Times are UTC Toggle Colours
00:00:03 *** Thedarkb has joined #openttd 01:20:23 *** supermop has joined #openttd 01:23:52 *** chomwitt has quit IRC 01:34:27 *** frosch123 has quit IRC 01:35:03 *** Pikka has quit IRC 01:39:10 *** KouDy has quit IRC 02:23:54 *** glx has quit IRC 02:49:51 *** muffindrake2 has joined #openttd 02:51:41 *** muffindrake1 has quit IRC 02:53:59 *** supermop has quit IRC 03:04:46 *** ToffeeYogurtPots has quit IRC 03:17:54 *** supermop_work has joined #openttd 03:19:00 *** KouDy has joined #openttd 03:20:55 *** supermop_work_ has quit IRC 03:27:10 *** KouDy has quit IRC 03:28:58 *** Flygon has joined #openttd 04:48:54 *** Progman has joined #openttd 04:50:24 *** KouDy has joined #openttd 05:06:02 *** cHawk has quit IRC 05:40:19 *** KouDy has quit IRC 06:14:09 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd 06:18:39 <andythenorth> moin 06:25:19 *** KouDy has joined #openttd 06:30:47 *** Fuco has joined #openttd 06:42:28 *** HerzogDeXtEr has joined #openttd 06:43:53 *** Thedarkb has quit IRC 06:45:23 *** nielsm has joined #openttd 07:09:08 *** cHawk has joined #openttd 07:30:18 *** Wolf01 has joined #openttd 07:30:30 <Wolf01> o/ 07:42:24 <peter1138> Offski 07:43:22 <andythenorth> skioff 08:00:26 *** sla_ro|master has joined #openttd 08:27:55 *** planetmaker_ has joined #openttd 08:53:48 *** Wacko1976 has joined #openttd 09:14:11 *** iSoSyS has joined #openttd 09:15:51 *** iSoSyS has quit IRC 09:17:50 *** Wacko1976_ has joined #openttd 09:22:18 *** Wacko1976 has quit IRC 09:54:44 *** Wormnest has joined #openttd 10:20:40 *** synchris has joined #openttd 10:44:46 *** frosch123 has joined #openttd 10:52:42 *** Thedarkb has joined #openttd 11:00:44 *** beno__ has joined #openttd 11:07:18 *** Thedarkb1-X40 has quit IRC 11:08:23 *** nkr has joined #openttd 11:20:02 *** Thedarkb has quit IRC 11:32:17 *** Thedarkb has joined #openttd 11:39:28 *** supermop has joined #openttd 11:40:57 *** Thedarkb has quit IRC 11:47:12 *** tokai has joined #openttd 11:47:12 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v tokai 11:48:29 *** supermop has quit IRC 11:54:08 *** tokai|noir has quit IRC 12:17:54 *** Thedarkb has joined #openttd 12:31:25 *** synchris has quit IRC 12:36:13 *** supermop has joined #openttd 12:40:45 *** nkr_ has joined #openttd 12:43:59 *** nkr has quit IRC 13:00:04 *** andythenorth has quit IRC 13:01:18 *** Thedarkb has quit IRC 14:01:58 *** nkr_ has quit IRC 14:05:40 *** HerzogDeXtEr1 has joined #openttd 14:10:43 *** HerzogDeXtEr has quit IRC 15:13:38 *** Fuco has quit IRC 15:13:41 *** supermop has quit IRC 15:35:56 *** snail_UES_ has joined #openttd 15:40:07 *** heffer_ has quit IRC 15:40:33 *** heffer has joined #openttd 15:50:23 *** sla_ro|master has quit IRC 15:50:45 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd 15:54:00 <andythenorth> in retrospect, changing length on cb36 is bonkers 15:54:15 <andythenorth> if any property should be immutable, it's vehicle length 15:56:16 *** virtualrandomnumber has joined #openttd 16:01:11 <nielsm> isn't it used for "generic multiple unit cars" and the like? 16:01:30 <nielsm> e.g. in the 2cc in NML train set? 16:03:14 <nielsm> (personally I'd rather have only fixed-length train sets, especially for MUs based on real-world material) 16:03:30 *** muffindrake2 has quit IRC 16:05:57 *** muffindrake has joined #openttd 16:07:43 *** rocky1138 has joined #openttd 16:12:41 <planetmaker_> CB36 length changes are used in several trainsets. And I consider it unlikely that it changed in the last 12 months ;) 16:14:27 <andythenorth> it's daft 16:14:38 <andythenorth> it's a legacy of only 128 IDs or whatever in patch 16:19:08 <nielsm> it's also a tool to keep the list of purchasable wagon types manageable from the player's perspective 16:20:28 <nielsm> another solution would be to require the player to "refit" the generic cars to match the train type, and refuse to leave depot unless the car type matches train type 16:21:47 *** stefino has joined #openttd 16:23:57 <stefino> hi all. is possible to refit train set due articulated switch? have a 3 wagon train in base and refit it into 4,5 or 6 wagon long train ? 