Times are UTC Toggle Colours
00:39:57 <snail_UES_> the “veh_num” function in m4nfo, which counts the number of vehicles in the consist (or from a certain vehicle on), displays the number *minus one*, right? 01:16:23 <glx> I guess it's https://newgrf-specs.tt-wiki.net/wiki/VariationalAction2/Vehicles#Position_and_length_.2840.2C_41.29 01:21:55 <glx> http://www.ttdpatch.de/grfspecs/m4nfoManual/TrainFunctions.html#veh_num <-- and the docs say "minus one" 02:02:58 *** DasPoseidon has quit IRC 03:19:26 *** debdog has joined #openttd 03:19:59 *** Wormnest has quit IRC 03:22:53 *** D-HUND has quit IRC 04:06:23 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] perezdidac opened pull request #8495: FR: Prevent tunnels from being built under extractive industries https://git.io/JLFsM 04:08:55 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] perezdidac commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under extractive industries https://git.io/JLFs5 04:08:59 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] perezdidac closed pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under extractive industries https://git.io/JLFsM 04:09:02 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] perezdidac reopened pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under extractive industries https://git.io/JLFsM 04:12:39 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] James103 commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under extractive industries https://git.io/JLFsp 04:15:09 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] perezdidac commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under extractive industries https://git.io/JLFGf 04:18:06 *** glx has quit IRC 05:12:15 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] 2TallTyler commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under extractive industries https://git.io/JLFZH 05:47:04 *** Gustavo6046 has quit IRC 06:01:36 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] Eddi-z commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under extractive industries https://git.io/JLFcZ 06:03:30 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] Eddi-z commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under extractive industries https://git.io/JLFcC 06:13:12 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] Eddi-z commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under extractive industries https://git.io/JLFco 06:28:29 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] Eddi-z commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under extractive industries https://git.io/JLFCG 06:46:38 <Heiki> oh, realism 06:52:07 <reldred> muh realisms 06:52:11 <reldred> muh immershuns 07:30:45 *** sla_ro|master has joined #openttd 07:47:33 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC 07:47:47 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd 08:03:26 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC 08:03:40 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd 08:06:45 *** snail_UES_ has quit IRC 08:07:18 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] erenes commented on issue #8194: Releases from version 1.10.1 no longer work on mid-2007 iMac https://git.io/JfMJz 08:08:48 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd 08:15:27 <andythenorth> is cat? 08:19:16 <reldred> cats are good yes 08:29:33 *** Gustavo6046 has joined #openttd 08:41:28 *** DasPoseidon has joined #openttd 08:52:43 *** crem has quit IRC 08:53:57 *** crem has joined #openttd 09:07:35 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] LordAro dismissed a review for pull request #8452: Doc: Add labels to landscape grid description. https://git.io/JL555 09:29:41 *** DasPoseidon has quit IRC 09:34:30 *** DasPoseidon has joined #openttd 09:54:35 <andythenorth> lol things that will never get old 09:54:51 <andythenorth> people in forums (not just tt-forums) posting 'is there any news in this thread since last post' 09:55:04 <andythenorth> it's nice for morons to self-identify 10:12:12 *** urdh has quit IRC 10:18:35 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] michicc commented on issue #8194: Releases from version 1.10.1 no longer work on mid-2007 iMac https://git.io/JfMJz 10:32:25 *** jottyfan has joined #openttd 10:33:09 *** tokai has joined #openttd 10:33:09 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v tokai 10:33:29 *** jottyfan has quit IRC 10:50:24 *** jottyfan has joined #openttd 10:51:51 *** Borg has joined #openttd 10:51:54 <Borg> howdy..... 