi|zuHause>remove all the crap about electrification, and types
08:10<Wolf01>One bit for type, if electrification matches then it's set for both (and road graphics take precedence, like now), if there are catenary and third rail, you must set them indipendently
08:10-!-Gja [~Martin@93-167-84-102-static.dk.customer.tdc.net] has joined #openttd
08:10-!-Gja is "Martin" on #bcache #openttd
08:10-!-smoke_fumus [~smoke_fum@188.35.176.90] has joined #openttd
08:10-!-smoke_fumus is "Crapping wizard" on #qemu #oolite #openttd
08:10<Wolf01>The grf has the electrification as type: overhead, rail, whatever
08:10<Wolf01>And you check that
08:10<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: does that simplify to 1 type per tile?
08:11<Eddi|zuHause>sure. that's even simpler than the current implementation :p
08:11<Wolf01>Just like rails
08:11<Wolf01>But then I want diagonal roads too
08:12<andythenorth>Wolf01: I still don’t understand in your proposal how the vehicle knows if it’s powered? :)
08:12<Wolf01>By checking if the type's electrification bit is set?
08:13<andythenorth>but that assumes ‘powered == electrified'
08:13<andythenorth>but that doesn’t hold :(
08:14<Wolf01>No, you can still run diesel trucks on road, but for trolleybuses you need to check if it's paved road AND the electrification bit
08:14<@planetmaker>probably OpenTTD's approach to 'powered' is a bit too complicated, trying to be maximum flexible
08:15<Wolf01>Ok, maybe any kind of road !OFFR/DIRT
08:15<andythenorth>it’s remarkably complex eh?
08:15<andythenorth>planetmaker: in NRT, there is no concept of ‘powered’ currently ;)
08:16<Wolf01>There's only the concept of powered
08:16<@planetmaker>can you frame me in how the current implementation handles it?
08:16<Eddi|zuHause>you don't need "powered"/"compatible" distinction if you don't have wagons
08:16<Wolf01>There isn't the concept of compatible which is for wagons
08:19<andythenorth>https://wiki.openttd.org/Frosch/NotRoadTypes
08:19-!-sla_ro|master [~sla.ro@95.76.45.217] has quit []
08:19<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: so what you actually mean there is no concept of "compatible", so you renamed "powered" to "compatible"
08:20<Wolf01>Yes, because it was the coolest thing to do
08:21<andythenorth>yes
08:21<@planetmaker>ty
08:21<andythenorth>I had my properties switched :P
08:25-!-grossing [xi6Y602AUu@0001792a.user.oftc.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
08:27<Wolf01>After this long talk, I'm sure we have done the best work without breaking all the things, it should just need some more fixes
08:27-!-grossing [wWr4nEVPxb@2a00:d0c0:200:0:b9:1a:9c1c:3e0] has joined #openttd
08:27-!-grossing is "Florian Gross" on #openttd #centos #openbox #oftc #osm-de #osm #kaschemme
08:31<andythenorth>I wonder if the ‘my trolleybuses are stuck’ issue really matters
08:32<andythenorth>given a clean sheet, I would have done this:
08:32<andythenorth>- labels are not unique per roadtype
08:32<andythenorth>- vehicles determine compatibility, not roadtypes
08:33<andythenorth>- maintaining vehicle newgrfs to handle new roadtype labels is not treated as the Worst Thing Ever
08:34<andythenorth>this means, e.g. a whole range of road surfaces could be provided, all with ‘ROAD’
08:35<andythenorth>it also means that transitive roadtype compatibility is handled per vehicle, which is more interesting
08:35<andythenorth>it also means that trolleybus could be upgraded over town roads without changing the label
08:36<andythenorth>- catenary would be a bool, on the tile, available for both tram and road
08:37<andythenorth>- vehicles would have a ‘requires catenary’ flag, and this would be separate from the road surface / tram rails
08:37<Wolf01>And you can change the surface without changing the compatibility (power), just not change the ROAD to HWAY or HAUL
08:37<andythenorth>- ‘electrified’ is treated as a single property at TTD scale, and no finer resolution of voltage etc is provided
08:37<andythenorth>nor are any hacks for overhead monorail or any other crap supported via catenary
08:38<andythenorth>- ‘types’ using, e.g. ROAD label, might provide catenary automatically on construction, XOR, we might make it a button on the construction toolbar
08:39<andythenorth>- we diverge from railtypes spec, which is, imho, baffling anyway
08:39<Wolf01>I must leave for a bit, I'll read it later
08:39<andythenorth>but that’s all just theory and hot air :I
08:39*andythenorth also
08:49-!-Gja [~Martin@93-167-84-102-static.dk.customer.tdc.net] has quit [Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com)]
08:55<andythenorth>hmm
08:56<andythenorth>I should delete combinatorial processing in FIRS?
08:56<andythenorth>it’s inconsistently used at secondary industries
08:56<andythenorth>‘illogical'
08:59<@planetmaker>andythenorth, but the handling sounds logical what you just sketched here
09:04<andythenorth>it’s taking something frosch proposed and inverting it
09:04<andythenorth>https://wiki.openttd.org/Frosch/NotRoadTypes#Non-constructible_rail-.2Froad-.2Ftramtypes_to_model_vehicle_compatibility.2Fpoweredness
09:13-!-frosch123 [~frosch@00013ce7.user.oftc.net] has joined #openttd
09:13-!-frosch123 is "frosch" on #openttdcoop.devzone #openttd.dev #openttd
09:15<andythenorth>quak
09:19<frosch123>hoi
09:20<frosch123>andythenorth: moving compatibility to road vehicles makes the convert-roadtype-type near impossible
09:20<frosch123>*tool
09:20<andythenorth>ok
09:21<Eddi|zuHause>also, wouldn't that require the vehicle set author to know every possible roadtype out there?
09:21<frosch123>road type classes :p
09:21<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: isn’t that the same for railtype authors currently?
09:22<andythenorth>it requires letting go of the idea that vehicle newgrfs aren’t maintainable
09:22<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: uhm, some portion of that was intended to be solved with the universal railtype scheme
09:23<andythenorth>how’s it going? :)
09:23<Eddi|zuHause>i'd say it was a success
09:23<Eddi|zuHause>but i haven't really checked development in the past ~4 years
09:24<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: it allowed for some interchangability between vehicle and track sets
09:29<andythenorth>‘PACK’ for packaging cargo? o_O
09:30<Eddi|zuHause>why not keep the old label?
09:30<Eddi|zuHause>you're not changing functionality
09:30<Eddi|zuHause>why risk breaking stuff?
09:31<andythenorth>I might keep the label
09:31<andythenorth>it’s an abuse of it mind
09:32<andythenorth>but it’s probably not significant
09:32<andythenorth>and it doesn’t break vehicle sets
09:32<Eddi|zuHause>you could make a poll
09:32<Eddi|zuHause>but beware that the result might be "boaty mcboatface"
09:36<andythenorth>that’s ok
09:37<Eddi|zuHause>also, the target audience of the poll should be vehicle set authors, because the label is your interface with them
09:38<andythenorth>hopefully I can just delete the cargo in FIRS v4
09:38<andythenorth>solving the problem :P
09:39<Eddi|zuHause>4? are you using exponential versions? or have i missed 3?
09:40<andythenorth>I am working on 3
09:40<andythenorth>although ^2 is not a bad version number system
09:40<andythenorth>like 2048 :P
09:41<Eddi|zuHause>i was trying to forget that...