16:24:31 <nielsm> no, refit can't change the number of cars in a train 16:26:24 <stefino> really? have a feeling that it is possible. So no way...have to build it part by part 16:26:59 *** Flygon has quit IRC 16:31:11 <planetmaker_> stefino, well. Technically that's not possible. But actually a newgrf developer can make it so 16:31:32 <planetmaker_> by introducing invisible wagons. And changing length upon refit 16:33:14 <stefino> planetmaker_: umm umm...I think that it is easier to make 3 simple wagons (front,middle, rear) and to buy amount of middle wagons what I want. 16:33:40 <planetmaker_> stefino, *that* is the LOT easier way to implement that, yes 16:34:24 <planetmaker_> stefino, and you can even change the look of the wagons, depending on the overall train length, if I recall correctly. Or depending on their position in the train. But that requires no magic with lengths etc and refit 16:36:45 *** Thedarkb has joined #openttd 16:38:17 <andythenorth> you can change look based on position, easily 16:38:57 <andythenorth> nielsm: refitting the generic cars doesn't help the shunting situation much 16:39:23 <stefino> holly sh.t :D this means that my random switch will not work. Cause in articulated items I have depentent random switches and this is unreal to code between more "solo" trains 16:39:25 <andythenorth> the whole 'cannot attach' situation needs to die for shunting 16:40:32 <stefino> so the 3rd option is to code all sets individualy 16:41:09 <stefino> it takes the same number of purchase list lines 16:41:33 <nielsm> andythenorth, imo there needs to be a concept of "hard couplings" that can be done by a mechanic in a workshop, but not during regular running, it's not entirely uncommon for some MU-like designs afaik 16:42:23 <andythenorth> eddi suggested similar 16:42:34 <andythenorth> but that doesn't help the newgrf spec much 16:42:45 <nielsm> unless you want to entirely prevent newgrf authors from making systems for player-determined-length MUs that logically shouldn't be able to separate during running 16:42:49 <andythenorth> unless it's sandboxed, and changes the behaviour of some vars 16:43:20 <andythenorth> if we sandbox a 'consist' and vehicles can't read outside it, it's fine 16:43:26 <andythenorth> except it breaks grfs 16:44:07 <andythenorth> due to history, grfs are fundamentally in conflict with shunting 16:44:23 <andythenorth> grf world has taken the view that grf author controls the train, not the player 16:49:10 <planetmaker_> oh, is shunting again a thing? 16:49:21 <Wolf01> Shunting is always a thing 16:49:55 <Wolf01> You need it when you can't do it, and it gets boring after 2 times when you can (must?) do it 16:51:18 <nielsm> what is actually needed is for each train car type to have a variable for front-coupler type and back-coupler type (they can be different) 16:51:26 <nielsm> and only cars with compatible couplers can attach 16:51:36 <nielsm> and a coupler type can be hard or soft 16:52:30 <nielsm> or you could even allow coupler types to specify how long it takes to perform the couple/decouple operation 16:53:23 <nielsm> (modern coupling between EMUs might be really quick, attaching an old loco to old goods cards with westinghouse-type brake pipes requires a full brake test) 16:53:28 <Wolf01> <andythenorth> due to history, grfs are fundamentally in conflict with shunting <- break it, isn't community whining about not being able to do new things because of retrocompatibility? 16:54:51 <andythenorth> nielsm: nah, I think you solve wrong problem 16:55:01 <andythenorth> what problem do you try to solve? :) 16:56:34 <planetmaker_> When I ponder(ed) shunting I considered yet another newgrf flag, set at global level by the trainset: [x] allow shunting 16:56:34 <nielsm> I'm just offering a solution in search of a problem! 