10:51:56 * Borg cries 10:52:18 *** jottyfan has quit IRC 10:54:05 <Borg> any YAPF experts around? I have like a path w/ 4000 penalty.. and those litle bastards still prefers it.. ;) 10:54:48 <Borg> lets see if 6000 will discourage them... 10:55:36 <Borg> not really.... wttttf 10:55:51 <Borg> and even if path is blocked... they want to go there... 10:55:56 <Borg> like wtf^3 10:56:17 <LordAro> you are absolutely on your own when fiddling with yapf penalty values 10:56:39 <Borg> why? :) 10:59:16 <Borg> I noticed 2 oddities w/ penalites generally.. 10:59:36 <Borg> big penalty makes path unusuable.. 10:59:41 <Borg> its never selected. 11:00:15 <Borg> even if everything is blocked.. completly.. w/ is weird. because I couldnt find that in code 11:01:17 <Borg> okey.. 9000 made it... 11:01:46 <Borg> not fully of course.. still some trains go to aux path.. where pri is free 11:01:54 <Borg> and its not blocked... 11:01:59 <Borg> lets enable pathfinder display 11:03:27 <Borg> what was it? 11:04:04 <Borg> okey found it 11:04:11 <Borg> what was pf.reserve_paths was for? 11:04:28 *** Samu has joined #openttd 11:06:02 <Borg> ahh always reserve path.. 11:09:50 <Borg> okey.. time to RTFS again.. and debuglevel yapf=3 11:11:29 <Samu> hello 11:12:22 <Borg> oki doki.. nice.. 11:12:23 <Borg> lets read 11:14:04 <michi_cc> You don't happen to have two-way signals somewhere, do you? 11:14:10 <michi_cc> Any maybe two_eol on? 11:16:36 <Borg> michi_cc: nope.. I dont use two-way signals at all.. and two_eol is off 11:16:44 <Borg> I just use PBS + oneway block 11:16:49 <Borg> michi_cc: wanna screenshot? 11:17:44 <Borg> and I use trick w/ PBS back signals.. to influence pathfinder.. to have primary path and auxliary path 11:19:08 <Borg> hmm train going to aux path.. cost is 23568.. still selected 11:20:11 <Borg> distance is 0 11:20:18 <Borg> its always 0.. not used in YAPF? 11:24:13 <Borg> now.. when I have 9000 penalty over aux path.. pri is finaly selected.. with cost 14272 11:24:28 <Borg> so.. aux path cost is now sth like 26000+ 11:24:33 <Borg> BIG difference.. 11:24:56 <Borg> so... 14272 vs 24000 yet... 24000 is selected.. why? 11:25:42 <Borg> I was studing that code.. few times.. and seems cost is importand part of path selection.. of course. if path is blocked by train... anything is better.. 11:26:02 <Borg> but if 2 paths are empty.. not reserved by other trains... we have 14272 vs 24000 and yet.. 24000 is selected 11:26:06 <Borg> with is completly weird to me.. 11:34:24 *** urdh has joined #openttd 11:37:42 <Borg> how path cache works? 11:46:24 <Borg> okey. I found the reason.. with makes me even more puzzzled 11:46:31 <Borg> station18113094 11:46:32 <Borg> PBS17823568 11:46:34 <Borg> fuck 11:46:47 <Borg> wrong past.. 11:47:16 <Borg> at station, I have cost 13094, but later on that path.. on first PBS signal cost is 23568 11:47:20 <Borg> how is that possible? 11:49:36 <Borg> okey.. got entire dump... 11:49:42 <Borg> for whole path it looks like this 11:50:51 <Borg> cost: 13094 -> 23568 -> 22852 -> (passing 2x PBS back signals, 6000 penalty) -> 9381 12:12:20 <Borg> noone? :) 12:13:46 <Borg> and yeah.. whole path is <10 signals.. so signal look ahead.. should kick in 12:19:05 <LordAro> TrueBrain: https://github.com/presslabs/gitfs 12:24:11 *** andythenorth has quit IRC 12:25:36 <Borg> what is... segment in pathfinder? 12:47:02 <Borg> another oddity.. 12:47:08 <Borg> when I increase look_ahead_signals = 20 12:47:13 <Borg> correct path is selected 12:47:50 <Borg> if (n.m_num_signals_passed >= m_sig_look_ahead_costs.Size() / 2) return 0; 12:47:59 <Borg> in ReservationCost() function 12:48:04 <Borg> wonder why its half of its size 12:48:09 *** urdh has quit IRC 12:48:22 *** urdh has joined #openttd 12:50:43 *** sla_ro|master has quit IRC 12:54:36 <FLHerne> Borg: I think 'segment' is a section of plain track between junctions/signals 12:55:05 <FLHerne> So the pathfinder can treat it as a single unit 12:55:29 <Borg> FLHerne: I doubt it.... in code I see stuff like this: 12:55:41 <Borg> segment_cost += Yapf().SignalCost(n, cur.tile, cur.td); 12:55:51 <Borg> all look ahead signals are added.. 