09:45<andythenorth>frosch123: http://bundles.openttdcoop.org/firs/push/LATEST/docs/html/economies.html
09:45<andythenorth>charts for basic economies are pretty good
09:46<andythenorth>wondering whether to exclude passengers from charts
09:46<andythenorth>there is a banned_cargos list, which includes pax, but can’t figure out what I intended with it
10:04-!-Lejving_ [~Lejving@81-233-148-192-no524.tbcn.telia.com] has joined #openttd
10:04-!-Lejving_ is "realname" on #openttdcoop.pz #openttdcoop.stable #openttdcoop.dev #openttdcoop #mi-gaming #mashinky #factoriocoop #/r/openttd #openttd
10:10-!-Lejving [~Lejving@81-233-148-192-no524.tbcn.telia.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
10:29-!-FLHerne [~flh@cpc4-papw5-2-0-cust175.5-3.cable.virginm.net] has joined #openttd
10:29-!-FLHerne is "Francis Herne" on #openttd
10:34<Eddi|zuHause>so... peacock, flamingo or phoenix?
10:34-!-Gja [~Martin@93-167-84-102-static.dk.customer.tdc.net] has joined #openttd
10:34-!-Gja is "Martin" on #bcache #openttd
10:36<andythenorth>flamingo
10:36<Eddi|zuHause>i was leaning towards peacock, actually
10:37<Flygon>Guys.
10:37<Flygon>Emu.
10:37<Flygon>Go for Emu.
10:37<Flygon>We once had a war against the Emus.
10:37<Flygon>They totally deserve shit named after them.
10:38<Eddi|zuHause>you people are weird...
10:38<Flygon>No we're not.
10:38<Flygon>:V
10:38<Flygon>We just, somehow, lost a war to flightless birds.
10:39<Eddi|zuHause>was that before or after the war against the rabbits that you brought in for "fun", and then they multiplied?
10:39<andythenorth>maybe FIRS 3 is ‘the difficult third album’
10:39<andythenorth>somehow it’s a bit of a turkey
10:39<Flygon>We're still officially at war with the Rabbits.
10:39<Flygon>And Foxes, incidentally.
10:40<Flygon>And Cane Toads.
10:40<Flygon>There's a reason it's legal to play "Cane Toad Golf".
10:40<Flygon>It's exactly what it sounds like.
10:42*andythenorth considers a QLD economy
10:42<Flygon>I want a VIC economy.
10:42<Flygon>Where you transport Vegemite and Victorian Bitter.
10:43<andythenorth>this is a disgrace http://bundles.openttdcoop.org/firs/push/LATEST/docs/html/cargoflow_extreme.html
10:43<andythenorth>how was that ever a good idea?
10:43<frosch123>don't look at it :p
10:43<frosch123>andythenorth: it's for a different kind of player
10:44<frosch123>i don't think extreme players look at the whole picture
10:45<frosch123>i think they explore localy what stuff is avaialble for transport and are happy to find something different every time
10:45<frosch123>like busy bee
10:45<andythenorth>ah ok
10:45<andythenorth>maybe I should censor the cargoflow chart
10:45<andythenorth>remember ‘fog of war’ in Warcraft 1? o_O
10:45<frosch123>no, it clearly tells people who care about graphs to not play that economy :)
10:45<Flygon>So, basically. The busy bee players just naturally evolve an economy that becomes interlinked without outright planning it?
10:46<Flygon>(Kinda like a real economy)
10:46<andythenorth>pretty much
10:46<frosch123>yes, i think some players look at the chart and plan what to produce/transport when
10:46<frosch123>others just take stuff as they come
10:47<frosch123>i used to play in a way, where i would first serve all forests on the whole map, before starting with the next cargo :)
10:48<frosch123>like, one graph link at a time, until 100% complete, then the next link
10:48<frosch123>but with firs supplies i have to play differently
10:49<frosch123>first set up a supply chain, to make things stable
10:49<Flygon>I tend to just go for what makes money.
10:49<Flygon>Then makes more money.
10:49<Flygon>Then I try to make sure the freight trunklines work well.
10:49<Flygon>Then I make more connections.
10:49<Flygon>And suddenly there's chains going on.
10:50<frosch123>andythenorth: you should exclude the industries without graphics from the top panel :p
10:51<andythenorth>or draw the graphics :P
10:51<andythenorth>anyway, after some shenanigans
10:51<andythenorth>I can now describe Supplies as a unique FIRS feature
10:52<andythenorth>without introducing confusion about Manufacturing Supplies, which are gone L:P
10:52<andythenorth>so maybe I can write the Get Started page better
10:52<andythenorth>so in plain words, what do Supplies do? o_O
10:55<supermop_>go on trucks
10:55<supermop_>everything else goes on trains
10:56<andythenorth>‘Deliver supplies to boost production at mines and farms’
10:56<andythenorth>“Control production'
10:56<andythenorth>bah
10:56<andythenorth>dunno
10:57<frosch123>production directly responds to players supplying industries
10:57-!-cosmobird [~cosmobird@116.75.81.54] has joined #openttd
10:57-!-cosmobird is "realname" on #communitydata #hot #josm #OpenRailwayMap #openttd #openttdcoop #openttdcoop.wiki #osm #open-maps-more-than-maps #osm-asia #coopetition
10:57<frosch123>production stays constants over time when constantly supplied
10:57<frosch123>production depends on cargo delivered, not on cargo taken
10:57<andythenorth>“Better production”
10:58<andythenorth>“Production is more fun"
10:58<frosch123>that's trademarked by sirkoz
10:58<andythenorth>:)
10:58<andythenorth>what would V453000 say?
10:58<andythenorth>probably swearing
10:58<frosch123>more slugs
10:59<andythenorth>“FIRS: 100% Slug Free"
10:59<frosch123>challenge: find the slug
11:00<andythenorth>easter slug
11:00*andythenorth bbl
11:00<andythenorth>maybe NRT will be out of the ditch by then :P
11:02<andythenorth>http://www.cargolaw.com/images/disaster2010.Wild.River8001.JPG
11:02<supermop_>I would have left it down there
11:03<supermop_>particularly ominous is the front end loader apparently trying to hold up the scree slope at left
11:05*andythenorth will see what Wolf01 comes up with
11:05<andythenorth>bbl
11:05-!-andythenorth [~andytheno@cpc87219-aztw31-2-0-cust178.18-1.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Quit: andythenorth]
11:05<supermop_>first anniversary is 'paper'
11:05<supermop_>does that mean I can get like a ream of printer paper?
11:06<supermop_>do people outside of the us have 'ream' as a unit of bulk paper sheet?
