Back to Home / #openttd / 2017 / 02 / Prev Day | Next Day
#openttd IRC Logs for 2017-02-28

---Logopened Tue Feb 28 00:00:04 2017
00:11-!-Snail [] has quit [Quit: Snail]
00:12-!-sim-al2 is now known as Guest151
00:12-!-sim-al2 [] has joined #openttd
00:12-!-sim-al2 is "sim-al2" on #openttd @#/r/openttd
00:15-!-Guest151 [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
00:31-!-markasoftware [~markasoft@2601:601:8c00:f808::c02e] has quit [Quit: markasoftware]
00:42-!-sim-al2 is now known as Guest152
00:42-!-sim-al2 [] has joined #openttd
00:42-!-sim-al2 is "sim-al2" on #openttd @#/r/openttd
00:47-!-Guest152 [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
00:54-!-chomwitt [] has joined #openttd
00:54-!-chomwitt is "chomwitt" on #openttd #qemu #debian #debian-games
01:17-!-Alberth [] has joined #openttd
01:17-!-mode/#openttd [+o Alberth] by ChanServ
01:17-!-Alberth is "purple" on @#openttd
01:43-!-supermop__ [] has joined #openttd
01:43-!-supermop__ is "A CIRC user" on #openttd #tycoon
01:45<@Alberth>hi hi
01:48-!-supermop_ [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
02:47-!-mescalito [] has joined #openttd
02:47-!-mescalito is "realname" on #openttdcoop #openttd
02:58-!-andythenorth [] has joined #openttd
02:58-!-andythenorth is "Andy" on #openttd
03:03-!-andythenorth [] has quit []
03:13-!-Sova [] has joined #openttd
03:13-!-Sova is "realname" on #openttd #openttdcoop
03:38-!-andythenorth [] has joined #openttd
03:38-!-andythenorth is "Andy" on #openttd
03:39-!-andythenorth [] has left #openttd []
03:58-!-sim-al2 [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
04:00-!-Supercheese [] has quit [Quit: Valete omnes]
04:03-!-supermop [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
04:09-!-matt11235 [~matt11235@] has joined #openttd
04:09-!-matt11235 is "realname" on #debian-gaming #debian-sayhi #debian #https-everywhere #openttd #linux #kernelnewbies
04:12-!-maciozo [] has joined #openttd
04:12-!-maciozo is "maciozo" on #openttd
04:25-!-skapazzo [~skapazzo@] has joined #openttd
04:25-!-skapazzo is "Dominic W" on #openttd #suckless
04:40-!-Samu [] has joined #openttd
04:40-!-Samu is "OFTC WebIRC Client" on #openttd
04:53-!-Wolf01 [] has joined #openttd
04:53-!-Wolf01 is "Wolf01" on #openttd
04:58<Samu>I like this
04:58<Samu>but it lacks customization
05:06<__ln__>windows 10 :(
05:07<Samu>my big coding skills:
05:08<Samu>i always take so much time figuring out how to code something, and then it's just so small
05:16<Samu>i'm following the formula
05:16<Samu>very similar to it
05:16<Samu>Engine_Running_Cost - instead of engine running cost, this is now the running cost of parts of the trains that have a running cost
05:17<Samu>Number_of_added_Wagons - instead of number of added wagons, this is now the length of parts of the train that do not have a running cost
05:18<@Alberth>o/ all
05:19<Samu>Constant_Variable - this part is, for now, based on _settings_game.vehicle.max_train_length
05:19<Samu>i'd like to have this to become a customizable user value
05:19<Samu>hi Alberth
05:52-!-zwamkat [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
05:53-!-zwamkat [] has joined #openttd
05:53-!-zwamkat is "Not your avarage Zwamkat" on #openttdcoop #openttd #debian
06:11-!-iSoSyS [] has joined #openttd
06:11-!-iSoSyS is "realname" on #openttd #/r/openttd
06:21-!-Sova [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
06:46-!-Sova [] has joined #openttd
06:46-!-Sova is "realname" on #openttdcoop #openttd
06:53<__ln__>Wolf01: ketchup on pizza -- heresy or not?
07:28<Wolf01>Samu, please, don't do "return cost += cost * ..."
07:29<Samu>hmm why? what happens?
07:29<__ln__>nothing, there's just ketchup on the pizza then
07:29<Wolf01>It's ugly as fuck
07:29<Samu>just ugly?
07:30<Samu>no real issues?
07:30<crem>+1 for "return x += x * blah" being ugly
07:31<Samu>return cost = cost + cost * unc_len / (VEHICLE_LENGTH * 2 * _settings_game.vehicle.max_train_length);
07:31<Samu>is this preferible?
07:32<Wolf01>No matter what, you should split in 2 lines
07:32<Wolf01>No assignments in return
07:32<Wolf01>It's error prone
07:33<Wolf01>And try to forget the idea that fewer lines in a patch is better
07:33<Wolf01>A good patch is good, no matter how many lines
07:34<Wolf01>Also comment difficult to read code to understand what it should do
07:35<__ln__>I agree, assignment in return statement is both ugly and harder to understand than doing it elsewhere.
07:35<Samu>heh, for me it was hard to understand that an articulated vehicle is not the same as a dual-headed vehicle
07:37<Wolf01>Also an assignment in return is useless as there is no other code which uses the variable
07:38<Samu> cost += cost * unc_len / (VEHICLE_LENGTH * 3 * _settings_game.vehicle.max_train_length); return cost;
07:38<Samu>is this it?
07:38<__ln__>Oh, indeed, i didn't even look that closely to notice cost is a local variable.
07:38<Samu>2 lines
07:38<Wolf01>Yes, that's better
07:40-!-FLHerne [] has joined #openttd
07:40-!-FLHerne is "Francis Herne" on #openttd
07:41<crem>I'd also use while{} rather than do{}while even though the first iteration is guaranteed to be non-NULL. But that's matter of taste I guess.
07:42<crem>There are lots of do{}while though.
07:43<Samu>uh, wait, explain me better, i'm noob
07:44<Wolf01>There's a difference between while() {} and do {} while()
07:44<Wolf01>The former tests the variable at the beginning, before executing the code
07:45<Wolf01>The latter executes the code and then tests the variable to know if it should do another loop
07:46<Samu>ah, the engine always has a cached_veh_length, doesn't it?
07:46<Samu>be it articulated or not
07:46<Samu>engine or wagon
07:47<Samu>cached_veh_length is the length of the current part being iterated
07:47-!-tycoondemon [] has joined #openttd
07:47-!-tycoondemon is "..." on #openttdcoop.stable #openttdcoop #openttd
07:48<Samu>if it's not articulated, it still has a cached_veh_length
07:48-!-tokai|noir [] has joined #openttd
07:48-!-tokai|noir is "Christian Rosentreter" on #openttd
07:48-!-mode/#openttd [+v tokai|noir] by ChanServ
07:49<Samu>if it is articulated, cached_veh_length is the value of only 1 of the parts
07:49<Wolf01>Then, what's the problem?
