360° tracklaying prototype

[Arathorn]

I agree, junctions in TTD are very limited, you often get the same cloverleafs everywhere. Complex tracklaying give possibilites for more complex junctions, people who don't want to do complex things don't want those junctions anyway.
But we must make sure it doesn't get tedious instead of complex.

[Steve]

The use of pre-made junctions sounds interesting. If you could just select a 2 way join and just plonked it there and simply connected it up it could save time for the more tedious spots. And of course you could make your own and use them again later (or even better, let you export them and we can have a real Junctionary!). But with all of this helpful stuff, you need to be careful your giving the player enough to do. As long as it doesn't turn into "Click this button and we'll finish the game for you!".

Something to point out: pre-made junctions should be put down in planning mode, so you can make minor adjustments.

I reakon it needs to be just enough help so you can enjoy the benefits of flat land.. without flatland. You won't be messing around going around mountains (TTD without those extra slopes thingys) but can spend time building and effective route.

Oh, and by default, should the curves be tighter inside a city by default? Trains probaly will be travelling slower anyway and would save some space.

[Zuu]

I want to have a grid system where one cell is somewath the same size as in TTD. Why? Becuse I love to build complex junctions. And when buildning junctions you dont want to be able to build each track part from virtually any spot to any other spot. That would mean that you wont be able to reproduce a junction. Creating double track (2 paralell tracks) manually would be would be a nightmare.

So I want to have a snap to grid which as in TTD lets me create advanced junctions, but limits me too. I dont know if I cant explain it better without paper.

I disagree so much.. what's the point of using an old limited system? If you want to create TTD junctions, do it in TTD! This game shouldn't just be Transport Tycoon 2, it should be so much different that it is something completely new and yet just as easy to play.

Thats why I suggested than snap to grid should be able to be turned on/off. So peoble that wanted to be limited can be limited, and peoble that want total freedome can get that.

Junctions would take up A LOT more space due to the curviness of curves, but we can balance that with much bigger maps, move towns and such further apart. That would give us more realistic (and much more fun to watch) junctions and still allow us to make complex and crazy junctions.

Im not against that. I havn't played Loco, or any other TT like game with realistic curves. But usaly in TTD I try to create if not realistic curves, then at least not to far unrealistic curves.

In theory, they could be more complex. I remember a program on Discovery about the new transport route through Boston (i think). They couldn't just demolish things that were already there, they had to weave between them. They had to dive deep under a canal and then squeeze a new bridge into the city and such, before they could think about removing old ugly highways. This kind of thing simply isn't possible with a square based system but it's something i'd just love to try and deal with.

I think I have seen at least two programs from boston about their highways at Discovery Channel. I think one was called "The big dig".

[Zuu]

I want to have a grid system where one cell is somewath the same size as in TTD. Why? Becuse I love to build complex junctions. And when buildning junctions you dont want to be able to build each track part from virtually any spot to any other spot. That would mean that you wont be able to reproduce a junction.

I see your point. Exactly recreating a previous junction might be difficult / impossible when you have more freedom. More restrictions would also require more thinking/planning ahead, maybe you could say a freeform system would be too easy / not challenging enough ?

Agrees that to much freedome might lead to a too easy / not challenging game.

[jfs]

Random idea: Allow rail vehicles have a minimum turning radius. Ie. some railroad locomotives/carriages simply won't ever be able to follow curves smaller than a certain radius.
This might also apply for some road vehicles. (Ie. a large tourist bus might not be able to drive down the small crooky streets of the old city center.)

[Steve]

Sounds good, as long as when your setting up a train's route, it'll check for such problems and give you a warning.
If trains are let to run on such track.. should they be derailed then? Could be disasterous..

[Hyronymus]

Isn't this all in the FRD?

[Steve]

Where/what is the FRD? I think there is a TEmpire wiki, but it's not mentioned in the FAQ thread or anything.

[Hyronymus]

Have fun reading it: http://tt2.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.p ... s/Gameplay .

[Zuu]

Where/what is the FRD? I think there is a TEmpire wiki, but it's not mentioned in the FAQ thread or anything.

Go to http://www.sf.net/projects/tt2 and click on home page link. Or type tt2.sf.net/wiki/ directly in your browser.

[jfs]

Yet another idea, this time for tracklaying interface:
Allow the user to make a freehand-drawing of the track, and then smooth that out, to avoid the usual wrinkles that result from mouse-drawings. Perhaps completely reject "nonsense" layouts, eg. "skating the mouse randomly around on the pad" drawings.
This would of course be most useful for building long streaks, and you'd need to be zoomed far out.