16:57:08 <planetmaker_> Then the vehicles defined there support it. That's it. If you set that flag, you are limited to a certain amount of things, but will not be able to do "magic" or "atrocities" (depending on view) 16:57:40 <andythenorth> planetmaker: I think it has to be something like that 16:58:08 <nielsm> although you might really want to prevent players from doing stuff that shouldn't be possible, like having an EMU passenger train pick up a line of coal cars, or having an old EMU model coujple to a new one that isn't compatible IRL 16:58:17 <andythenorth> then 'can attach' needs extending to handle shunting 16:58:22 <andythenorth> with messages for player 16:58:29 <andythenorth> also it needs to account for conditional orders 17:01:20 <nielsm> yep, news item "train attempted to couple with incompatible unit" and train pauses until you skip the join order or remove the offending cars and put something else instead 17:01:20 <nielsm> and then you need to handle the case of two trains that were supposed to join but couldn't occupying the same platform in station, so they can't just leave in either direction 17:02:41 <planetmaker_> <nielsm> although you might really want to prevent players from doing stuff that shouldn't be possible, like having an EMU passenger train pick up a line of coal cars, or having an old EMU model coujple to a new one that isn't compatible IRL 17:02:54 <planetmaker_> ^^ I don't think you want to prevent players doing that 17:03:20 <planetmaker_> well, maybe you. But I don't. The solution to that problem is simple: if you don't want that to happen, then don't order your vehicles to do so 17:03:41 <planetmaker_> so every realism-based player can play happily. And everyone who doesn't care, can still do what they like 17:03:42 <Wolf01> +1 17:04:05 <nielsm> then you make a mistake with your orders and end up "why the heck is train EMU hauling around the coal???" 17:05:26 <nielsm> (and "what's that EMU doing at the coal mine?") 17:05:26 <planetmaker_> so fix that mistake and you can continue to play happily 17:05:43 <planetmaker_> basically you ask for the game to make decisions you like for everyone - irrespective if it suits them or not :) 17:06:21 <virtualrandomnumber> what would happen if I ordered a train to pick up wagons at a station but the wagons in question aren't there? 17:06:46 <planetmaker_> it's to me like lego: I can build realistic-looking things with the bricks. If I mis-place something, I dissasemble it, fix it and re-assemble 17:06:57 <planetmaker_> But at the same time I could build my sci-fi universe with it. 17:09:48 <andythenorth> nielsm: yes incompatible trains should stop 17:09:53 <andythenorth> and report 17:10:07 <andythenorth> like when they can't find a path and get stuck in a block 17:10:48 *** Thedarkb has quit IRC 17:13:37 <Eddi|zuHause> <planetmaker_> ^^ I don't think you want to prevent players doing that <-- well, we do have the "can attach" callback for that, but that kinda assumes you're inside a depot 17:16:28 <andythenorth> that needs extending for shunting 17:19:48 <Eddi|zuHause> exactly 17:19:58 <andythenorth> the key objective is to ensure that trains remain built as newgrf authors want 17:20:11 <andythenorth> otherwise it's a spec violation 17:20:23 <andythenorth> it's not up to the player to compose trains 17:20:30 <planetmaker_> :P 17:21:00 <Eddi|zuHause> well it is, but when the newgrf author wants to put restrictions on it, we should respect those 17:21:21 <andythenorth> I would be trolling, but I'm not 17:21:31 <Eddi|zuHause> sometimes more restrictions make for better gameplay 17:21:33 <andythenorth> historical fact is that newgrf spec exists to let newgrf authors control player behaviour 17:21:44 <andythenorth> unless we bump version 17:23:14 *** virtualrandomnumber has quit IRC 17:25:53 <nielsm> I think it's perfectly acceptable for a game mod to set rules for what's valid playing and what's not, but seeing how much of a sandbox TT