07:49<Samu>so it needs to sum all parts
07:50<Samu>i think my code is fine
07:50<Samu>my do {} while()
07:54<Wolf01>As crem says, it's only a matter of taste if it works the same way
07:55-!-tokai [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
08:06-!-tycoondemon [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
08:12-!-JezK_ [~jez@2407:7800:400:107f:442f:917c:e18b:a21e] has quit [Quit: :q!]
08:15<Wolf01>"But do not ever write, 'a = b +=1' or we will have to kill 10 kittens, 27 mice, a dog and a hamster." XDDDD
08:17-!-tokai [] has joined #openttd
08:17-!-tokai is "Christian Rosentreter" on #openttd
08:17-!-mode/#openttd [+v tokai] by ChanServ
08:18<@Alberth>I wonder what value a gets :)
08:19<@Alberth>probably same as b
08:19<Wolf01>I think is the same of a = ++b, but not sure
08:19<@Alberth>ha, I never write pre-increment either :p
08:20<@Alberth>always post-increment, and always as separate statement
08:20<Wolf01>Me too
08:20<Wolf01>Pre-increment is for code obfuscation
08:23<@Alberth>I can see pre-decrement being useful, but pre-increment, I wouldn't be able to give a useful example now
08:23<Wolf01>Lol "for(int x=0; x<100; x++); cout<<x;" -> 100... fucking semicolons XD
08:23<crem>nope, all postfix operators are for code obfuscation. It's natural for all unary operators to be prefix.
08:24-!-tokai|noir [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
08:26-!-Arveen [] has quit [Quit: I like trains]
08:26<@Alberth>no compile error for unknown x? :)
08:27<@Alberth>crem: sure, as soon as we have 1 =+ a
08:27<Wolf01>Might be, I just shortened the code
08:28<crem>What is "1 =+ a"?
08:28<Wolf01>Wtf is +=A?
08:28<@Alberth>prefix form of a += a
08:28<@Alberth>a += 1
08:29<crem>+= is a binary operation, it is infix.
08:29<Wolf01>I was reading this one
08:30<@Alberth>crem: not really, left hand side and right hand side have different properties
08:30<Wolf01>The accepted answer is really explanatory
08:30-!-sim-al2 [] has joined #openttd
08:30-!-sim-al2 is "sim-al2" on #openttd @#/r/openttd
08:30<@Alberth>Normal + is a binary operation imho
08:31<crem>It's right-associative binary operator.
08:31<crem>i mean
08:32-!-alex_ [] has joined #openttd
08:32-!-alex_ is "Alex" on #openttd #open-source-java #debian
08:33-!-tokai|noir [] has joined #openttd
08:33-!-tokai|noir is "Christian Rosentreter" on #openttd
08:33-!-mode/#openttd [+v tokai|noir] by ChanServ
08:34<Samu>"cost += cost * unc_len...;" is this bad?
08:34<@Alberth>"operator" has no side effects in my view, which is why "operator" doesn't seem the right word to me
08:35<@Alberth>Samu: quadratic costs?
08:35<@Alberth>ie cost = cost + cost * unc_len
08:35<Samu>cost = whatever it is right now + extra
08:36<Samu>that extra is based on the cost that whatever it is right now
08:36<@Alberth>where "extra" includes the cost you have to far
08:36<Wolf01>Where unc_len is 0 <= x < 1 I hope
08:36<@Alberth>sure, will work
08:37<Samu>unc_len is 1 to ... hmmm 64*8*2
08:37<@Alberth>but it may not do what you expect it to do
08:37<Samu>oh, it can also be 0
08:38<Samu>so 0 to 64*8*2
08:38<Wolf01>I already have enough with transport fever where running cost of wagons are x10 than the purchase cost of an engine
08:38<@Alberth>good model for making money :p
08:38<@Alberth>free wagons, you just pay per km :p
08:39<Wolf01>No, the problem is that even the wagon costs a lot
08:39<Wolf01>You usually can't start with trains in that evil game
08:39<@Alberth>so they too have the problem of being too sand-boxish?
08:39-!-alex_ [] has quit [Quit: Ухожу я от вас (xchat 2.4.5 или старше)]
08:39<Wolf01>No, it's the opposite
08:40-!-tokai [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
08:40<Wolf01>Everything costs too much
08:40<Wolf01>But you can enable the sandbox mod and have everything for free
08:40-!-Stimrol [] has joined #openttd
08:40-!-Stimrol is "Stimrol" on #openttd
08:40<@Alberth>E_TOO_MUCH_REALISM :p
08:41<Wolf01>Yup, like a 3 seats car (counting the driver) can carry 24 pax
08:41<@Alberth>I could see it as a way to drive you to simpler buses etc
08:42<Samu>cost += cost * unc_len / (VEHICLE_LENGTH * 2 * _settings_game.vehicle.max_train_length)
08:42<Samu>wanna help me work on a better formula?
08:42<Wolf01>1. what you want as a result; 2. what the variable mean
08:42<Wolf01>Cost is the entire consist running cost iirc
08:43<Wolf01>Which in vanilla is calculated for engines only
08:43<Samu>let me copy paste, i got it explained earlier today
08:44<Wolf01>I understood you want to make running cost based on consist length
08:44<Samu>Cost = this is the running cost of parts of the train that have a running cost
08:44<Wolf01>I think is better to have a grf feature instead
08:45<Samu>unc_len - the sum of the length of parts that do not have a running cost
08:45<Wolf01>What _settings_game.vehicle.max_train_length has to do there then?
08:46<Samu>i wanted some level of customization...
08:46<Wolf01>I wouldn't mix a setting value in calculations
08:46<Samu>but that's probably bad
08:47<Samu>I plant have a separate user-defined value
08:47<Samu>plan to*
08:47<Wolf01>Leave it out for now
08:48<Samu>ok, replace it with which value?
08:48<Samu>default is 7
08:48<Samu>default of max_train_length that is
08:49<Wolf01>That is a multiplier, and max_train_length is not the right one to use, the weight multiplier could be a better one
08:51<Wolf01>Also like that, the greatest is the length, the lower is the cost
08:51<Wolf01>Just put your formulae in excel and throw at it some numbers, make a chart and see
08:52-!-fiatjaf [~fiatjaf@] has quit [Quit: ~]
08:52-!-fiatjaf [~fiatjaf@] has joined #openttd
08:52-!-fiatjaf is "~" on #openttd #fish
08:53-!-Stimrol [] has quit [Quit: ZNC -]
08:53<Samu>running cost based on train weigth isn't a good idea imo
08:54<Samu>the weigth is varied
08:54<Samu>it would be constantly changing the running cost values
08:55<Samu>but it's an idea that could go into a newgrf perhaps
08:57<Samu>"I wanted to achieve something "simple""
08:57<Samu>more wagons = more costs
08:57<Samu>less wagons = less costs
08:57<Wolf01>Just add running costs to wagons?
