Transport Tycoon Forums

It's a beautiful set Snail, long awaited but it was definetly worth it, can't wait to see the standard gauge part!

Any chance that You can make it possible to use this set with 600mm, including dual guage? Thanks in advance!

Sorry, I typed this last night while tired. See my post below.

Ummm... 1000mm isn't 600mm, although it's the same scale. It really wouldn't be balanced against the original 600mm set and wouldn't even be balanced against anything just when you see the amount of money a 600mm line requires, which is close to zero. Trains from this set go way faster than others from the 600mm set, and it would really be more than irrealistic (although irrealism isn't a problem in OpenTTD) to have 60kph trains on 600mm tracks.

acs121 wrote:Ummm... 1000mm isn't 600mm, although it's the same scale. It really wouldn't be balanced against the original 600mm set and wouldn't even be balanced against anything just when you see the amount of money a 600mm line requires, which is close to zero. Trains from this set go way faster than others from the 600mm set, and it would really be more than irrealistic (although irrealism isn't a problem in OpenTTD) to have 60kph trains on 600mm tracks.

Sorry, I typed that last night while tired.

For some reason, the normal meter gauge isn't appearing. Only the high speed and electrified meter gauge show up in the tracks menu. Can someone explain why?

Have you enabled "Vehicles never expire" ? Just in case.
Also, IIRC, there's a parameter named "Without Finescale" in the parameters. You should disable it if it is enabled as it allows narrow gauge trains to use standard gauge rails (because of pixel width differences). Or disable the parameter allowing for narrow gauge trains if you use Finescale.

acs121 wrote:Have you enabled "Vehicles never expire" ? Just in case.
Also, IIRC, there's a parameter named "Without Finescale" in the parameters. You should disable it if it is enabled as it allows narrow gauge trains to use standard gauge rails (because of pixel width differences). Or disable the parameter allowing for narrow gauge trains if you use Finescale.

I think I might have an outdated version, because there's a lot less parameters than there should be, but I can't find the current version anywhere.

The parameter in question is in the train set, not the track set.
Also, maybe you should show me your GRF list if you have other active NewGRFs.

acs121 wrote:The parameter in question is in the train set, not the track set.
Also, maybe you should show me your GRF list if you have other active NewGRFs.

Well, that's dumb. What if someone wants to use the rails with Iron Horse 2's Narrow Gauge trains instead of the French Train Set?

Well, it turns out good, as I just tried to use the track set with IH2 and it works perfectly well ! IH2 narrow gauge trains are only steam or diesel, so you'll find them on all tracks, while electric narrow gauge trains still have their tracks. High speed narrow gauge is also available and lets you buy IH2 trains too.

acs121 wrote:Well, it turns out good, as I just tried to use the track set with IH2 and it works perfectly well ! IH2 narrow gauge trains are only steam or diesel, so you'll find them on all tracks, while electric narrow gauge trains still have their tracks. High speed narrow gauge is also available and lets you buy IH2 trains too.

Then why do I only get two railtypes when I don't use the French Trains?

Not sure what I did, but removing it and re-adding it to the NewGRF list fixed the issue.

Glad you could fix that problem!

In any case, a new version of this set (which fixes the bugs discovered so far, all while adding a couple of new features) is on its way. Stay tuned...

As promised, version 1.1 is now complete. You can get it from the first post of this thread.

It finally corrects the bugs around parameters that were found in the earlier posts. At the same time, I took the chance to slip yet one more steamer in the list (yah I love steamers... ) and to rearrange the stats of some existing steamers as well, to make them more realistic. My ongoing work on the Standard Gauge part of this set includes estimating steamers' "real" power starting from their technical stats, and it's been quite illuminating.

Other than that, I've added one more feature that will be prominent in the SG set: the concept of max axle weight for railtypes. In reality, it's a very important concept to differentiate various rail types, much more than "max speed" which, IMO, is very much overrated in most sets.
I've also added stowage factors for freight wagons, in a very similar way as MB is doing in his DB Set. This should introduce more realism and variety across the different types of available freight wagons.
For those who see these as BAD FEATURES, there's still the parameter to disable them. And the Toy Mode is still there.

Because of the addition of a new engine, I'm afraid this version won't be savegame-compatible with the previous one.

Last but not least, the German translation is now complete (thanks Michael!) and the donotreadme document is updated to reflect the newest changes.
Hope you enjoy playing with it. As always, please do not hesitate to report bugs or even weirdnesses that you might encounter with it.

Nice release

How do you handle the stowage factor? Is it worked out for every known cargo, or by class, or something else?

Stowage factors? Sounds like an AMAZING FEATURE to me!

andythenorth wrote:Nice release

How do you handle the stowage factor? Is it worked out for every known cargo, or by class, or something else?

It is used for every known cargo, see http://www.ttdpatch.de/grfspecs/m4nfoMa ... Types.html (scroll down).

regards
Michael

michael blunck wrote:It is used for every known cargo, see http://www.ttdpatch.de/grfspecs/m4nfoMa ... Types.html (scroll down).

Thanks.

Is the implementation adjusting vehicle capacity in a callback?

Or is it redefining cargos and setting cargo prop 1D (Capacity multiplier)?

Or something else?

The stowage factor concept was worked out by MB, I thought it was neat and implemented it in a very similar way.

andythenorth wrote:Is the implementation adjusting vehicle capacity in a callback?

Or is it redefining cargos and setting cargo prop 1D (Capacity multiplier)?

Or something else?

I'm modifying capacity in the "property" callback (I think it's CB36). I could have also done it using the capacity callback instead, but the way I chose allowed me to simplify my code (since I already have to modify the "loading amount" property).

Is there any difference between the two methods, by the way?

Snail wrote:Is there any difference between the two methods, by the way?

The prop 1D method means that the cargo grf author is determining the stowage factor.

This could be argued to be the most 'correct' implementation, because the volume of a cargo should be inherent to the cargo, and vehicle set authors shouldn't need to worry about it.

BUT I think in practice that having the cargo vary the volume just causes problems / unexpected results for vehicle sets.

IMHO the vehicle author is best placed to know whether a specific vehicle will cube out before it weighs out or vice versa. So FIRS sets prop 1D to 1 for all cargos except goods and mail (which are 2, supposedly for consistency with original cargos). Similar to you, I then use the vehicle capacity callback method in my own vehicle grfs.

I only adjust vehicle capacity for mail and valuables currently, but stowage factor looks interesting, for e.g. high-cube box cars, or vehicles with more axles etc.

Can you please do me a favor?

I've created tri-guage tracks (600mm, meter-guage generic narrow gauge, and standard) using the label nAAN and electrified tri-gauge using the label nAAE. The only way for this to work as expected is to ask other NewGRF makers nicely to add compatibility, and while I can't make it compatible with every rail set ever, I can ask active GRF creators if they're willing to adapt.

Thanks in advance.

----

I also noticed something weird with one of your narrow gauge depots...



If you look at the red line, the depot's left side is shorter than the right side. Not sure if you intended it to be that way.

Sure, I can add nAAN and nAAN as compatible railtypes for my tracks. This will be implemented in version 1.2 (currently in the works, as I've found quite a few bugs with 1.1).
Have you thought about any axle weight limit for your railtypes?

Thanks for pointing out the inconsistency with the modern depot. It will be fixed in version 1.2 .