11:07-!-Alberth [~alberth@00015f9e.user.oftc.net] has joined #openttd
11:07-!-mode/#openttd [+o Alberth] by ChanServ
11:07-!-Alberth is "purple" on @#openttd
11:07<frosch123>https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ries_(Papierma%C3%9F) <- supermop_
11:08<@Alberth>o/
11:08<frosch123>1 ream of A4 paper at weigt 80g/m² are 500 sheets
11:08<frosch123>which is the usual unit you buy them packaged
11:08<frosch123>Alberth: hoi :)
11:09<supermop_>similar to here
11:09<frosch123>supermop_: i never heard the term before though :)
11:09<supermop_>a ream is generally roughly always the same mass, if you buy nicer paper you get fewer sheets
11:10<supermop_>frosch123: we use it for the paper wrapped up package of paper that is a maybe 6cm or so tall
11:11<supermop_>and the a standard box you'd have in the office has I think 10 of those in it
11:11<frosch123>yeah, but i would just call it pack of paper :)
11:12-!-cosmobird [~cosmobird@116.75.81.54] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
11:12<frosch123>maybe i will now annoy my coworkers by searching for an opportunity to use the scientific term :p
11:12<supermop_>I think among most people younger than baby boomers or gen x, ream is less common these days
11:12<@Alberth>:)
11:12<@Alberth>never heard that term either
11:12<supermop_>unless it's by someone who does a lot of work with paper
11:13<@Alberth>of course
11:13<supermop_>us younger people never had to print so much, or reorder lots of paper for offices
11:15<supermop_>interesting that the 'short' ream of 480 sheets comes from hand made paper being made from big sheets and folding it into 8
11:16<LordAro>ream of paper is a thing in the UK, generally for rolls
11:17<supermop_>that is a small roll of paper
11:19<@planetmaker>\o
11:19<frosch123>moi
11:21<@planetmaker>Ries... there's no end to learning. And there are units... which are plain weired :)
11:26-!-FLHerne [~flh@cpc4-papw5-2-0-cust175.5-3.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
11:28<@Alberth>some people would argue that "light year" is weird :p
11:37<@planetmaker>let them argue ;)
11:37-!-FLHerne [~flh@cpc4-papw5-2-0-cust175.5-3.cable.virginm.net] has joined #openttd
11:37-!-FLHerne is "Francis Herne" on #openttd
11:46-!-FLHerne [~flh@cpc4-papw5-2-0-cust175.5-3.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
11:50<Wolf01><frosch123> andythenorth: moving compatibility to road vehicles makes the convert-roadtype-type near impossible <- I would like to figure out how they do it in R-world.. maybe they just don't give a shit :P
12:04-!-Biolunar [Biolunar@dslb-092-073-186-118.092.073.pools.vodafone-ip.de] has quit [Quit: leaving]
12:12<@Alberth>simple, they close down the entire block, take out the whole street, put down a new street, remove all blockades, and leave again
12:16<@Alberth>preferably that happens at several nearby streets at the same time
12:19<Wolf01>I mean the compatibility
12:21-!-tokai|noir [~tokai@00012860.user.oftc.net] has joined #openttd
12:21-!-tokai|noir is "Christian Rosentreter" on #openttd
12:21-!-mode/#openttd [+v tokai|noir] by ChanServ
12:25-!-cosmobird [~cosmobird@116.75.81.54] has joined #openttd
12:25-!-cosmobird is "realname" on #communitydata #hot #josm #OpenRailwayMap #openttd #openttdcoop #openttdcoop.wiki #osm #open-maps-more-than-maps #osm-asia #coopetition
12:28-!-tokai [~tokai@00012860.user.oftc.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
12:38-!-Flygon [~Flygon@210-84-23-180.dyn.iinet.net.au] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
12:50-!-sla_ro|master [~sla.ro@95.76.45.217] has joined #openttd
12:50-!-sla_ro|master is "slamaster" on @#sla #openttd #love
13:14<@Alberth>transport companies write out an order for new trains that has to run on their type of tracks, obviously
13:14<@Alberth>in particular, they don't buy from $random supplier just because it exists at the same time
13:15<@Alberth>$manufacturer supplies trains to any track that the customer wants
13:16<@Alberth>as such, just because in history a company bought $xyz train at $pqr tracks, that doesn't mean it's impossible to by a $xyz' from the same supplier that runs at $abc tracks, it's just that in history nobody did that
13:21<@Alberth>unfortunately, that gets interpreted as $xyz train cannot run at $abc tracks
13:35-!-gelignite [~gelignite@x4db627aa.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #openttd
13:35-!-gelignite is "gelignite" on #openttd #openttdcoop.devzone
13:38-!-Progman [~progman@p5DC5F24B.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:48-!-Hiddenfunstuff [~Geth@e137.ip11.netikka.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
13:59-!-sla_ro|master [~sla.ro@95.76.45.217] has quit []
14:04-!-sla_ro|master [~sla.ro@95.76.45.217] has joined #openttd
14:04-!-sla_ro|master is "slamaster" on @#sla #openttd #love
14:12<supermop_>Alberth I don't think there is a good way unless you make 'can run' more nuanced
14:21-!-cosmobird [~cosmobird@116.75.81.54] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
14:30-!-Wormnest [~Wormnest@s5596abd2.adsl.online.nl] has joined #openttd
14:30-!-Wormnest is "Wormnest" on #openttd
14:31<@Alberth>I'd say make it less nuanced
14:32<@Alberth>eg 3rd rail may be relevant in RL, but in the end it's just electric powered track
14:32<Wolf01>Point
14:32<Wolf01>It is only eyecandy
14:34<@Alberth>people try to push RL into the OpenTTD model, but that is never going to work, since it doesn't aim to be a realistic simulator
14:34<@Alberth>it's a game, you buy trains, you transport stuff
14:38<@Alberth>45 degrees angles is no problem, but not having 2 pixels 3rd rail, oh no, that's bad!
14:41-!-andythenorth [~andytheno@cpc87219-aztw31-2-0-cust178.18-1.cable.virginm.net] has joined #openttd
14:41-!-andythenorth is "andythenorth" on #openttd
14:41-!-mescalito [~mescalito@10-178-191-90.dyn.estpak.ee] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
14:41<andythenorth>Wolf01: did you solve it? o_O
14:41<Wolf01>Nope
14:41<Wolf01>Still thinking
14:41<Wolf01>Or stinking...
14:43<supermop_>Alberth: what i meant, is that unless you give rail vehicles a property like 'gauge' and then also apply that to rails, it will be impossible to have a model of compatibility that makes sense
14:44<Eddi|zuHause>Alberth: i don't think telling people "you should not want <X>" is the solution to any problems
14:45<supermop_>but sometimes people are not going to want to care if a tram is 600, 1000, or 1435 mm gauge
14:45<supermop_>they just want 'trams go on tram tracks'
14:46<andythenorth>if we’re playing relative weighting
14:46<Wolf01>I've come to some conclusions, but they aren't TT at all
14:46<andythenorth>I concluded we need to make a different game :P
14:46<andythenorth>like an actual _gam_
14:46<andythenorth>_game_ *
14:47<andythenorth>not a bad isometric version of https://train-simulator.com/
14:48-!-glx [~glx@000128ec.user.oftc.net] has joined #openttd
14:48-!-mode/#openttd [+v glx] by ChanServ
14:48-!-glx is "Loïc GUILLOUX" on +#openttd
14:56<supermop_>damn the house we rented in melb is now worth over a 1Maud
14:59<frosch123>houses increase in worth after you lived there?
15:00<Wolf01>I could rent you one :P
15:06*andythenorth plays openttd
15:08<Eddi|zuHause><supermop_> but sometimes people are not going to want to care if a tram is 600, 1000, or 1435 mm gauge <-- sure, then they just don't use a track set that distinguishes those, but one that unifies them
15:09<Eddi|zuHause>there's no reason for roadtypes to actively prevent distinguishing the gauges, though
15:09<andythenorth>that’s a straw man anyway
15:10<frosch123>why are there no road gauges?
15:10<andythenorth>there are axle weights
15:10<andythenorth>and max heights
15:10<frosch123>why are american cars not 4m wide?
15:11<andythenorth>they wouldn’t fit the drive through
15:11<frosch123>so car size is limited by garage size?
15:11<andythenorth>mcdonalds
15:12<frosch123>i guess cars are generally two horses wide
15:13<frosch123>never heard of a car with 3 or 4 horses in parallel
15:16<debdog>http://www.bz-berlin.de/data/uploads/multimedia/archive/00253/wagenrennen_253899a-768x432.jpg
15:16<Eddi|zuHause>frosch123: even back in ancient rome, horsecarts had standardized sizes
15:19<frosch123>that's only europe though
15:20<Eddi|zuHause>frosch123: it would have been very impractical for any one place to start making them bigger than usual, because they were meant to go to different cities
15:20<frosch123>what roadsize did ancient india use?