08:58<Samu>no, because that would require newgrf
08:58<Samu>default wagons have no costs
08:58<Samu>i wanted to do it for the default wagons
08:58<Samu>without the need of a newgrf
08:59<Wolf01>Then why you want to add obscure costs? We already have the "other" category which is weird enough
08:59<Samu>because it's unfair that train size can go up to 64 tiles, and yet the running cost of a train doesn't change
09:00-!-Snail [] has joined #openttd
09:00-!-Snail is "Jacopo Coletto" on #openttd
09:00<Samu>i know 64 isn't exactly playable
09:00<Samu>but most servers use the default of 7, maps also larger
09:00<Wolf01>But you will need to add more engines or the train won't move, there your added running cost goes
09:01<Samu>i have it explained in my old topic
09:02<Samu>if you care to read
09:02<Wolf01>Also different wagons should have different costs, I could have a flat wagon 1 tile long which costs less than an armored wagon of 1/4 tile
09:08<Wolf01>Btw, I'm not saying you are trying to do a bad thing, I would like it too (I like realism) but I would do it via grf
09:10-!-Snail [] has quit [Quit: Snail]
09:10<Wolf01>As I don't like when something is changed in obscure ways, as if the running cost for engines says "2M/y" and the info window says "3.5M/y", where the 1.5M comes off?
09:11<Samu>you won't know until you attach the wagon into a train
09:11<Samu>and then look into the train details
09:11<Samu>it's "obscure"
09:11<Wolf01>If you do it with a grf, each wagon can show its running cost, like engines do, and you can sum the numbers
09:12<Wolf01>Why do the running cost of a wagon changes with train length?
09:12<Wolf01>Can't you just sum 2M+200k+200+150k+150k+300k?
09:13<Samu>that's not always the case, there are wagons with running costs specified, and some without
09:13<Samu>if you mix it up with newgrfs' that is
09:13<Wolf01>Instead of doing 2M+(black_magic)?
09:14<Wolf01>1. mixing up grfs is your fault, as most of miscalculations reported in the forum; 2. vanilla game should not change vanilla values using black magic
09:15<Samu>i mean mix vanilla with a newgrf that contains wagons with running costs
09:16<Wolf01>That's bad enough
09:17<Wolf01>Also if you need to report the running cost for a wagon, you should do another function and apply the cost to that wagon with the wagon lenght, not the length of entire consist which means nothing
09:17<Samu>yes, that's one issue, i intend to solve it by having a game setting that enables or disables these costs
09:17<Wolf01>I won't pay less the fuel if I make my car bigger
09:18-!-enygmata [~oftc-webi@] has joined #openttd
09:18-!-enygmata is "OFTC WebIRC Client" on #openttd
09:20<Wolf01>What I mean is that you should do cost += ... into the loop, not at the end
09:21<Samu>i got this
09:21<Wolf01>The problem is that you might not know the cost of the engines because you didn't have already looped through all the consist
09:21<Samu>same formula
09:22<Samu>the engine cost is added
09:22<Wolf01>But you could use a constant for vanilla or when you don't have defined running cost
09:22<Samu>cost += GetPrice(e->u.rail.running_cost_class, cost_factor, e->GetGRF());
09:22<Samu>that's already in there, i didn't touch that
09:22<Wolf01>Also I can't understand why you must derive wagon running cost from an engine
09:23<Samu>this is the running cost of engines, but also of wagons that do specify running cost
09:23<Wolf01>For vanilla engines you could add 1/8 of their price
09:24<Samu>that would still make usage of the most powerful/fast train preferible, and i wanted to change that
09:24<Wolf01>And just leave out all the lenght calculations which don't mean anything
09:24<Samu>for the early part of the game, that is
09:26<Wolf01>I can't follow you
09:26<Samu>in the case of vanilla, running cost of wagons should be dependant on engine running cost
09:26<@Alberth>turn on breakdowns, and you get a much different choice in engines
09:26<Samu>most of the time, a powerful engine got high running cost
09:26<Samu>a less powerful engine got low running cost
09:26<Samu>it's not always the case
09:27<@Alberth>use a different newgrf if you don't agree
09:27<Samu>meh, my post
09:27<Wolf01>You are going to purchase a trailer: "it's 100$ says the dealer, to what vehicle do you want to attach it?" "a ferrari" "then its 500$"
09:28<@Alberth>giving parameters free for tuning by newgrf authors means some makes choices different from your ideas
09:28<Samu>makes no sense to you, :(
09:28<Wolf01>Make no sense to everyone else than you
09:28<@Alberth>it works for Apple :p
09:29<Samu>i had tested a Dash
09:29<Samu>running cost of dash is about £1400
09:29<Samu>wagons attached into Dash were about ~£93 or so running cost
09:30<Wolf01>Wagons which don't have running costs should be derived from other wagon details not from planets lining up and a total ecplipse"
09:30<Samu>a manley-morel dmu running cost is about £1700
09:30<Samu>wagon attached would be about ~£113
09:30<@peter1138>did inflation ever get fixed
09:30<Samu>this cost isn't shown in the wagon, because by the time you're purchasing the wagon, you don't know into which train it's going to be attached
09:31<Wolf01>^ and that is wrong
09:31<Samu>but why? that's the intention :(
09:32<Wolf01>Because I purchase wagons and engines based on running costs too, If I can't make 2M/y, I won't purchase an engine which costs me 3M/y
09:32<@peter1138>then you need a specific wagons for that use
09:32<Wolf01>And with hidden costs I can't know that
09:32<Samu>the only thing you will know is that the running cost is not displayed in the wagon
09:33<Wolf01>The only thing I won't know is the running costs
09:33<Samu>if the wagon does specify a running cost, it will say it, and it will use it
09:33<Wolf01>If it's not displayed it's 0
09:33<Wolf01>And it should be 0
09:34<Samu>if it's.. £100 for the wagon and £1400 for the engine, it will be £1400 + £100
09:34<Samu>if it doesn't display it
09:34<Samu>it will be based on the engine
09:34<Samu>if it displays £0
09:34<Samu>it will be £1400 + £0
09:35<Wolf01>But it isn't displayed, how do I know it's 100?
09:35<Samu>you won't know, until it is attached into the train
09:35<Wolf01>Also, it's based on the engine
09:35<Wolf01>But also on length
09:35<Wolf01>So E+W = 1400+100
09:35<Wolf01>E+W+W = 1400+80+80
09:36<Samu>that length is the length that does not have a running cost
09:36<Wolf01>E+w+w+w+w+w+w+w+ww+w+w+ They pay me to run it
09:36<Samu>if all wagons don't have a running cost
09:37<Samu>meh, let me take a screenshot
09:39<Wolf01> <- Is this too different than your idea?
09:40<Wolf01>You can even put a multiplier and use the same multiplier to show the actual running cost on the details
09:41<Wolf01>I simply can't understand the relation of the wagon running cost with the engine
09:42<Samu>let me try with another engine, brb
09:42<Wolf01>Also it's just a nonsense to spread the running cost of the engine to the entire consist based on the length of the consist
09:42<supermop__>If i have a pullman coach with fancy waiters and staff onboard, i assume they do not ask for more pay depending on what locomotive hauls them?
09:43<Wolf01>1400 + 1W -> 100, +2W -> 80, +3W -> 60
09:43<supermop__>although in that case i guess you need at least 1 waiter when there is one coach, but maybe only 2 waiters for 3 coaches?
09:44<Samu>refresh page, should display 2 images
09:44<Samu>the ferrari effect
09:44<Wolf01>Samu I can't give a fuck of the screenshots, it's the wrong implementation behind it which is the problem
09:45<Wolf01>The idea is good, but not the implementation
09:45<Samu>let me look at your code
09:45<Wolf01>You buy 3 apples: 3€, 3 apples and 1 pear -> 25€, how much costs the pear?