games are it's also suggestable that mod authors provide a "free play" mode 17:26:31 <andythenorth> that's not the spec :) 17:26:57 <andythenorth> also we're boxed in on this 17:27:10 <andythenorth> on the one hand it will be 'horrible devs won't implement shunting' 17:27:18 <andythenorth> and if we do, multiple newgrf authors will rage quit 17:27:32 <andythenorth> then it's 'horrible devs forced best contributors out' 17:27:40 <Eddi|zuHause> nielsm: but that's a discussion between the newgrf authors and their users, we're discussing here the appropriate foundations 17:33:28 <andythenorth> I think shunting is probably a no-no currently 17:34:59 *** KouDy has quit IRC 17:35:16 <andythenorth> unless newgrf vehicles are banned from shunting if the flag is not set 17:35:17 <andythenorth> I guess 17:36:32 <planetmaker_> ^^ that is my very suggestion for how to tackle it @andythenorth 17:36:32 <andythenorth> remember the engine pool disaster? 17:36:35 <andythenorth> we shouldn't really have done engine pool 17:36:53 <planetmaker_> because now we have unlimitted vehicles and sets? 17:37:09 <andythenorth> no because it broke sets where authors assumed they were only grf 17:37:18 <andythenorth> I remember it as very painful 17:37:36 <andythenorth> we destroyed years of work remember? 17:37:40 <andythenorth> community split 17:37:53 <planetmaker_> oh, sure. yeah... but... I don't quite remember it as painful. As... it was easy to keep using one newgrf 17:38:12 <andythenorth> but we *allowed* players to choose more than one 17:38:20 <andythenorth> so trains could be mixed up 17:38:27 <andythenorth> even as newgrf author didn't intend 17:38:52 <andythenorth> :P 17:38:54 <planetmaker_> yes... I'm probably more engineer than artist. I consider that great. An artist horrible ;) 17:41:03 <planetmaker_> So yes, it's rather easy to implement it as opt-in which is set globally for a NewGRF 17:41:03 <planetmaker_> and then ... voila 17:41:11 <planetmaker_> most NewGRFs are then likely quickly updated in ...12 months. And the rest is not maintained anymore 17:41:21 <planetmaker_> Or are vapourware :P 17:43:08 <andythenorth> flag does seem safest 17:43:15 <andythenorth> like autorefit 17:43:39 <andythenorth> then ban some behaviours 17:43:59 <planetmaker_> yep. And stops all kind of anger and fears 17:45:32 <Eddi|zuHause> i think that approach is too easy 17:45:57 <planetmaker_> you mean it's too non-traditional and too uncontroversial? 17:47:19 <Eddi|zuHause> no, i mean you're ignoring issues that are perfectly valid 17:47:34 <Eddi|zuHause> just on the grounds that you don't want to think about them 17:47:59 <planetmaker_> uh. such as? 17:50:20 <planetmaker_> Mind that neither andy nor me said that such a newgrf-global flag magically solves all problems. But it solves many social ones in the first place, and many which might result from [sprites not available / not specifically drawn / ...] being taken care of explicitly by the newgrf author 17:50:29 *** planetmaker_ has quit IRC 17:54:59 *** rocky1138 has quit IRC 17:58:47 *** stefino has quit IRC 17:59:17 *** Lejving__ has joined #openttd 17:59:35 *** planetmaker_ has joined #openttd 17:59:40 <planetmaker_> @logs 17:59:40 <DorpsGek> planetmaker_: https://webster.openttdcoop.org/index.php?channel=openttd 18:00:04 *** Arveen2 has joined #openttd 18:00:10 *** HerzogDeXtEr has joined #openttd 18:00:17 *** tokai|noir has joined #openttd 18:00:17 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v tokai|noir 18:00:23 *** Wacko1976_ has quit IRC 18:00:27 *** nielsm is now known as Guest5088 18:00:27 *** Eddi|zuHause has quit IRC 18:00:30 *** berndj has quit IRC 18:00:49 *** guru3 has quit IRC 18:00:59 *** Eddi|zuHause has joined #openttd 18:01:23 *** andythenorth is now known as Guest5092 18:01:36 *** berndj has joined #openttd 18:01:43 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd 18:05:03 *** Guest5088 has quit IRC 18:05:08 *** Guest5092 has quit IRC 18:05:52 *** guru3 