15:20<Eddi|zuHause>frosch123: also, american cars are generally a bit larger than european cars (mostly longer rather than wider, though)
15:20<andythenorth>frosch123: http://www.douglas-self.com/MUSEUM/LOCOLOCO/patiala/pat5.jpg
15:21<andythenorth>Indian
15:21<andythenorth>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patiala_State_Monorail_Trainways
15:21<frosch123>is that a car or a tram? :)
15:21<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: not ancient enough :p
15:21<andythenorth>is a guided busway a car or tram? o_O
15:22<andythenorth>no overtaking, probably a tram
15:23<Eddi|zuHause>i seem to recall a similar system being operated in lissabon
15:23<Eddi|zuHause>where it was called "tram"
15:29<__ln__>known as lisbon in english
15:29<frosch123>http://www.gigapolis.com/zauberwald/wolf/bilder/china19.jpg <- hah! broad gauge road
15:35<andythenorth>ha
15:35<andythenorth>what was the problem again?
15:35<andythenorth>people can’t distinguish tram catenary from trolleybus catenary?
15:36<Wolf01>^
15:37<frosch123>i wondere whether there exist roadtypes at all :p
15:37<frosch123>is there narrow gauge and broad gauge cobblestone road?
15:38<andythenorth>there were different gauges for cobble roads, yes
15:39<frosch123>narrow gauge cars can run on broad gauge road?
15:40<frosch123>narrow gauge road vehicles allow a tram to overtake in the middle?
15:42<andythenorth>eye-candy NRT?
15:42<andythenorth>all types are compatible, but they can look different?
15:42<@planetmaker>doesn't sound like a bad idea actually
15:42<@planetmaker>keep the tram type and the road type
15:43<@planetmaker>but have all roads compatible to current road and all trams to current trams. Just allow co-existing different looks
15:43<frosch123>there could just be a ground type
15:43<Wolf01>Still the problem about telling which one has the catenary
15:43<@planetmaker>make that a 3rd road type :)
15:43<@planetmaker>which can co-exist with the former two
15:43<frosch123>64 ground types, 3 flags for road, tram, catenary
15:44<frosch123>the ground type provides graphics for road, tram and road+tram
15:44<frosch123>i.e. no independent road/tram track graphics
15:44<@planetmaker>we have that now, though
15:44<@planetmaker>I like the idea to compose ground + road + tram (in that order) on top of an arbitrary ground tile
15:44<Wolf01>Not really, road+tram graphics might be a problem
15:45<@planetmaker>though currently we only compose (ground+road) + tram
15:45<@planetmaker>(ground with road) + tram
15:45<@planetmaker>and (ground w/o road) + tram
15:45<andythenorth>how do we determine poweredness?
15:45<frosch123>planetmaker: my point is, judging by current grfs, we have tons of ground types, 2 road types (andy's haul, well and normal road), and tramtypes have too little pixels to make a real difference
15:45<@planetmaker>road vehicle / tram vehicle. Like now
15:46<andythenorth>planetmaker: so tram always gets catenary? o_O
15:46<frosch123>i do not see how 16 tramtypes would make sense
15:46<andythenorth>and no trolleybuses?
15:46<@planetmaker>agreed, frosch. I don't see the need for many different tram types. Though people will argue they want different-looking tram tracks for different towns
15:47<andythenorth>it’s not the look
15:47<@planetmaker>but I don't get your argument about ground types
15:47<frosch123>but the graphics are mostly defined by the road, not by the tram
15:47<andythenorth>trams have different gauges
15:47<frosch123>road or ground
15:47<andythenorth>and trams have multiple voltages
15:47<Wolf01>Different ground, tram tracks are the same 2 grey lines every time
15:47<andythenorth>THESE ARE VERY IMPORTANT
15:48<@planetmaker>andythenorth, I'd make 'catenary' a separate flag (additional to road or tram). And just have the vehicle give a flag 'needs catenary'. That solves the power problem
15:48<andythenorth>eh, but what about the voltages?
15:48<andythenorth>:P
15:48<@planetmaker>so a vehicle is powered if it has the proper road type (road/tram) and catenary (if it requires it)
15:48*andythenorth isn’t making a case that andythenorth believes in
15:49<@planetmaker>voltage... in German I can make a word game with that: Spannungen zu unterscheiden oder nicht führt nur zu Spannungen ;)
15:49<Wolf01>Also, what if you have trolleybus + a tramway which supports 3rd rail on the same tile? Both will become electrified? With a single bit, that is
15:49<@planetmaker>~: to differe between voltages/tensions you will create tension
15:50<@planetmaker>wolf: kinda
15:50<supermop_>andythenorth I dont think there is enough variety in tram power to make a difference
15:51<supermop_>seems nearly all systems are 600-750 VDC
15:51<Wolf01>Then 2 bits, one for type like the original idea by andy
15:51<Wolf01>But there is still the problem about telling if there's trolleybus or tram
15:52<supermop_>Wolf01 currently trolleybus wires overrule tramway wires
15:52<Wolf01>I know
15:52<andythenorth>can’t people just draw them red and blue or something?
15:52<supermop_>it doesn't bother me
15:52<Wolf01>And when bot are present is yellow?
15:52<Wolf01>*both
15:53<andythenorth>yes
15:53<Wolf01>Or an overlay which tells what is missing?
15:53<andythenorth>or that
15:53<supermop_>because two trolley bus wires with one tram wire in the middle looks basically the same as just two trolleybus wires
15:53<frosch123>i think allowinging combining road and tramtrack graphics from different grfs was a mistake
15:54<andythenorth>how else do I build trams in towns?
15:54<andythenorth>oh, from different grfs?
15:54<supermop_>anything more and you can't see through the wires
15:54<supermop_>frosch123 why?
15:54<andythenorth>different grfs are always a mistake :P
15:54<frosch123>currently i prefer a single newgrf type per tile, which provides all road, tram and electrifcation graphics
15:54<Wolf01>frosch123: nah, we should only find a better way to tell what there is on a tile
15:55<supermop_>I am happy to add sprites for tram+trolley wires superposition if supported
15:55<frosch123>electrification type could be catenary or some other method within the road, but it makes no sense to have independent electrifcation for road and tram
15:55<supermop_>but I am not bothered by lack of it
15:55<@planetmaker>yes... But does it need to be from different NewGRF?
15:55<Wolf01>frosch123: from the gameplay pov you are completely right
15:56<supermop_>frosch123 trolley buses cannot run on tram wires
15:56<@planetmaker>if road is separate from tram is separate from catenary... it's the players fault if it looks weired
15:56<andythenorth>frosch123 I can’t find a compelling argument that electrification isn’t just a tile property
15:56<andythenorth>but that makes vehicle compatibility a mess?
15:56<frosch123>andythenorth: you want to distinguish catenary from different electrifcation like 3rd rail
15:56<andythenorth>I don’t want to
15:56<supermop_>i feel like that distinction is much more important than track gauge
15:56<andythenorth>I think other people want to
15:56<frosch123>one has pantographs, the other has a third slot in the track
15:57<frosch123>it makes a visual difference
15:57<frosch123>gauge is invisible for trams
15:57<Wolf01>I'm fine with the electrification as tile property, but for sure somebody will say "I don't want ELRL and trolleybuses"
15:57<frosch123>it's barely visible for trains, and tram has even fewer pixels
15:57<andythenorth>Wolf01 are they volunteering to write the spec?
15:57<andythenorth>:)
15:57<supermop_>gameplay wise 3rd rail is not in anyway meaningfully distinct from overhead wire
15:57<Wolf01>Ask SimYouLater :P
15:58<Wolf01>He wants to write a lot
15:58<supermop_>but there is is definitely a gameplay effect from saying trolleybus can drive wherever electric tramway is
15:59<Wolf01>Also allowing trams travelling on tiles without catenary but 3rd rail
15:59<Wolf01>It's electrified, but is uncanny
15:59<supermop_>I for one certainly would prefer road electrification to somehow be independent of tram power
16:00<supermop_>who wants 3rd rail trams anyway
16:00<Wolf01>People?
16:00<andythenorth>what about rope tramways?