09:45<Samu>ah, that would make the cost permanent
09:45<Samu>for each wagon
09:45<Samu>independent of the egine
09:46<Wolf01>Hint: the pear costs 0.75€, but you have a ferrari
09:47<Samu>hmm so the ferrari effect is bad for realism
09:48<Wolf01>Not just for realism, it's nonsense
09:48-!-orudge` [] has joined #openttd
09:48-!-orudge` is "orudge" on #thesinner #openttdcoop.devzone #bukkit #jontylog #tycoonexiles #z.aud #locomotion #transportempire #openttdcoop #openttd #tycoon
09:48-!-mode/#openttd [+o orudge`] by ChanServ
09:48<Wolf01>Because the next time you might want to apply a different cost if the depot where you purchase the wagon is near an airport
09:50<Samu>okay, if i don't base it on the length of the engine, what do I base it on
09:50<Wolf01>The cost of the wagon
09:51<Samu>erm,... running cost of the engine
09:51<Wolf01>The weight of the wagon
09:51<Samu>power of the train?
09:51-!-sim-al2 [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
09:51<Wolf01>Forgot about the engine
09:51<Wolf01>You have a wagon and its details
09:51<Wolf01>Nothing else
09:52<Samu>i see
09:52<Wolf01>Use the length of the name of the wagon multiplied by the id of the default cargo, do what you want, just use the same wagon details
09:52<Wolf01>It *must* be reproducible
09:52<Samu>19t (49t) for grain, i see
09:54<Samu>not sure, hmm...
09:54<Wolf01>Also, please don't make it strange for mixed grfs, it's already weird to have different purchase prices
09:55<Samu>newgrfs are already a mess indeed
09:56<Samu>running cost based on wagon weigth, independently of engine
09:57<supermop__>maybe dirt should be something different than rough mining roads etc
09:57<supermop__>and those can be gravel
09:57<Samu>do you mean the current weigth of the wagon?
09:57<Samu>if it's emtpy, it's 19t
09:57<Wolf01>We have a lot of gravel roads here
09:57<Samu>if it's full it's 49t
09:57<Samu>or do i use the max value always?
09:58<Wolf01>I would use min value
09:58<crem>Running cost should also depend on velocity! For realism. :) And age.
09:59<Samu>i don't think it would achieve anything by just adding permanent costs to wagons, just for the sake of being the same
10:00<Samu>we're at odds, you have a different issue than me
10:00<supermop__>any gameplay need for shittier tramways?
10:00<Wolf01>Btw, I would use purchase_cost / factor * breakdown_chance
10:00<Samu>my goal was to achieve balance
10:00<supermop__>seems like it will be easier to run out of road types than tram types
10:00<Samu>incentive usage of lower running cost trains
10:01<supermop__>as long as you don't use exotic tram power supplies
10:01<Samu>but my proposal is nonsense, not realism
10:02<Samu>i dunno, i gotta test
10:02<Wolf01>supermop__, yes, I thought that too, 23 / 7 instead of 15 / 15 could have been a better choice
10:02<supermop__>currently only want normal tram and modern faster light rail,
10:02<Samu>i prefer balance over realism
10:02<supermop__>but there is scope for drawing at least a shittier looking catenary with even lower speed than regular tram
10:03<supermop__>but i dont think there is need for shittier tramway track
10:03<Wolf01>But you could have lightrail, elrail, catenary, suspended, train on rubber
10:04<Wolf01>Small metro
10:04<supermop__>maybe this: light railway; LR with shitty wire; LR with decent wire; LR with nice modern catenary
10:05<Wolf01>Also some industrial consists might be placed in tram section just to keep them separated from road
10:05<supermop__>and not worry about quality of trackbed in such a basic grf
10:06<supermop__>thing is, in that case, then you might want the modern light rail to not be buildable on road
10:07<supermop__>anyway that gives variation and only uses 4 out of 15 slots
10:07<Wolf01>The one with grassy paths and cement?
10:07<supermop__>when tram is in the roadway, it all looks the same
10:08<supermop__>not worth worrying about quality of track
10:08<supermop__>when tram is out of the road, it either looks like crappy rails, nice rails, or is still set into concrete
10:08<Wolf01> <- this would be a nice addition to cities
10:09<supermop__>wolf: yes
10:10<supermop__>sometimes it looks like this though:
10:10<Wolf01>I know you could just let bare land under it, but with some decoration and forbidding to build it over road / build road under it, it is a cool thing
10:10<@Alberth>ever looked at how many train track types exist? :)
10:11<Wolf01>The problem might be crossings
10:11<supermop__>and sometimes like this:
10:12<Wolf01>I already have a patch to disable crossings on the same roadtype, I think making a patch which allows only to cross another roadtype and not build it in the same direction is not so difficult
10:12<supermop__>is it worth 3+ tram types though for the different ways it can look when absent of roadway?
10:14<supermop__>can maybe abuse town zone/sidewalks to get fancy grass or pavement in town, gravel ballast outside
10:14<Wolf01>Btw, let's ask the cat when he arrives
10:14<crem>The aspect in ttd that I always didn't like is that from the very beginning it's possible (and encouraged) to build large routes in random places of the map. In reaility companies usually start small and local. It would be nice to have a "distance from headquarters penalty", purchasing permits to extend area where you can build or something like that.
10:15<supermop__>crem: in 1994 playing tto, my neighbor told me that reliability and running cost improve the closer a vehicle is to your HQ
10:15<supermop__>i believed that for about 10 years and was so sad to find it was not true
10:16<Wolf01>But, let's make it and don't tell others, for the glory of satan
10:16<Wolf01>Commit message: changed stuff
10:16<supermop__>Wolf01: is it possible for tramtype to block roads or vis versa yet?
10:17<Wolf01>Not yet, but soon
10:17<Wolf01>We need to make the core working flawlessly first
10:17<Wolf01>Then flag-fest will happen
10:18<crem>All that you discuss now, trams etc.. Will it be available in "pure" openttd with default gfx? Or one has to build from some fork, know what gfx to download, etc?
10:19<supermop__>please DL and test
10:19<supermop__>cannot go into regular Openttd until it is well tested
10:20<crem>But eventually, will it?
10:20<supermop__>only if enough people test it and work to make sure it works
10:21<supermop__>there is no guarantee if users are apathetic towards it,it will die
10:23<crem>Because even in last major versions updates, all "major" changes were like "more height levels" and "windows remember their size". It's sad to see actual gameplay enchancements which don't get into the game.