has joined #openttd 18:06:08 *** Lejving_ has quit IRC 18:06:13 *** HerzogDeXtEr1 has quit IRC 18:06:28 *** tokai has quit IRC 18:06:28 *** Arveen has quit IRC 18:06:33 <andythenorth> Eddi|zuHause: I think flag is foundation, then the spec needs to do more 18:06:52 <andythenorth> there is no getting around that authors don't want shunting, so need to be able to forbid it 18:07:10 <andythenorth> and the forbidding needs to work for software we can't modify, i.e. existing grfs 18:07:45 <Eddi|zuHause> i don't think that many authors want no shunting at all 18:08:28 <andythenorth> well, we know that some don't 18:08:37 <andythenorth> I didn't mean to imply 'all authors' there 18:08:39 <andythenorth> sorry 18:10:26 <Eddi|zuHause> well, let's look at other examples: when we reworked flipping vehicles in depot, we identified some "trivial" cases where the NewGRF wasn't conflicting, and allowed flipping for those, all the other cases had to implement a special callback to work 18:11:33 <Eddi|zuHause> my aim here would be a similar thing. all (or most of) the "unproblematic" cases should just work with shunting, and for the special cases, give the NewGRF authors the right tools to handle them 18:12:01 <andythenorth> nah depot flip is a flag 18:12:11 <andythenorth> otherwise no flip 18:12:23 <andythenorth> actually we broke newgrf there and annoyed a lot of people 18:12:39 <Eddi|zuHause> no, we broke a thing that never worked properly before either 18:13:00 <andythenorth> not in the eyes of players or authors 18:13:10 <Eddi|zuHause> because the non-8-units long vehicles had to have special offsets depending on whether it was flipped or not 18:13:12 <andythenorth> yes 18:13:15 <andythenorth> it was terrible 18:13:27 <andythenorth> it was the right thing to do 18:13:44 <andythenorth> and the rage was only because there was an existing behaviour 18:13:50 <andythenorth> there's no existing behaviour for shunting 18:15:00 <Eddi|zuHause> i think the shunting operation should be attempted, and if callback results differ between before and after, it should throw an error message and skip the shunting order 18:15:22 <Eddi|zuHause> also, i have no problem with disabling shunting if the engine has wagon override enabled 18:15:40 <Eddi|zuHause> both things have to be communicated with the user 18:16:17 <andythenorth> I think that is all good 18:16:43 <andythenorth> my flag proposal is for newgrf authors who need to explictly ban shunting 18:17:02 <andythenorth> for released newgrfs 18:17:12 <andythenorth> it should be opt-in choice 18:17:27 <Eddi|zuHause> i disagree 18:17:40 <andythenorth> rationale? 18:17:52 <andythenorth> the choice is binary, opt-in, opt-out, I don't miss anything? 18:18:30 <andythenorth> or you propose newgrf author can choose to handle a cb when shunting happens? 18:19:00 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, the NewGRF needs some more details 18:19:12 <andythenorth> yes but already released newgrfs? 18:19:20 <andythenorth> we can't modify what's already out there 18:19:37 <andythenorth> sorry, I just see that as fundamental 18:19:47 <Eddi|zuHause> example: you have two ICE2 unites [head]-[wagon]*n-[steering] + [steering]-[wagon]*n-[head] 18:20:13 <Eddi|zuHause> you would want to allow shunting between two heads, or two steering wagons, or mixed, but not between the wagons 18:20:47 <Eddi|zuHause> or the case where you wouldn't want to put cargo wagons on such a unit 18:20:56 <andythenorth> I think we solve different issues 18:21:15 <andythenorth> I agree with your proposals, but you can't write new newgrf code for released grfs 18:21:19 <andythenorth> they're already shipped 18:21:19 <Eddi|zuHause> i think we have very many issues 18:22:42 <andythenorth> well 18:22:45 *** Thedarkb has joined #openttd 18:22:58 <andythenorth> is the released grfs issue handled by running wagon-attach cb when shunting? 18:23:03 <andythenorth> and respecting the result? 