16:00<Wolf01>That too
16:00<supermop_>that's easy
16:00<andythenorth>why are we fixating on electrification?
16:00<andythenorth>we already know it just resolves to the label
16:00<supermop_>cable cars are simple
16:01<Eddi|zuHause>it makes more gameplay sense if trolleybus only goes where trolleybus catenary was installed, not simply where tram catenary is installed
16:01<Wolf01>And don't forget people will ask for wetroads, metro, and pipelines
16:01<supermop_>Eddi|zuHause exactly
16:01<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: we’ve convinced ourselves the opposite
16:01<Wolf01>Eddi|zuHause: like it's now
16:01<andythenorth>what’s the evidence base?
16:01<supermop_>trolleybus needs two wires
16:01<Eddi|zuHause>even if that means it may be tricky to find the spot where you forgot to place the catenary
16:02<andythenorth>has anyone actually encountered the problem?
16:02<Wolf01>That's easily solvable with an information layer
16:02<supermop_>idk I think i am the only player who plays with trolleybuses
16:02<Wolf01>And it would be useful for rails too
16:02<Eddi|zuHause>i think you will find enough people who want to play with trolleybus
16:03<supermop_>Eddi|zuHause they do not seem to have yet found the buses
16:03<Wolf01>I usually convert big parts of the rail infrastructure to electric when it becomes available, and I always miss a spot
16:03<Wolf01>With NRT this will apply to roads too
16:03<supermop_>with nrt, making cable cars is trivially easy though,
16:04<supermop_>make tramway type Rope
16:04<supermop_>make cable car,
16:04<Eddi|zuHause>Wolf01: once upon a time there was a tile highlighting patch, where you could have two layers of information displayed by coloured frames around a tile
16:04<supermop_>cable car has max hp and TE when on rope
16:04<Wolf01>I remember that one
16:04<Wolf01>I'm older than that :D
16:04<Eddi|zuHause>i never quite understood why that wasn't included
16:04<supermop_>and ROPE has high infrastructure cost
16:05<Wolf01>Because it tried to tell up to 4 things at the same time, adding complexity
16:05<Eddi|zuHause>anyway, that could easily display unelectrified rail in one colour and electrified in another colour
16:06<Wolf01>We should just add 2 transparent tiles, one green and one red, then with a new tool ask "where in the map is this *type present?"
16:06<Eddi|zuHause>or you select a railtype, it will draw "same", "powered", "compatible" and "incompatible" in different colours
16:07<Wolf01>Yes
16:08<Eddi|zuHause>(where by "colour" i always mean the regular highlighting frame sprite, with a recolour map applied)
16:10*andythenorth was going to re-implement HEQS trams as industrial tramtype
16:10<andythenorth>might wait :P
16:10<supermop_>well at least the steam ones shouldn't change
16:10<supermop_>brb
16:11<frosch123>andythenorth: what makes industrial tram look different to other trams?
16:11<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: what distinguishes industrial tram rails from regular tram rails?
16:11<frosch123>:p
16:12<@Alberth>size, power, carried cargo, and probably place of tracks
16:12<Wolf01>Above or below?
16:12<@Alberth>difference between trams
16:13<frosch123>Alberth: tramtracks, not trams :)
16:13<@Alberth>simpler design, most likely
16:14<@Alberth>but at pixel level, not much, except perhaps the amount of rust :p
16:17<Eddi|zuHause>Alberth: nothing of that justifies introducing a (incompatible) tram type specific for industrial trams to go
16:19<frosch123>he, i was just wondering about the graphics?
16:19<frosch123>i can only imagine ground types, hardly any tramtypes
16:20<Eddi|zuHause>frosch123: but if you only introduce industrial tram as visual tram type, then there's no reason to recode HEQS for that, you can simply introduce the type as compatible to regular tram
16:21<frosch123>Eddi|zuHause: i hoped andy had some graphics in mind
16:21<Wolf01>PEAT
16:22<Eddi|zuHause>some HEQS trams are inspired by "Feldbahn"
16:22<Wolf01>https://i.ytimg.com/vi/V39JFjexSUk/hqdefault.jpg
16:23<@Alberth>Wolf01: nah, PEAT doesn't use trams, they would sink, gorund is too wet
16:23<Wolf01>http://www.users.waitrose.com/~jraby/pin1.jpg uh... does this even has tracks?
16:23<@Alberth>could just be stone guiding the wheels
16:24<@Alberth>andy once also had pictures of stone rails :)
16:24<Wolf01>Me too
16:24<@Alberth>oh, maybe it was you :)
16:24<andythenorth>difference of trams
16:25<andythenorth>in my view, a key part of the game is contention for tile space between different route types
16:25<andythenorth>it’s a core mechanic (and it’s also why ships suck)
16:25<Wolf01>Nice that you look for "stone rails" on google and you get chalk/cement fences, actual rails and a factorio picture
16:26<andythenorth>newgrf vehicle authors tend to think the choice is between many kinds of wonderful locomotive
16:26<andythenorth>but the choice is already made when you choose the type of route
16:28<andythenorth>so the purpose of another tram type is to add range to the available routes
16:28<Wolf01>Difference of trams: no signals to bother of, consists already available (just select the length you need)
16:28<Wolf01>And compactness
16:28<andythenorth>industrial trams would be slow, high capacity, and relatively long
16:29<andythenorth>they would actually have crap throughput, measured per tile
16:29<andythenorth>but they would look impressive
16:29<andythenorth>mining trucks on HAUL would have *much* more capacity
16:29<andythenorth>(throughput)
16:30<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: i think the advantage of industrial trams would be that they're available much earlier than useful trucks
16:30<Eddi|zuHause>even if they then don't reach the truck peak
16:31<frosch123>you mean you have to decide in advance whether you want vehicle A or B, because you cannot just switch or mix them on the same track?
16:31<andythenorth>yes
16:31<andythenorth>this has worked so far in Iron Horse
16:31<frosch123>incompatibility as feature :)
16:31<andythenorth>as long as there are consistent characteristics to the vehicles of that type
16:31<Wolf01>:)
16:31<andythenorth>the mistake is ‘balancing’
16:31<andythenorth>trying to provide a range of vehicles in the type is BS
16:32<andythenorth>or at least, a wide range
16:32<andythenorth>hmm
16:32*andythenorth counts on fingers
16:32<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: i don't see why "city bus" (high capacity, slow) and "long range bus" (low capacity, fast) would require incompatible road types
16:33<andythenorth>they don’t, they’re a totally valid edge case
16:33<andythenorth>took me a while to figure that case out
16:33<andythenorth>although a case could be made for ‘highway’ roadtype, for express buses only
16:33<andythenorth>maybe
16:34<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: but similarily, "passenger tram" and "industrial tram" are already significantly distinguished by what areas they go to, they don't need separation by track type
16:34<frosch123>Eddi|zuHause: long range busses have same capacity, but slower loading
16:34<frosch123>long range busses usually have two decks
16:35<frosch123>while short distance ones are articulated
16:35<andythenorth>RH provides pax and freight trams, but all of roughly same speed, and moderate capacity
16:35<andythenorth>industrial rail would be different
16:35<frosch123>except the brittish did it weird
16:35<Eddi|zuHause>frosch123: i think the general idea was that with local busses, you allow standing places, but long range does not
16:35-!-Alberth [~alberth@00015f9e.user.oftc.net] has left #openttd []
16:35-!-FLHerne [~flh@cpc4-papw5-2-0-cust175.5-3.cable.virginm.net] has joined #openttd
16:35-!-FLHerne is "Francis Herne" on #openttd
16:36<Eddi|zuHause>i think there's a law where if you allow standing places, you can't go faster than 60km/h
16:36<andythenorth>I can justify 3 or 4 tram types (2 types, with and without catenary)
16:36<andythenorth>but I can’t find any rationale for more than 2 roadtypes
16:36<andythenorth>unless, again, with and without catenary
16:36<andythenorth>hmm
16:37<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: if we're still discussing NRT design choices, then you're probably too focused on a single use-case
16:37<andythenorth>I am yes, I am biased
16:37<andythenorth>I am not the right person to get this out of the ditch
16:38<andythenorth>at least we have evidence now, in the form of playable grfs
16:38<andythenorth>not just hot air
16:38<frosch123>andythenorth: i guess you get more roadtypes when adding speed bs
16:38<andythenorth>yes I guess
16:39<andythenorth>unrelated: removing MNSP from FIRS Basic economies => win
16:39<frosch123>but maybe speed is a property of the groundtype
16:39<andythenorth>Basic is now more relaxing
16:39<frosch123>it's obviously shared by road and trams
16:39<frosch123>and it depends on the surroundings, i.e. walkway vs. planks
16:39<andythenorth>I am the wrong person to comment
16:40<andythenorth>I find the idea of restricting speed redundant :P
16:40<andythenorth>vehicles already have speed limits
16:40<frosch123>it's a passenger thing :)
16:41<frosch123>if you connnect towns with busses, they may drive at different speeds throughout the route
16:41<andythenorth>for realistic towns?