10:24<supermop__>crem: the more complex a feature is, the more work it needs to make sure it can go into trunk
10:25<supermop__>if you follow threads for the major patchpacks in the forums, you will see there are constantly bugs, problems, conflicts
10:25<Wolf01>Like NRT, which might see trunk next xmas if I can't fix some of the shit I've done
10:25<supermop__>and the maintainer has to work constantly to resolve them
10:26<Wolf01>And andy already wants me at work on docks
10:27<supermop__>a patch for trunk has to make sure that it absolutely does not cause problems first, and that the code follows standards, so if the author dies tomorrow, some other dev can easily follow it
10:28<supermop__>notice that Cdist took like 4 years or more to get into trunk, and even now people complain about it not working the way they expect
10:28<supermop__>also, more height levels was a huge patch that took years and years of work
10:28<@Alberth>wiki doesn't do a great job in explaining what you should expect from cdist :)
10:29<Wolf01> supermop__
10:29<supermop__>people clamored for MHL for years but it took Chillcore and others tons of work to get it to be suitable for trunk
10:30<supermop__>Wolf01: nice
10:30<Wolf01>Btw, I would like a grf set (and baseset too) with that kind of graphics
10:31<supermop__>i will make for 50,000.00 USD
10:31<Wolf01>Simutrans has a sort of it
10:31<Wolf01>I could make it with voxels
10:31<supermop__>buy now and i'll only charge 45,000
10:32<supermop__>can probably just hire that artist
10:33<Wolf01>He does really cool things
10:33<Wolf01>Too bad I'm shit at drawing (and at coding too, but a bit better there)
10:34<Wolf01> what?
10:35<Samu>testing ship vs train vs road vehicle
10:35<Samu>be back later
10:36<supermop__>just make a few hundredthousand eur and pay the artist
10:36<supermop__>or pay me and i will try to learn
10:37<supermop__>Wolf01: that looks pretty cheap
10:38<supermop__>label for shitty tramway? SHTR?
10:38<Wolf01>Uhm, it would be possible to make bridge graphics which merge when 2 bridges are build close?
10:39<supermop__>wolf: ive always wanted that
10:39<Wolf01>Just SHIT is enough, it's already tramway :P
10:39<Wolf01> <-
10:39-!-Wormnest [] has joined #openttd
10:39-!-Wormnest is "Wormnest" on #openttd
10:40<supermop__>currently only idea i have is use 3+ bridge types: regular, left, right, and maybe center
10:40<FLHerne>There's a grf somewhere for that, IIRC
10:40<FLHerne>(with seperate bridge types for each side)
10:40<supermop__>i don't care about having 3 types of suspension bridge anyway
10:41<supermop__>but until nml does bridges, im not going to bother with it
10:45-!-Landscape [] has joined #openttd
10:45-!-Landscape is "OFTC WebIRC Client" on #openttd
10:49<Wolf01> <- btw, granite tramway
10:49<Landscape>hey you developers, what about this suggestion: Possibility to generate Landscapes with cliffs? So, hills are generate in one way - a cell can only be one level higher ore lower than the neighborcell. My idea is to change the hillgenerator to a mountaingenerator where a cell can be two level higher or lower than a neighborcell. what do you think about it?
10:51-!-Sova [] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
10:52<Landscape>it shouldn´t be able that trains, cars and ships can pass this cliffs.they only could drive the normal ways. I know, it would be difficult to generate landscapes and change it with the landscape-changetools... now i´ve to go
10:53<FLHerne>Landscape: With extra-steep slope tiles, or actual vertical cliffs?
10:53<FLHerne>Both have been suggested quite a few times :P
10:53<FLHerne>(if you want to implement it, great...)
10:55<Landscape>yes, with extra steep slope tiles while using the normal graphics for slopes but stretched
10:55<Landscape>it would not be possible without new tiles... i tried to build them on a peace of paper
10:55<FLHerne>'stretching' pixel art tends to look awful
10:56<FLHerne>Maybe for compatibility with old terrain grfs, but you'd need new sprites for the baseset and any updated grfs
10:56<@Alberth>nice Wolf01
10:57<Landscape>you´re right, but i think it´s not the most difficult thing with the graphics, i don´t know
10:57<FLHerne>Also, slopes are exposed to newgrfs, so you'd have to think about back-compatibility and how to extend the interface for that
10:58<@Alberth>trickiest bit is likely the slope, and tunneling/bridge building
10:58<@Alberth>the vertical foundations are not stored, only drawn
11:01<Samu>i must be doing something terribly wrong
11:01<Samu>almost no difference
11:02<Samu>year 1951
11:03<Wolf01>Landscape, I was trying to do it, but current engine glitches too much
11:03<Landscape>ok, i knowed there are quite a few of things to think about. Tunnel and bridges..., first i´ve to prepare my own developer- station on my pc
11:06<Landscape>Wolf01, you tried? Probably another solution could be this: Not to hight up the hills extremly but generate some zones where no trains, vehicles and ships can pass. this zones should be scattered along the hightlevels of hills
11:07<Wolf01>I just tried to make the terrain use foundations instead of slopes when raising a tile corner with CTRL
11:08<Samu>at least i brought the running cost of those 2 trains to be on par with those of 3 ships and 18 trucks
11:08<Samu>it's something!
11:08<Wolf01>It's just 1 train, put there 10 and you see a big change
11:08<Samu>but i fear insufficient
11:09-!-matt11235 [~matt11235@] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
11:09<Samu>3 ships: -£11,074
11:10<Samu>2 trains (1.6.1): -£6,890
11:10<Samu>2 trains (mine): -£11,025
11:10<Samu>18 trucks: -£11,369
11:11<Samu>so? it's something!
11:11<@Alberth>how does 3 ships compare with 2 trains, other than in cost?
11:11<Samu>the starting loan was £150k
11:11<Samu>i wasted as much as i could for each
11:11<Wolf01>I have 3 ships... I have 2 trains .... PA! Running costs are the same
11:12<@Alberth>ie 2 trains 1.6.1 looks the same like 9 trucks to me
11:12<@Alberth>maybe you need 10 trucks
11:13<Landscape>ok, thanks for the short chat and the quick answeres about this theme with the slopes, i´ve to go now. have a nice day
11:13<@Alberth>but my point is, why is 2 trains 1.6.1 vs 9 trucks bad, and 3 trains yours vs 18 trucks good?
11:15-!-Landscape [] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
11:16<Samu>good question
11:16<@Alberth>maybe trains were designed to have a high initial purchase cost and low running cost, while trucks are easier to buy initially, but cost more to run?
11:16<Samu>you made me think
11:17<@Alberth>so depending on how long or often you intend to use them, what is best changes?