18:23:42 <andythenorth> this is a social problem with authors, not with cb 36 18:23:43 <andythenorth> btw 18:23:50 <andythenorth> cb 36 is different issue 18:24:18 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, but i think "disallow shunting for all old GRFs" is not the right solution 18:24:25 <andythenorth> fundamentally we have to respect "that engine can't run with that wagon" if authors require that 18:24:30 <andythenorth> I wish we didn't, but eh 18:24:34 <andythenorth> cat out of bag 18:25:04 <Eddi|zuHause> i think we can adapt the wagon-attach-callback to run during shunting operations 18:25:26 <Eddi|zuHause> and then refuse the shunting the same way as with the CB36-guard i proposed above 18:25:53 <andythenorth> ok that's 2 issues solved 18:26:11 <Eddi|zuHause> (the wagon-attach callback in itself is flawed as well, as it only asks A to allow B to attach, it doesn't ask B) 18:26:51 <andythenorth> hmm 18:26:59 <andythenorth> I never use it, because, why would you? 18:27:08 <andythenorth> how does it work? 18:27:11 * andythenorth -> spec 18:27:31 <andythenorth> it was made to placate a canadian who massively destructively rage quit in the end anyway 18:27:53 <Eddi|zuHause> both MB and George use it, i think 18:28:24 <andythenorth> pikka did too 18:28:31 <andythenorth> and V I think 18:28:49 <andythenorth> ok so the issue is 'this engine may not haul wagon x' 18:28:50 <andythenorth> fine 18:28:55 <Eddi|zuHause> i would be surprised if Snail doesn't 18:28:56 <andythenorth> just respect the cb 18:29:39 <andythenorth> if carriage A in newgrf B attaches to engine C in newgrf D, eh [shrug] 18:29:47 <Eddi|zuHause> the typical way to circumvent wagon-attach-callback is to use the invisible engine as front engine. because of the before-mentioned "B doesn't get asked" flaw 18:32:26 <andythenorth> ok so 18:32:31 <andythenorth> - attachment check 18:32:35 <andythenorth> - cb36 result validation 18:32:38 <andythenorth> what else? 18:32:43 <Eddi|zuHause> wagon override 18:32:50 <andythenorth> I never understand wagon override :P 18:32:57 <andythenorth> engine specifies liveries? 18:33:39 *** nielsm has joined #openttd 18:33:42 <Eddi|zuHause> original intention was to have T.I.M and AsiaStar livery wagons 18:33:51 <nielsm> huh why did I get disconnected.... oh well 18:33:57 <nielsm> been working on a little thing too: http://0x0.st/s_Eq.png 18:34:19 <Eddi|zuHause> i was also disconnected earlier 18:34:44 *** gelignite has joined #openttd 18:35:04 <andythenorth> o_O 18:36:02 *** Fuco has joined #openttd 18:37:07 <nielsm> and then going from the title screen game to an almost blank 64x64 map: http://0x0.st/s_Ec.png 18:38:01 <Eddi|zuHause> not quite sure how to read that output 18:38:31 <nielsm> long, medium, short term times taken to do various core parts of the game logic 18:38:48 <nielsm> "overall" is based on the time between calls to the main game loop 18:39:30 <nielsm> "gameloop times" is how long it takes to process all the game logic (pathfinding, towns and industry growth, etc) 18:39:49 <nielsm> "drawing times" is how long it takes for the windowing system and blitter to produce the image to put on screen 18:39:58 <nielsm> "video times" is how long it actually takes to put it on screen 18:41:14 *** KouDy has joined #openttd 18:41:58 <nielsm> those screenshots are taken from an unoptimized debug build, so everything is slow 18:42:29 <nielsm> in an optimized x64 build everything is so fast most times just end up as 0.00 ms 18:43:28 <Eddi|zuHause> try one of those old Coop games :p 18:43:46 <nielsm> need to rush for some food now 18:50:47 <snail_UES_> just got in now... 18:51:27 <snail_UES_> I’ve read your discussion above, I’m sorry to say that changing a vehicle length through CB36 is the only alternative to having a huge purchase list :p 18:53:00 <snail_UES_> ideally there should be a callback or something that returns the “original” engine a wagon was attached to when it left the depot 18:53:05 <snail_UES_> that could be cached 18:53:27 <snail_UES_> then, you