16:41<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: speed limits are so there's no benefit to running a fast bus for inner-city travels
16:42<andythenorth>ok
16:42<andythenorth>no counter argument here
16:42<andythenorth>they’re the least of the current problems eh?
16:42<Eddi|zuHause>and to have a reason to have separated tram routes
16:43<Eddi|zuHause>frosch123: i think the "ground type" argument can easily be solved if you always take the minimum of the two speeds
16:43<frosch123>i guess fast roads would not supply houses
16:43<frosch123>so you can build fast routes inside a town, but houses die along them
16:43<andythenorth>can I do HAUL as a ground type? :P
16:43<Eddi|zuHause>frosch123: i think i did originally suggest something like that, not sure if it was considered for implementing
16:44<frosch123>Eddi|zuHause: i do not try to solve the groundtype issue :p i think ground types are the solution :p
16:44<Eddi|zuHause>frosch123: a flag "this type will be considered by the town growth algorithm"
16:44<FLHerne>andythenorth: My bet is that the high-ish limit will be reached fairly easily with misc. not-actually-road types
16:44<FLHerne>e.g. pipes would make vastly more sense as a road
16:44<FLHerne>Than the current rail ones
16:45<frosch123>hmm, pipes :)
16:45<frosch123>sounds again like a ground type, you cannot combine it with other road or tram
16:47<Eddi|zuHause>pipes should be a separate transportation type
16:47<Eddi|zuHause>but that's a different issue
16:48<FLHerne>Yes, "continuous" systems would be nice
16:48<Eddi|zuHause>pipe/conveyor/ski lift/...
16:48<frosch123>pipes are already pretty meh in factorio
16:48<FLHerne>But until that glorious day, they'll all be roadtypes
16:48<frosch123>i guess they are like ships in ottd
16:48<FLHerne>Hm
16:48<frosch123>stuff just flows independently
16:48<FLHerne>For cosmetic-only purposes, can NRT roads be animated?
16:48<Eddi|zuHause>you have one "station" that continuously emits new vehicles, and another station which consumes them
16:48<frosch123>FLHerne: what do you want to animate?
16:49*FLHerne doubts that many people actually care if their ski-lifts move passengers around
16:49<Eddi|zuHause>and a path inbetween without switches/crossings
16:49<FLHerne>So if the road tiles can be animated, you could do ski-lifts without any real vehicles
16:49<frosch123>you can do that with objects
16:49<FLHerne>Oh, right :P
16:49<Eddi|zuHause>i'm pretty sure that GRF already exists
16:49<FLHerne>It's been done with objects, even?
16:50<frosch123>i have seen ski lifts as objects
16:50<FLHerne>Yeah, I remember it now
16:50<Wolf01>Yes, better use objects if there isn't the need to use stuff along with vehicles
16:50<frosch123>but it were only screenshots, so no idea whether animated
16:51<frosch123>the road funiture object grfs would work better as groundtypes though
16:51<Eddi|zuHause>but i think working ski lifts would be nice for some tourist industries
16:52<Eddi|zuHause>frosch123: so you need an additional "road decoration type"?
16:52<frosch123>hah, i was talking about that all day :p
16:52<Eddi|zuHause>frosch123: or alternatively, an Object that allows to place a road on top of it
16:53<Eddi|zuHause>or an object that behaves like a road (with state machine)
16:54<Eddi|zuHause>(as a byproduct of newgrf road stations)
16:55-!-sla_ro|master [~sla.ro@95.76.45.217] has quit []
16:58<Eddi|zuHause>(with these road-objects you can then do "fun stuff" like onramps, roundabouts, ...)
16:59<Eddi|zuHause>(i possibly talked about these before)
16:59<Wolf01>Too bad they are just eyecandy
16:59<Eddi|zuHause>(also in the context of ship-locks, drawbridges, ...)
17:02<andythenorth>frosch123: so do ground types have any labels, or how does it work? o_O
17:03<frosch123>ground types may have multiple labels
17:04<frosch123>this ground can act as road, rail, elrl, road+rail, road+elrl
17:05<frosch123>that ground can act as hway
17:06<frosch123>some ground can act as hway, rail, elrl, but not combined (inner city high speed)
17:06<frosch123>ground would define how it transforms when you add/remove road or tram, or convert road or tram
17:09<andythenorth>so each tile can only have content from a single grf?
17:09<frosch123>yes, that's the main difference
17:10<frosch123>it assumes that combining road from grf 1 and tram from grf 2 will never look right, unless tram pixels are insignificant
17:11<frosch123>it can provide trolley and tram catenary, can allow both or make them exclusive
17:11<andythenorth>I can’t see any argument against it
17:11<frosch123>but it puts all the blame on a single grf to make them visually distinct
17:11<andythenorth>yes
17:11<andythenorth>whilst allowing flexibility
17:12<andythenorth>removes any need for social contract
17:12<andythenorth>how do I construct it? :P
17:13<andythenorth>unified icon on main toolbar?
17:13<andythenorth>then object/station style UI chooser?
17:13<frosch123>from a bit point of view: current nrt allows choosing 16 road and 16 tram independently where the majority of combinations are useless. ground types allow choosing 256 combinations of road+tram pre-filtered by the grf author for stuff that makes sense
17:14<frosch123>andythenorth: i think toolbar would still be separate
17:14<frosch123>you build road and tram independently
17:14<frosch123>just the groundtype tells whether it is possible to combine them, and what happens if you do
17:15<andythenorth>is there a lot ‘this type cannot be built here’? o_O
17:15<frosch123>otoh, maybe main toolbar has only one icon, but the construction toolbar itself has buttons to build road and tram?
17:16<frosch123>though that would be weird for bridges/tunnels/depots
17:16<andythenorth>I wonder if they’re on/off flags like one-way road
17:16<andythenorth>or if they’re actually like stations, you choose a type, then sub-menu
17:17<andythenorth>and you literally get a preview of ‘road’, ‘tram’, ‘road+tram’, ‘electrified road+tram’ etc
17:17<frosch123>yeah, maybe like that
17:17<andythenorth>could it not fill the screen on 2x zoom? o_O
17:17<frosch123>you pick a ground type, then have some suboptions to select
17:17*andythenorth complicates the issue :P
17:17<frosch123>andythenorth: would need some toggle button
17:17<frosch123>expand/collapse
17:17<andythenorth>windowshade :P
17:18<andythenorth>I patched that for stations :P
17:18<andythenorth>hmm
17:18<andythenorth>I guess it needs a spec
17:18<andythenorth>if the spec works, and a patch works, and we test it, and it makes trunk...