11:20-!-enygmata [~oftc-webi@] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
11:22<Samu>it's just not possible to balance this, is it ? :(
11:22<Samu>i'm losing my motivation
11:23<FLHerne>In practice, I think Samu's right
11:24-!-supermop [] has joined #openttd
11:24-!-supermop is "A CIRC user" on #openttd #tycoon
11:25<FLHerne>No-one actually builds short-term links in OTTD, because towns and (non-oil) industries don't move once you've served them
11:27<FLHerne>(but increasing the rail maintenance costs to prevent long empty straight lines is probably simpler)
11:27<Samu>oh, infrastructure maintenance costs is turned off, perhaps i should turn it on, see if it makes a difference
11:29-!-supermop__ [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
11:33<Samu>property maintenance for ships is nearly non-existant
11:34<Samu>property maintenance for rails is nearly 3 times that of the road
11:35<Samu>in the long run, it's still insufficient
11:35<Samu>trains still dominate :( but i will wait till 1952
11:39-!-matt11235 [~matt11235@] has joined #openttd
11:39-!-matt11235 is "realname" on #debian-gaming #debian-sayhi #debian #https-everywhere #openttd #linux #kernelnewbies
11:40<FLHerne>Samu: Maintenance costs scale non-linearly with network size
11:41<FLHerne>They do seem to prevent some of the sillier ways to use trains
11:43<Samu>@calc 18 * 20
11:43<@DorpsGek>Samu: 360
11:43<Samu>calc 9 * 30
11:43<Samu>@calc 9 * 30
11:43<@DorpsGek>Samu: 270
11:43<Samu>@calc 9 * 30 * 2
11:43<@DorpsGek>Samu: 540
11:44<Samu>@calc 160 * 2
11:44<@DorpsGek>Samu: 320
11:47-!-Flygon [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
11:49<@Alberth>calc should refuse to do such simple calculations :)
11:49<Wolf01>Or just return wrong answers :D
11:50<@Alberth>"more than previous"
11:51<@Rubidium>Alberth: just randomly choosing a radix for the input and output data would do enough
11:51<@Alberth>haha :)
11:52-!-sla_ro|master [] has joined #openttd
11:52-!-sla_ro|master is "slamaster" on @#sla #openttd #love
11:55<Samu>:) gonna combine with weigth multiplier for freigth
11:55<Samu>thought this discards passengers...
11:56<@Alberth>don't know if mail counts as freight
11:56<Samu>this map is too flat too
11:56-!-Flygon [] has joined #openttd
11:56-!-Flygon is "Flygon" on #openttd
12:03<Samu>there's many ways to test this, all pointing out to train supremacy, i'm sad, losing motivation
12:03<Samu>dunno what to do
12:12<@Alberth>use a newgrf for trains
12:12<@Alberth>one with bigger costs
12:13<Samu>4 kirby pauls vs 3 jubilees vs 2 ginzus
12:13<Samu>vs the rest
12:13<@Alberth>but yes, you cannot balance all, as different authors have different ideas about "good"
12:13<@Alberth>default trains are designed for original map, so that's where you should test
12:14<Samu>even the kirby pauls beat the road vehicles
12:14<@Alberth>but transport tycoon is a train game
12:14<Samu>something is amiss and I am yet to find out what
12:15<Samu>kirby paul can't even reach max speed, it maxes out at 52 km/h
12:15<Samu>still faster than road vehicles at 48 km/h
12:18-!-iSoSyS [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
12:22<Samu>@calc 9 * 30 * 4
12:22<@DorpsGek>Samu: 1080
12:22<Samu>1080 cargo delivered once all 4 kirby pauls complete a journey
12:23<Samu>only 360 cargo delivered for all 18 trucks
12:32<supermop>i wonder when gravel roads were 'invented'
12:32<supermop>most dirt roads in the US are now gravel
12:32<supermop>but surely gravel was used for roads before that switch
12:39<supermop>im sure people could have build gravel roads in 400bce, but it seems like it wasn't common until like 1800
12:39<supermop>or even later
12:40<Wolf01>supermop, did you see the granite tramway?
12:41<supermop>i did !
12:41<supermop>seems more like a rail type tho
12:43<supermop>ok 9 roadtypes: DIRT, GRAV, EGRV, STON, ESTN, ROAD, ELRD, HWAY, EHWY
12:43-!-FLHerne [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
12:43<supermop>not sure stone is needed
12:44<supermop>maybe road becomes stone, and hway is the asphalt with stripes
12:45<supermop>can add two more for BRT/EBRT
12:46<@Alberth>romans already built stone roads
12:47<@Alberth>need for gravel roads is likely connected with increasing weight of traffic
12:47<@Alberth>or with intensity/reliability or so
12:53-!-glx [] has joined #openttd
12:53-!-mode/#openttd [+v glx] by ChanServ
12:53-!-glx is "Loïc GUILLOUX" on +#openttd
12:56<supermop>Alberth: yes, there are stone roads in antiquity, but gravel is cheaper
12:57<supermop>but it needs a society to be already producing lots of crushed stone
12:57<@Alberth>since we build stone houses that we tear down after 20 years :)
12:57<supermop>so romans probaby didn't bother with gravel - if the road is minor build dirt, if major build stone
12:58<@Alberth>vehicles were likely not that heavy, as they had to drive on non-stone roads as well
12:58<supermop>where 'build dirt' was probably less grading and more 'walk along this path enough and it becomes a dirt road'
12:59<@Alberth>we still have those today, in woods, and along rivers
13:00<@Alberth>regular traffic likes to drive in straight lines
13:00-!-gelignite [] has joined #openttd
13:00-!-gelignite is "gelignite" on #openttd #openttdcoop.devzone
13:00<@Alberth>so not in woods and alongside rivers
13:00<supermop>today in the US, dirt roads only really exists on private land, and very remote areas of parks and protected land
13:01<supermop>unpaved public roads are now gravel
13:01<supermop>where they remain
13:01<supermop>i still remember some public dirt roads in minnesota from when i was a kid
13:01<@Alberth>likely, given the budget of road maintenance in the USA, as I understood it
13:03-!-Ethereal_Whisper [~Tricia@] has joined #openttd
13:03-!-Ethereal_Whisper is "Tricia" on #openttdcoop #openttd
13:05<supermop>not sure anyone will care about building a road more expensive than dirt but cheaper than asphalt
13:06<supermop>unless roads can modify the TE of vehicles
13:06<Ethereal_Whisper>I mean of the road technologies out there, asphalt is basically the cheapest unless you don't pave it at all
13:06<supermop>most mining access roads are going to be dirt or gravel though
13:07<supermop>so any player who wants a variety of roads probably wants a road that looks good leading to a mine, and doesn't look like a city street
13:07-!-Progman [] has joined #openttd
13:07-!-Progman is "Peter Henschel" on #openttdcoop #openttd
13:08<Samu>alright, it's not possible to balance running costs without being too obtrusive
13:08<Samu>i have just increased it by 10 and it's still not enough
13:11<Samu>capacity matters way too much and trains are kings here
13:16-!-FLHerne [] has joined #openttd
13:16-!-FLHerne is "Francis Herne" on #openttd
13:18<Samu>something similar to what has been done with infrastructure maintenance costs for airports, has to be done with trains
13:18<Samu>very disruptive
13:18<Samu>and i bet no one would like that
13:18<Samu>heck, i don't even like what happened with airports
13:19<Samu>they went from viable as first transport type, to impossible as first transport type
13:37-!-Gja [] has joined #openttd
13:37-!-Gja is "Martin" on #bcache #openttd
13:43<supermop>airport newgrfs can reduce the infra costs
13:45<supermop>or increase it
13:45<@DorpsGek>TrueBrain: Commit by translators :: r27762 /trunk/src/lang (4 files) (2017-02-28 19:45:37 +0100 )
13:45<@DorpsGek>TrueBrain: -Update from Eints:
13:45<@DorpsGek>TrueBrain: catalan: 5 changes by juanjo
13:45<@DorpsGek>TrueBrain: greek: 29 changes by kyrm
13:45<@DorpsGek>TrueBrain: croatian: 2 changes by UnderwaterHesus
13:45<@DorpsGek>TrueBrain: (...)
