Path Based Signalling!!! (pbs v080)

[Bilbo]

And here we have one of my most basic problems with the thought process behind OpenTTD. I should be able to choose "one", "the other", "both", or "neither"[0]. I should not be restricted to just "one" or "the other".

That would be nice in an ideal world. But if that demand that you give to developers makes it impossible to write the patch at all, or so complex that it is not attempted, then I hope they ignore it.

I think that if track system with only new or only old signals would work (and mixture of these two would technically work but suboptimally - like trains not being able to cross borders between these two), then it would be enough - it would still be possible to manually rebuild the signalling system on the fly for old saves to maintain some compatibility. Or to allow concurrent use of these two in different companies in multiplayer.

[Bilbo]

I have thought also about another possibility - like we have rail type conversion tools, we could have something similar to convert between PBS and ordinary signals. Maybe this would solve the compatibility problems too without need to support the mixture of signals. Question is, whether the signals can be somehow converted automatically...

[Buhmann]

Why don't you just mark those new pbs signals in some way (maybe like the old ones) and they only act as pbs-signals if every exit signal of their block is a pbs signal, too?

[DaleStan]

I'd rather implement the new system cleanly and just add an on/off switch. DaleStans problem is highly theoretical as the new system supersedes the old one in that you can do anything you could do with the old system in the new system, too.

Oh, it is? So I can say that this track is to be one-way, whether anyone or anything else likes it or not? The wiki page fails to inform me what I might use to cause such to happen, other than by doing something differently. This is not sufficient.

[jungle]

And here we have one of my most basic problems with the thought process behind OpenTTD. I should be able to choose "one", "the other", "both", or "neither"[0]. I should not be restricted to just "one" or "the other".

I'm not sure I see what you're driving at here. There are already plenty of other OTTD features where a new behaviour replaces an old behaviour without the option of having both behaviours at once on the same map.

New Pathfinder(s)
Most NewGRFs (where they replace existing buildings or vehicles)
Passenger Destinations (OK, so it's a patch at the moment, but it certainly couldn't be switched both on and off on the same map, however it was implemented)
Handling of non-stop orders
Any new AI features
...to name but a few

Or am I misunderstanding your point?

If the game is still able to run the old signalling system with this as an alternative I don't see the problem. Although of course the new signalling idea might be rejected for other reasons (e.g. if it turns out to be too confusing for players)

[Tekky]

I have thought also about another possibility - like we have rail type conversion tools, we could have something similar to convert between PBS and ordinary signals. Maybe this would solve the compatibility problems too without need to support the mixture of signals. Question is, whether the signals can be somehow converted automatically...

I don't think they could be converted automatically. It is certainly possible to automatically convert individual signals from normal to PBS signals. But this wouldn't be meaningful, because the signal layouts also would have to be converted. I see no way of doing this automatically.

Why don't you just mark those new pbs signals in some way (maybe like the old ones) and they only act as pbs-signals if every exit signal of their block is a pbs signal, too?

Yes, I would take the existing graphics of PBS signals if my new signals are supposed to coexist with traditional signals. However, the main problem is to determine how the signals should behave when entering and leaving a PBS area. I have described this problem in this linked post (click here).

[DaleStan]

And here we have one of my most basic problems with the thought process behind OpenTTD. I should be able to choose "one", "the other", "both", or "neither"[0]. I should not be restricted to just "one" or "the other".

I'm not sure I see what you're driving at here. There are already plenty of other OTTD features where a new behaviour replaces an old behaviour without the option of having both behaviours at once on the same map.

And there are plenty of features where it should not be thus. Signal behaviour is currently a per-signal setting. Why is it suddenly becoming a per-game setting?

Why don't you just mark those new pbs signals in some way (maybe like the old ones) and they only act as pbs-signals if every exit signal of their block is a pbs signal, too?

YE GHODS NO!! Why must you persist in this complete illogic that a PBS path is a path between two PBS signals?! This makes it completely impossible to alternate between PBS and non-PBS blocks!

A PBS path starts at a PBS signal, and ends somewhere. "Somewhere," as in "A PBS path may not be infinitely long."

[Korenn]

And here we have one of my most basic problems with the thought process behind OpenTTD. I should be able to choose "one", "the other", "both", or "neither"[0]. I should not be restricted to just "one" or "the other".

I'm not sure I see what you're driving at here. There are already plenty of other OTTD features where a new behaviour replaces an old behaviour without the option of having both behaviours at once on the same map.

And there are plenty of features where it should not be thus. Signal behaviour is currently a per-signal setting. Why is it suddenly becoming a per-game setting?

Because it is suddenly becoming a completely differently functioning signal, which makes the programming complex. Implementing it as a whole game setting is the first step towards developing this new functionality. Making things compatible and functioning in parallel with the old system should not be a development goal in this early stage of an idea.

But all this bickering doesn't matter, I hope Tekky is ignoring it and working out his idea and that he will show us some new signals soon

[athanasios]

But all this bickering doesn't matter, ...

Yeah. DaleStan is just warming the engines for the new year...

[nulio]

Hi,

I have the latest beta release for Mac. Can I use the PBS? I ask this cause in the first post we see a windows build and another file, and I'm noob at this.

Regards,
Júlio

[FooBar]

No. PBS is not supported in the latest beta. In fact, PBS is not supported in any recent version.

There's a new PBS patch being developed (see other thread somewere in dev forum). That patch is currently not stable enough to be of any use in your regular games. You could help the development of that patch by compiling OTTD yourself (including that patch) to try and locate bugs in the patch.

[nulio]

Thanks for the answer

Yep, as soon as I have more time I'll be glad to help, I already subscribed the other topic