could allow shunting upon different conditions, depending on what that “original” engine was 18:56:01 <snail_UES_> something similar to the “can attach” callback. There could be a “can shunt”; this would decide which engine IDs could shunt that vehicle 18:56:18 <snail_UES_> and this would work very well if we could identify the “original engine” this wagon left the depot with 18:57:33 <andythenorth> snail_UES_: a huge purchase list is fine btw 18:57:43 <andythenorth> but it's a side issue 18:57:46 <snail_UES_> andythenorth: I beg to differ 18:58:02 <andythenorth> irrespective of how you're using CB36, it has to not break anyway 18:58:18 <snail_UES_> what has not to break? 18:58:39 <andythenorth> length 18:58:41 <andythenorth> etc 18:59:09 <snail_UES_> CB36 is used to change length and you can’t say it’s “wrong"... 18:59:21 <andythenorth> I could solve your issue in the grf, there are only 8 lengths 18:59:27 <andythenorth> you don't need a huge purchase list 18:59:33 <snail_UES_> then, shunting would occur among the cases when length changes 18:59:33 <andythenorth> but that doesn't solve shunting 18:59:51 <snail_UES_> andythenorth: there is no “issue” in my grf 19:00:07 <andythenorth> poor choice of words 19:00:14 <snail_UES_> it’s just the concept of multiple similar vehicles cluttering the purchase list that makes no sense... 19:00:17 <andythenorth> I don't mean 'bad issue' 19:00:22 <andythenorth> I just mean 'you chose a route' 19:00:47 <andythenorth> I could spend 6 weeks persuading you to change it, but still doesn't solve shunting :P 19:01:05 <andythenorth> I think Eddi|zuHause solved the length issue anyway 19:01:08 <snail_UES_> I think it’s more of a philosophical thing 19:01:15 <andythenorth> yes 19:01:35 <snail_UES_> I’ve received feedback from my playtesters that they prefer automatic length change rather than a silly purchase list 19:01:39 <andythenorth> running the cb and refusing to shunt if values change is probably a solution 19:01:58 <andythenorth> Eddi|zuHause convinced me about that one 19:02:22 <andythenorth> and also running current 'can attach' cb as well 19:02:43 <andythenorth> I think those 2 solve most of the newgrf problems 19:03:29 * andythenorth -> gtg :) 19:03:33 *** andythenorth has quit IRC 19:24:33 <snail_UES_> just posted my proposal on the forum 19:30:39 *** tokai has joined #openttd 19:30:39 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v tokai 19:34:04 *** KouDy has quit IRC 19:37:33 *** tokai|noir has quit IRC 19:38:51 *** glx has joined #openttd 19:38:52 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v glx 19:52:10 *** KouDy has joined #openttd 20:21:09 <Wolf01> https://www.flickr.com/photos/140731612@N05/41744646241/in/pool-1120587@N22 seem small 20:29:56 <Arveen2> looking at the tiles it's rather big 20:40:53 *** Thedarkb has quit IRC 20:45:36 *** Thedarkb has joined #openttd 20:58:56 <nielsm> http://0x0.st/s_6N.png 21:14:17 *** supermop has joined #openttd 21:31:03 <nielsm> the translatable strings system doesn't have a way to display float values, does it? 21:40:44 *** gelignite has quit IRC 21:44:36 <frosch123> there is a fixed-point float number for the train length 21:46:01 *** planetmaker_ has quit IRC 21:46:12 <frosch123> nielsm: {DECIMAL} 21:47:47 <nielsm> ah 21:47:58 <nielsm> will fix my code to use that then 21:53:34 *** KouDy has quit IRC 21:58:47 <nielsm> made a PR of it now 21:59:18 *** Wormnest_ has joined #openttd 22:06:18 *** Wormnest has quit IRC 22:11:44 *** KouDy has joined #openttd 22:26:28 *** GT has joined #openttd 22:38:42 <Wolf01> 'night 22:38:44 *** Wolf01 has quit IRC 23:12:48 *** nielsm has quit IRC 23:16:46 *** supermop has quit IRC 23:21:38 *** Wormnest_ has quit IRC 23:27:03 *** Fuco has quit IRC 23:28:37 *** Thedarkb1-X40 has joined #openttd 23:28:50 *** Thedarkb1 has joined #openttd 23:35:13 *** beno__ has quit IRC 23:35:13 *** Thedarkb has quit IRC 23:45:51 *** GT has left #openttd 23:57:53 *** frosch123 has quit IRC