13:46-!-andythenorth [] has joined #openttd
13:46-!-andythenorth is "Andy" on #openttd
13:47<supermop>eager to hear your opinions on gravel
13:48<supermop>also your name for the crappiest trackbed you can imagine
13:49-!-HerzogDeXtEr [] has joined #openttd
13:49-!-HerzogDeXtEr is "purple" on #openttd
13:50<andythenorth>gravel is small stones
13:50<supermop>wolf and i settled on "SHIT"
13:50<andythenorth>we won’t let my kids play that then :P
13:50<supermop>well i need the string def. from you
13:52<supermop>dirt is road
13:53<andythenorth>goat trail is considered to be at the more technical end of 4x4 driving
13:54<supermop>whats the name for the equivalently worthless tramway
13:55<Samu>you know what? it might actually be a good idea
13:55<Samu>disrupt train supremacy
13:55<supermop>trains are supreme because they are fun
13:55<Samu>but it's definitely not what I had in mind initially
13:55<supermop>airplanes are boring
13:57<supermop>Go to airport 1, go to airport 2,
13:57<supermop>clone until holding pattern full
13:58<andythenorth>hi planetmaker
13:59<@planetmaker>so we have now sensible accelerations as defaults? That's good :)
14:00<Samu>there's BaseCostsMod 5.0 which could increase the running costs of trains, but it's not really the same feel as a game setting for vanilla
14:00<Samu>vanilla engines
14:02<Eddi|zuHause>with about 7 years delay
14:03-!-Progman [] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
14:05<Samu>what's wrong with
14:05<Samu>i can't open it
14:06<andythenorth>Eddi|zuHause: 7 years is almost no time, for mature software :D
14:08<Wolf01><supermop> CANE? <- dog? XD
14:08<Wolf01>Oh, is cat o/
14:10<andythenorth>is refactoring FIRS?
14:11<V453000>Cat massive
14:17-!-Samu [] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
14:18-!-Samu [] has joined #openttd
14:18-!-Samu is "OFTC WebIRC Client" on #openttd
14:20-!-frosch123 [] has joined #openttd
14:20-!-frosch123 is "frosch" on #openttdcoop.devzone #openttd
14:20-!-matt11235 [~matt11235@] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
14:22<Wolf01> WHAT
14:24<Samu>does imgur work?
14:24-!-Samu [] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
14:24-!-Samu [] has joined #openttd
14:24-!-Samu is "OFTC WebIRC Client" on #openttd
14:25<Samu>i can't open it, i wanted to post an image to show you
14:25<Wolf01>Half of the web doesn't work well for me
14:25<frosch123>do you at least have the better half?
14:26<Samu>any alternative?
14:26<Samu>i get nothing, just a white page
14:26<Wolf01>I have 1/4 good and 1/4 bad
14:26<Wolf01>It works for me, just takes 3 minutes to load
14:28<Samu>i didn't want to use onedrive, links are gigantic, but oh well
14:28<Wolf01>It's not twitter here
14:31<SpComb>us-east-1 S3 is down
14:32<Samu>hmm i forgot what i was going to say
14:33<frosch123>they are installing a new web filter
14:33-!-Arveen [] has joined #openttd
14:33-!-Arveen is "realname" on #openttd #openttdcoop
14:33<andythenorth>is that why my Zendesk is broken :P
14:34<Samu>ah, about infrastructure maintenance costs
14:34<Samu>i turned it on for trains, and also increased the running costs massively on them
14:34<Samu>what do you think?
14:35<Samu>running cost went from -£1,101,367 to -£7,563,774
14:36<Samu>property maintenance went from -£120,000 to -£6,790,668
14:36<Samu>and there's the profit graph to have a look at the difference over 1 year
14:37<Samu>the other openttd shows infrastructure costs for aircraft
14:37<Samu>that part is untouched
14:37<Samu>it's just for comparison
14:38<Wolf01>Can't see the picture
14:38<Samu>oh t.t
14:38<Samu>damn imgur, do you know an alternative?
14:40<Samu>does it open
14:46-!-Samu [] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
14:46-!-Samu [] has joined #openttd
14:46-!-Samu is "OFTC WebIRC Client" on #openttd
14:52<supermop>andythenorth: guided busway?
14:52<supermop>more interesting than hway?
14:52-!-andythenorth [] has left #openttd []
14:59-!-matt11235 [~matt11235@] has joined #openttd
14:59-!-matt11235 is "realname" on #debian-gaming #debian-sayhi #debian #https-everywhere #openttd #linux #kernelnewbies
15:06<supermop>speed limits for dirt is tricky
15:06<supermop>if i have a rally car, i should be able to drive 100mph on a private dirt road
15:07<supermop>as dirt roads are outside of town, far from the cops, they should have higher speedlimit than ROAD
15:08<Samu>dirt rally tycoon
15:16<Eddi|zuHause>only if you have general lee
15:20<supermop>hmm can i make ROAD unbuildable by player?
15:24<frosch123>introdate in far future?
15:26<supermop>then towns cant grow
15:26<supermop>so i have dirt 50kmh, gravel 70kmh, stone 80kmh
15:27<supermop>asphalt 100kmh, hway no limit?
15:27<frosch123>you can also increase the cost by factor 1000 :p
15:27<supermop>maybe lower gravel?
15:27<frosch123>but it may make money when converting road
15:28<frosch123>towns building gold roads
15:28<frosch123>players harvesting them
15:28<supermop>is gravel cheap to maintain because it's so simple, or expensive because you have to re-grade it every year?
15:29<supermop>it seems like stone should be more expensive to build than asphalt, and slower, and more expensive to maintain
15:29<frosch123>that depends on the usage :)
15:29<supermop>so no reason to ever build it
15:30<supermop>unless you start in 100BCE
15:30<frosch123>gravel is cheap and lasts long if rarely used
15:30<supermop>maintenance cost based of traffic?
15:31<supermop>so the newer roads are more expensive, but their upkeep costs scale better with traffic
15:38-!-Wormnest_ [] has joined #openttd
15:38-!-Wormnest_ is "Wormnest" on #openttd
15:45-!-Wormnest [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
15:47-!-orudge` [] has quit [Quit: Goodbye.]
15:47-!-orudge` [] has joined #openttd
15:47-!-orudge` is "orudge" on #thesinner #openttdcoop.devzone #bukkit #jontylog #tycoonexiles #z.aud #locomotion #transportempire #openttdcoop #openttd #tycoon
15:47-!-mode/#openttd [+o orudge`] by ChanServ
15:55<@Alberth>make a gold road for towns :p
15:58<supermop>the sprites already exists in the nrt wiki page
16:02<supermop>should the crappiest tramway be cheaper than gravel road?
16:03<frosch123>you mean andy's yellow road?
16:04<__ln__>anyone going to go see the solar eclipse in august?