17:19<andythenorth>…can we throw away railtypes?
17:19<andythenorth> :P
17:19<frosch123>then you can have your mining ground type, which allows to select haul road, or feldbahn
17:19<andythenorth>yes
17:19<andythenorth>it’s better
17:19<andythenorth>they overlap the same concern
17:19-!-Offlithium [~Offlithiu@2602:30a:2c54:d2b0:1a3b:d2ff:feaa:4048] has joined #openttd
17:19-!-Offlithium is "Offlithium" on #openttd
17:19<Offlithium>hello
17:20<frosch123>hoi
17:20<andythenorth>so if I choose auto-road button, is that when a chooser UI appears, with one type already selected?
17:21<frosch123>andythenorth: i think you select the road toolbar, and there is a select ground button at the end, which opens a bigger window, where you select stuff, close it again, and then build with the selected stuff
17:21<frosch123>maybe you can select favorites, which are then selectable from the main toolbar
17:22<frosch123>so, only one main toolbar button, and user-filtered choices in the dropdown
17:22<andythenorth>ok, so that’s potato/potato compared to choosing from main toolbar, except you get a visual preview
17:22<frosch123>while the complete selection is multi-dimensional instead of a 1-dimensional list
17:22<andythenorth>it basically moves a dropdown menu
17:22<andythenorth>and expands it
17:25<andythenorth>so do all of supermop’s roads collapse to ‘road’?
17:25<andythenorth>and then it’s literally like a station set to choose the road surface?
17:25<frosch123>something like that
17:26<frosch123>maybe road/tram types are filters
17:26<frosch123>you select what road/tram you want, and you get a filtered list of available groundtypes for that combination
17:27<andythenorth>a picture would avoid ambiguity, but that reads like what I am imagining
17:27<andythenorth>select HAUL -> see stuff
17:28<andythenorth>I dunno, ‘concrete HAUL’, ‘mud HAUL’, ‘concrete + tram HAUL’ etc
17:28<andythenorth>still not convinced that tram / road / catenary aren’t boolean toggles
17:29<andythenorth>so like a station set, all tiles for a roadtype label could just be grouped in one menu?
17:29<frosch123>supermob wanted one-wire tram catenary, two-wire trolley catenary, three-wire combined catenary or something
17:29<Eddi|zuHause>no, because there may still be functionally different tram types
17:30<Eddi|zuHause>instead of just visually different
17:30<andythenorth>eh, but then aren’t they different labels?
17:30<andythenorth>or do I miss something again?
17:30<frosch123>concreate ground would also allow selecting third rail tram, while mud-ground would not
17:30<andythenorth>how do we provide for functional difference, except by label? o_O
17:31<frosch123>andythenorth: i think road and tram would keep their current labels
17:31<andythenorth>ok
17:31<frosch123>but multipe grounds supply the same labels
17:31<frosch123>you do not need to change the label to provide a different ground
17:31<andythenorth>no
17:31<andythenorth>so then we can just filter on sets of labels, no?
17:31<andythenorth>that was my naive assumption
17:32<Eddi|zuHause>so tram type "has" a label, ground type "supports" a label, and a vehicle is "powered" on a label
17:32<frosch123>yes, you select "trolley road" and "electrified tram", and the ground type says: impossible combination :p
17:32<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: that’s roughly how I’m understanding it
17:33<andythenorth>‘no ground tiles are available for this combination'
17:33<andythenorth>bit like the new filter in auto-replace, but with 2 dimensions?
17:34<frosch123>you convert existing tram to electrified tram, and the groundtype either allows it, or if not either it is rejected or the groundtype is replaced
17:34<frosch123>i guess 3 conversion tools: convert road, convert tram, convert ground
17:34<andythenorth>interestingly complex:P
17:35<frosch123>each fail if the resulting combination is not allowed
17:35<frosch123>maybe complex, but handcrafted complexity
17:35<frosch123>it's no combinatio of any 16 types with any 16 types, but a human selection
17:36<andythenorth>yes
17:37-!-Wormnest [~Wormnest@s5596abd2.adsl.online.nl] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
17:39<frosch123>i am not sure how depots would work
17:39<frosch123>currently depots have a single explicit road/tramtype, which defines which vehicles you can build
17:39<andythenorth>interesting case
17:39<andythenorth>multi-type depots? o_O
17:40<frosch123>would ground types result in depots being able to have both road/tram?
17:40<andythenorth>is there any reason not to?
17:40<andythenorth>the current arrangement has no particular upsides or downsides
17:40<frosch123>you can already build compatible roadtypes in the same roaddepot
17:40<frosch123>so i guess separating road and tram is kind of arbitrary
17:41<frosch123>so, let's say it's a good thing
17:41<frosch123>to allow both
17:43<frosch123>hmm, ground types would also be able to supply new station graphics
17:44<andythenorth>yes
17:44<Eddi|zuHause>i think you should leave station graphics out of the patch
17:45<andythenorth>I have never been convinced of the benefits of complete NewStations spec for roads
17:45<andythenorth>not that anyone has tried it :)
17:45<andythenorth>but eh
17:45<Eddi|zuHause>tram turning loops...
17:45<frosch123>the problem with newstations are the nontrack tiles :)
17:46<andythenorth>solved problem :)
17:46<andythenorth>it’s total hax, but it works
17:46<Eddi|zuHause>frosch123: yes, but that's because they were put in as an easy hack, before a proper general solution could be discussed
17:46<andythenorth>ideally they’d just be ‘station tiles’ and available in all route construction menus :P
17:47<andythenorth>the only negative is having to switch building tool
17:47<andythenorth>autorail -> 9 -> build :P
17:47<Eddi|zuHause>"a,9" is a terrible key combination
17:47<frosch123>which should be objects or something
17:47<Eddi|zuHause>too far apart
17:48<Eddi|zuHause>frosch123: but objects don't extend catchment area
17:48<frosch123>exactly
17:48<frosch123>station walking is a terrible thing
17:48<andythenorth>frosch123: for roadstop graphics, if we need one grf controlling the tile for appearance of road/tram stuf, then it’s odd to let an arbitrary grf decide the station in sprites future
17:48<andythenorth>sprites / in /s
17:48<frosch123>i have always dreamed of reducing airport area to zero, and only allow transfers
17:49<Eddi|zuHause>frosch123: no, it's not :p
17:50<Eddi|zuHause>frosch123: well, that would require station catchment radius being only applied to the tile that induces it, not to the whole station
17:50<andythenorth>so I’ll have to patch nml again? o_O
17:50<frosch123>that's also something on my todo list, i don't know why it is not done yet
17:50<Eddi|zuHause>so a bus station at an airport would not cause a catchment area around the airport
17:50<frosch123>so many people talked about catchment preview, but noone fixed it
17:50<andythenorth>talking doesn’t need QA :P
17:51<frosch123>i do not even consider the catchment fix particulary hard
17:51<Eddi|zuHause>frosch123: but that again works against your non-track argument, because obviously a representative train station building should have a catchment area much larger than a simple platform
17:53<frosch123>no
17:53<frosch123>maybe a representative train station would accept/consume tourists
17:54<Eddi|zuHause>frosch123: also, you'll clash with the kind of people that would just encircle an airport with train station tiles so it goes back to having a catchment area
17:54<frosch123>but it certainly does not affect cargo transport
17:55<Eddi|zuHause>frosch123: i've seen people walk quite long distances to train stations, even though tram/bus systems were available
17:55<andythenorth>frosch123: ground types does nothing for the compatibility issue eh?