Some more things:
What about crossing other tracks?
AI tracklaying? (Actually I forgot if there's even going to be an AI, but if there is it should be intelligent and not cheat )
Would road building be the same as rail building? How about towns' automatic roads?
Where can signals be placed? How? (Actual signalling and train routing should be in another topic I guess, though.)

[PJayTycy]

Yet another idea, this time for tracklaying interface:
Allow the user to make a freehand-drawing of the track, and then smooth that out, to avoid the usual wrinkles that result from mouse-drawings.

That won't work very well in 3D. Remember this is a 2D prototype, but the game will be in 3D.

What about crossing other tracks?

Do you mean bridges or level-crossings? Both should be possible.

AI tracklaying?

Not the purpose of this prototype, but if we get good algorithms for automatic tracklaying for the players, we can re-use them for the AI.

Would road building be the same as rail building? How about towns' automatic roads?

If it's up to me, roads, tracks and canals would all use the same "engine". Using different systems would require more work and cause confusion.

Where can signals be placed? How?

Each of the straight sections could be considered as a block (just like 1 piece of rail in TTD). Currently each section has a list of other "blocking" sections (ie: crossings, lines too close to each other, ...). The idea is, if a train is on one section, all sections in that "blocking list" should be blocked (put on "red") too.

[jfs]

Yet another idea, this time for tracklaying interface:
Allow the user to make a freehand-drawing of the track, and then smooth that out, to avoid the usual wrinkles that result from mouse-drawings.

That won't work very well in 3D. Remember this is a 2D prototype, but the game will be in 3D.

Why shouldn't it work in 3D as well? It's jsut a matter of projecting the mouse down on the terrain, like in any other operation. It was just thought as a way to lay out a sketch of the route, which can then be fitted better later on.
Another possibility would be to use a top-down map for this, perhaps on the minimap.

What about crossing other tracks?

Do you mean bridges or level-crossings? Both should be possible.

Actually I was thinking in a "how to decide when to do what", but I suppose that's more of a UI question.

AI tracklaying?

Not the purpose of this prototype, but if we get good algorithms for automatic tracklaying for the players, we can re-use them for the AI.

Which was actually my point. IMO the algorithms should be designed so they can easily be used with an AI.

[PJayTycy]

On request, I post the current state of this prototype. Most important change : you can actually build the sections created with "automate tracks" instead of only previewing them.

I reverted to my old distribution method:

1 zip file, with the

• source files : *.java
• 1.5.0 compiled files : *.class
• 2 batch files : run.bat and compile_and_run.bat

for java 1.4.2 pre-compiled files : see post below

Either double click the batch file of your choice, or copy the contents into a console window.

It should work with java 1.5.0 and java 1.4.2

[Steve]

Doesn't work in 1.4.2

run.bat gives:

Code: Select all

Exception in thread "main" java.lang.UnsupportedClassVersionError: TE3DTracks (Unsupported major.minor version 49.0)
        at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass0(Native Method)
        at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass(Unknown Source)
        at java.security.SecureClassLoader.defineClass(Unknown Source)
        at java.net.URLClassLoader.defineClass(Unknown Source)
        at java.net.URLClassLoader.access$100(Unknown Source)
        at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(Unknown Source)
        at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
        at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(Unknown Source)
        at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
        at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
        at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
        at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClassInternal(Unknown Source)

[PJayTycy]

Doesn't work in 1.4.2

oh sure...

the source is 1.4.2 compatible, but seems like I compiled to 1.5.0

Try the compile_and_run.bat (but if you don't have the compiler, that won't work either).

I attached a 1.4.2 compiled version.

[Zuu]

May I suggest that you include these two shellscripts in your future releases. Which are for compiling and run on unix/linux.

[PJayTycy]

May I suggest that you include these two shellscripts in your future releases. Which are for compiling and run on unix/linux.

consider it done.

I don't know if the -classpath "." flag has to be set on linux, in windows omitting it sometimes gives problems.

[Zuu]

I think that was the problem, when trying to run your bat file. Exept that I had to remove the pause line and set permisson to get it run at all.

[Steve]

Oddly enough, it didn't work on the first run, only the second. Said the following:
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: TE3DTracks

Apart from being dreadfully slow, the system is good. If incorperated into the game, the changing of radius of the circles would be too much, i'd much prefer a single option. I think i've mentioned that before though. I also noticed that if the points were placed quite close together and the radius of the circles was made too big, then the track would go round the circle on the other side of the track in order to loop around. Crazy stuff. I'd recommend forcing people into tighter corners in such situations.

Now just add some trains