16:04-!-supermop [] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
16:04-!-supermop [] has joined #openttd
16:04-!-supermop is "A CIRC user" on #openttd #tycoon
16:05-!-skapazzo [~skapazzo@] has quit [Quit: leaving]
16:12-!-ericnoan is "ericnoan" on #linode #tor #debian @#thisisatestpleaseignore4843 #munin
16:12-!-ericnoan [] has joined #openttd
16:12-!-Wormnest__ [] has joined #openttd
16:12-!-Wormnest__ is "Wormnest" on #openttd
16:17-!-frosch123 [] has quit [Quit: be yourself, except: if you have the opportunity to be a unicorn, then be a unicorn]
16:18-!-Wormnest_ [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
16:26-!-supermop_ [] has joined #openttd
16:26-!-supermop_ is "A CIRC user" on #openttd #tycoon
16:30-!-sim-al2 [] has joined #openttd
16:30-!-sim-al2 is "sim-al2" on #openttd @#/r/openttd
16:31-!-supermop [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
16:36-!-Alberth [] has left #openttd []
16:41<Eddi|zuHause>why is firefox using 25% mem, and "Web Content" using another 20%?
16:42<Eddi|zuHause>also, why did my sound break?
16:46-!-Eddi|zuHause [] has quit []
16:46-!-Eddi|zuHause [] has joined #openttd
16:46-!-Eddi|zuHause is "Johannes E. Krause" on #openttd
16:51<Samu>Wolf01: i found the engines.h file
16:51<Samu>i can try now wagon running cost based on the wagon weigth
16:52<Samu>if i give wagons a running cost class, that is
16:52<Samu>there's steam, diesel and electric
16:53<Samu>steam = expensive, diesel = medium, electric = cheap
16:54<Wolf01>Wagons don't have a type
16:55<Samu>but i can edit that in
16:55<Wolf01>It makes no sense
16:55<Samu>let me see how broken this breaks openttd, brb
16:56<Samu>i just gave a running cost to passenger carriage
16:57<Samu>it's 25 tonnes, so the cost factor is also 25
16:57<Samu>then some magic is done to get the price into a number and it became £615/yr
16:57<Samu>openttd computing GetPrice
16:59<Samu>there's 3 carriages for the same type
17:01<Samu>maglev = steam
17:01<Samu>monorail = diesel
17:01<Samu>rail = electric
17:04-!-gelignite [] has quit [Quit:]
17:17<Samu>okay, it makes no sense then, reverting changes
17:25-!-sla_ro|master [] has quit []
17:46-!-matt11235 [~matt11235@] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
18:18<Samu>@calc ((1920) - 1) / 4 - ((1920) - 1) / 100 + ((1920) - 1) / 400 + 1)
18:18<@DorpsGek>Samu: Error: unexpected EOF while parsing (<string>, line 1)
18:20-!-Wormnest__ [] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
18:21<Samu>@calc 1919/4-1919/100+1919/401
18:21<@DorpsGek>Samu: 465.34553616
18:22<Samu>@calc 365*20+465
18:22<@DorpsGek>Samu: 7765
18:23-!-HerzogDeXtEr1 [] has joined #openttd
18:23-!-HerzogDeXtEr1 is "purple" on #openttd
18:24<Samu>@calc 365*1920+465
18:24<@DorpsGek>Samu: 701265
18:24<Samu>@calc 703092-701265
18:24<@DorpsGek>Samu: 1827
18:30-!-HerzogDeXtEr [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
18:30-!-JezK_ [~jez@2407:7800:400:107f:3db5:daca:8457:e66a] has joined #openttd
18:30-!-JezK_ is "jez" on #openttd #love
18:47-!-Gja [] has quit [Quit: Going offline, see ya! (]
18:52-!-FLHerne [] has quit [Quit: There's a real world out here!]
18:53<Samu>Wolf01: did you see that?
18:54<Samu>running cost based on wagon weight
19:11-!-chomwitt [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
19:12-!-markasoftware [~markasoft@2601:601:8c00:f808::c02e] has joined #openttd
19:12-!-markasoftware is "markasoftware" on #openttd
19:24-!-Snail [] has joined #openttd
19:24-!-Snail is "Jacopo Coletto" on #openttd
19:27<Wolf01>Bah... I just completed the 5th seasonal chapter and I think that if I play diablo 3 again in a week I'll puke... there are 8 seasonal chapters :(
19:30<Wolf01>Samu, how much high are those running costs compared to other vehicles running costs?
19:35<Samu>which ones?
19:36<Wolf01>That pax car running cost is a bit more than 1/4 of its purchase price, how much are running costs of engines?
19:36<Samu>let me check
19:37<Wolf01>Just to be sure it is reasonable, you won't buy a new wagon every 4 years
19:38<Samu>5336 for lev 2 cyclops
19:38<Wolf01>And the price?
19:40<Wolf01>So it's 4% of the price while pax car is 26%
19:40<Wolf01>Divide it by 10
19:41<Samu>i'm not sure how to divide it
19:41<Samu>it's a Money variable
19:42<Samu>it doesn't accept a simple "/ 10 "
19:42<Samu>must figure it out
19:43<Samu>ah, i can change it on the cost_factor
19:43<Samu>it's a uint
19:52<Samu>weird math, I divided by 10 and i get £49
19:52<Samu>was expecting £61
19:53<Samu>ah, i get it, i did this wrong
19:53<Samu>what i did was 25 / 10 = 2
19:53<Samu>because... integers
19:54<Samu>cost_factor is based on weight and 25 is such a small number grrr
19:55-!-HerzogDeXtEr1 [] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
20:04<Samu>hmm, can only divide by 2, 4, 8, 16, etc....
20:04<Samu>it's bit shift
20:05<Samu>will try 8
20:06<Samu>shift = -3
20:07<Samu>getting £76/yr on maglev
20:07<Samu>passenger carriage
20:08-!-iSoSyS [] has joined #openttd
20:08-!-iSoSyS is "realname" on #openttd #/r/openttd
20:08<Samu>615/8 = 76, :p
20:08<Samu>@calc 615/8
20:08<@DorpsGek>Samu: 76.875
20:09<Samu>total shift is -8 -3
20:13<Samu>to be honest, considering that trains are too good, £615 would be better
20:15<Samu>there is no consensus regarding this
20:16<Wolf01>In fact, it's just a problem of yours
20:16<Samu>I have trouble leaving it as is
20:17<Samu>something must be done, but i don't know what
20:18<Wolf01>Something already was done, is called newgrf
20:19<Samu>i tried with exorbitant running costs earlier today, and I was still not happy about it
20:19<Samu>they're just too good
20:20<Samu>guess it's time for me to give up on this
20:20<Samu>I'm not sure what to do, so I better stop trying
20:23<Samu>alright, time to go sleep, cyas, take care
20:23-!-Samu [] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
20:26<Wolf01>Me too
20:26-!-Wolf01 [] has quit [Quit: Once again the world is quick to bury me.]
20:41-!-markasoftware [~markasoft@2601:601:8c00:f808::c02e] has quit [Quit: markasoftware]
20:46-!-mescalito [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
20:56-!-mescalito [] has joined #openttd
20:56-!-mescalito is "realname" on #openttd #openttdcoop
21:44-!-maciozo [] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 1.7]
21:50-!-glx [] has quit [Quit: Bye]
21:58-!-iSoSyS [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
22:24-!-supermop [] has joined #openttd
22:24-!-supermop is "Guest" on #tycoon #openttd
23:05-!-cHawk [] has quit [Ping timeout: 480 seconds]
23:25-!-cHawk [] has joined #openttd
23:25-!-cHawk is "realname" on #tor #tor-project #openttd
---Logclosed Wed Mar 01 00:00:05 2017