17:55<andythenorth>e.g. ROAD can’t go on HAUL
17:55<frosch123>andythenorth: it massively reduced the amount of labels you have to consider
17:55*andythenorth is not sure that transitiveness really matter
17:55<andythenorth>matters *
17:56<andythenorth>although players discovered it straight away
17:56<andythenorth>anybody made a mixed gauge railtype yet? :P
17:56<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: the non-transitive cases are exactly what makes upgrading hard
17:57<andythenorth>because…?
17:58<Eddi|zuHause>for example if railtype A is present on a tile, and is used by a train of railtype B, then you build a railtype C over that tile, which is compatible with A but not B
17:59<Eddi|zuHause>the upgrade algorithm determines that C can overbuild A because it's compatible
17:59<Eddi|zuHause>but that breaks the route for B
18:01<Eddi|zuHause>if it were transitive, it would be fine, because C compatible with A and A compatible with B means C compatible with B
18:02<andythenorth>how can B be compatible with A but not C?
18:03<andythenorth>that makes no sense
18:03<andythenorth>[as a design choice]
18:03<Wolf01>You are thinking about A->B->C, but think it as normal->catenary->3rd rail
18:05<Wolf01>(it makes no sense to "upgrade" catenary to 3rd rail, but one train that can run with catenary might not run on 3rd rail)
18:06<andythenorth>why?
18:06<andythenorth>who’d do that?
18:06<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: maybe C is like "high speed rail without freight trains"
18:07<Eddi|zuHause>or B is "oversized train that cannot run under catenary"
18:07<Eddi|zuHause>or all sorts of weird combinations
18:07<andythenorth>ok, but all the cases presented are rational
18:08<andythenorth>and the player has made a dumb choice
18:08<andythenorth>player chooses to break their route, that’s up to them
18:08<Eddi|zuHause>that's not the problem
18:08<Eddi|zuHause>the problem is that the algorithm cannot determine the case reliably
18:09<Eddi|zuHause>so the game behaves inconsitent/wrong from the view of the player
18:09<Wolf01>The problem is that he didn't know it until tried to convert track under a train
18:09*andythenorth didn’t realise there were upgrading algorithms
18:10<andythenorth>I thought it just built what I wanted?
18:10<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: build a rail in X direction, build an electrified rail in Y direction. watch the magic happen
18:10<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: then build electrified rail first, and normal rail second
18:10<frosch123>andythenorth: there is a difference between the convert tool and adding trackbits
18:11<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: and then the problems begin when you have complicated railtypes with weight, different AC/DC catenary, 3rd rail, ...
18:12<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: there might be a "universal" railtype, but the game cannot possibly find that automatically
18:12<andythenorth>why should it? o_O
18:12*andythenorth is confused as to the problem being solved there
18:12<andythenorth>magic rarely works
18:12<andythenorth>don’t try, mostly
18:12<Eddi|zuHause>there are algorithms for finding that, but they require the graph to be transitive
18:13<Eddi|zuHause>and the graph is not transitive (in general)
18:13<andythenorth>don’t attempt magic
18:14<andythenorth>sometimes magic is necessary :(
18:14-!-Gja [~Martin@93-167-84-102-static.dk.customer.tdc.net] has quit [Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com)]
18:15<Eddi|zuHause>andythenorth: but the current overbuilding algorithm is clearly better than requiring the player to switch railtypes when connecting electric and non-electric rails
18:15<Eddi|zuHause>which makes junction building really annoying in mixed networks
18:16<andythenorth>understood
18:17*andythenorth must sleep
18:17-!-synchris [~synchris@139.138.202.72] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
18:17<andythenorth>bye
18:17-!-andythenorth [~andytheno@cpc87219-aztw31-2-0-cust178.18-1.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Quit: andythenorth]
18:18-!-frosch123 [~frosch@00013ce7.user.oftc.net] has quit [Quit: be yourself, except: if you have the opportunity to be a unicorn, then be a unicorn]
18:21-!-Offlithium [~Offlithiu@2602:30a:2c54:d2b0:1a3b:d2ff:feaa:4048] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
18:21-!-Offlithium [~Offlithiu@2602:30a:2c54:d2b0:1a3b:d2ff:feaa:4048] has joined #openttd
18:21-!-Offlithium is "Offlithium" on #openttd
18:30<Wolf01>I want to drive a EMD DDA40X :|
18:30<Eddi|zuHause>sounds heavy
18:30<Wolf01>It is
18:31<Eddi|zuHause>DD as in axle scheme?
18:31<Wolf01>Let me check trainz simulator
18:31<Wolf01>Is the Centennial
18:32<Eddi|zuHause>yeah, axle scheme Do'-Do'
18:34<Wolf01>If I have it I must use it on freeplay, and that isn't interesting :(
18:42<Wolf01>How do I drive a diesel locomotive? I'm too used with coal ones :P
18:42<Wolf01>Too many brakes
18:43<@peter1138>what
18:44<Wolf01>It's moving \o/
18:48<Wolf01>Ok, ok, I was in easy mode :(
18:48<Wolf01>That's just a cog to rotate
19:03-!-HerzogDeXtEr1 [~farci@i59F6A5D6.versanet.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
19:06-!-cHawk [~chawk@95.157.52.147] has joined #openttd
19:06-!-cHawk is "realname" on #openttd #tor
19:08-!-FLHerne [~flh@cpc4-papw5-2-0-cust175.5-3.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
19:10-!-gelignite [~gelignite@x4db627aa.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Quit: http://bit.ly/1kso8Ta]
19:29<Wolf01>'night
19:29-!-Wolf01 [~wolf01@0001288e.user.oftc.net] has quit [Quit: Once again the world is quick to bury me.]
19:40-!-mindlesstux [~mindlesst@2001:19f0:5:238:5400:ff:fe30:7f01] has quit [Quit: ZNC - http://znc.in]
19:40-!-mindlesstux [~mindlesst@2001:19f0:5:238:5400:ff:fe30:7f01] has joined #openttd
19:40-!-mindlesstux is "ZNC - http://znc.in" on #virtualization #virt @#tuz-oftc @#tuz #qemu #osm #openttd #openconnect #observium #linode #ipv6 #OpenRailwayMap
19:54-!-Progman [~progman@p5DC5F24B.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #openttd
19:54-!-Progman is "Peter Henschel" on #openttdcoop.dev #openttdcoop #openttd
19:55-!-mindlesstux [~mindlesst@2001:19f0:5:238:5400:ff:fe30:7f01] has quit [Quit: ZNC - http://znc.in]
19:56-!-mindlesstux [~mindlesst@2001:19f0:5:238:5400:ff:fe30:7f01] has joined #openttd
19:56-!-mindlesstux is "ZNC - http://znc.in" on #virtualization #virt @#tuz-oftc @#tuz #qemu #osm #openttd #openconnect #observium #linode #ipv6 #OpenRailwayMap
20:02-!-DDR [~David@S0106f0f249839863.vc.shawcable.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
20:20-!-Progman [~progman@p5DC5F24B.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
20:23-!-Offlithium [~Offlithiu@2602:30a:2c54:d2b0:1a3b:d2ff:feaa:4048] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
20:28-!-smoke_fumus [~smoke_fum@188.35.176.90] has quit [Quit: KVIrc 4.2.0 Equilibrium http://www.kvirc.net/]
21:18-!-glx [~glx@000128ec.user.oftc.net] has quit [Quit: Bye]
22:08-!-DDR [~David@S0106f0f249839863.vc.shawcable.net] has joined #openttd
22:08-!-DDR is "David" on #openttd
22:48-!-Offlithium [~Offlithiu@2602:30a:2c54:d2b0:1a3b:d2ff:feaa:4048] has joined #openttd
22:48-!-Offlithium is "Offlithium" on #openttd
23:21-!-Flygon [~Flygon@210-84-23-180.dyn.iinet.net.au] has joined #openttd
23:21-!-Flygon is "Flygon" on #openttd
---Logclosed Sun Jul 16 00:00:13 2017