12:56:16 <Borg> there is also one weird thing 12:56:32 <Borg> if (segment_cost > s_max_segment_cost) { 12:56:44 <Borg> with is worrying.. because s_max_segment_cost is hardcoded to 10000 12:58:30 <Borg> but still.. its weird.. because increasing signals lookup ahead... make it works fine.. so.. im really puzzled 13:07:09 <Borg> okey lets try something stupid 13:08:58 <Borg> as expected.. stupid thing makes things... bad :) 13:12:06 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] Eddi-z commented on pull request #8485: Codechange: improve performance for complex vehicle chains by resolving sprites less often https://git.io/JLF6I 13:17:04 <Borg> okey.. I think I found something.. 13:17:11 <Borg> with badly influences my costs 13:17:38 <Borg> pbs_cross_penalty <- can anyone explain me.. what it really is? 13:18:10 <Borg> I increased it.. so trains nicely move into platforms when there are some corssing occupied 13:18:19 <Borg> but.. it seems now.. it destroy things in other places 13:21:07 <Borg> time to make test tracks 13:24:44 *** andythenorth has joined #openttd 13:27:58 *** jottyfan has joined #openttd 13:28:09 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC 13:28:22 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd 13:30:42 <Borg> okey its not it.. 13:30:51 <Borg> changing pbs_crossing to default doesnt change anything 13:33:19 <Borg> now.. doing close inspection on paths.. 13:33:33 <Borg> im even more and more puzzled 13:35:25 <Borg> diagnol paths are more expensive? 13:40:15 *** glx has joined #openttd 13:40:15 *** ChanServ sets mode: +v glx 13:40:48 <Borg> arfgh! 13:40:51 <Borg> yes they are... 13:41:15 <Borg> and its hardcoded 13:41:26 <Borg> so its best to AVOID them.... 13:44:41 <Borg> okey.. 13:44:49 <Borg> now is all clear why other patch is still prefered.. 13:44:56 <Borg> there is quite long diagonal track in pri path... 13:45:07 <Borg> with gets probably around 1500+ cost 13:45:19 <Borg> what was the reasoning to penalize diagonal tracks? 13:47:07 <Borg> okey. but there is YAPF_TILE_CORNER_LENGTH=71 13:47:11 <Borg> co its 100 vs 71 13:48:03 <Borg> so its not actually it 13:55:06 <TrueBrain> LordAro: nice :D We basically build that ourselves, but not on FUSE level :P 13:55:15 <LordAro> indeed not 13:55:28 <LordAro> FUSE level is a bit cursed 13:55:41 <TrueBrain> I rather like that we decide when to commit/push, honestly :) 13:55:57 <TrueBrain> but I understand why they did it :D 13:58:15 *** snail_UES_ has joined #openttd 14:01:41 *** sla_ro|master has joined #openttd 14:06:34 *** Con_TheGranny has quit IRC 14:10:11 <Borg> guys.. I really need help w/ that 14:10:42 <Borg> Im trying to understand why my short path.. with like 3-4 signals is sooo expensive 14:12:01 <LordAro> Borg: here's what you should do (that i think i've told you before) : 14:12:07 <LordAro> 1) remove all pathfinder settings from your openttd.cfg 14:12:10 <LordAro> 2) don't touch them again 14:12:40 <Borg> thans not the solution 14:12:45 <Borg> because default settings do NOT work 14:13:06 <LordAro> i can almost promise that the number of people who have actually changed any of those settings in a useful way in the last 15 years can be counted on 1 hand 14:13:15 <LordAro> no one knows what those values are, or what they are doing 14:13:16 <LordAro> they work 14:13:19 <LordAro> so don't touch them 14:14:41 <SpComb> MAGIC 14:14:51 *** gnu_jj has quit IRC 14:16:32 <Borg> okey.. lets set them to default 14:16:35 <Borg> to see what happens.. 14:24:30 <Borg> yeah... MAGIC.... does NOT fucking work.. 14:24:32 <Borg> as expected.. 14:26:12 <Borg> adding 4500 penalty on path.. 14:26:36 <Borg> jaj.. selected.. 14:26:40 <Borg> lets see if its persistent 14:27:32 <Borg> difference between paths cost is very small.. weird 14:27:43 <Borg> aux path have +4500 penalty additionally 14:27:49 <Borg> all default settings 14:27:57 <Borg> is there something obvious I dont see? 14:29:25 <andythenorth> https://youtu.be/e0U29z4iXFo?t=46 14:30:08 <TrueBrain> I somehow expected to be rickrolled :) 14:30:31 <Borg> 11594 vs 6062.. 14:31:48 <Borg> really.. 14:32:02 <Borg> again.. path w/ cost 11594 selected 14:32:02 <Eddi|zuHause> do they talk about how on patch-day the government has to turn off the projector that simulates the moon on the sky? 14:32:23 <Borg> where 6062 is empty.. no reservations.. green lights.. 14:32:27 <TrueBrain> didn't you hear they are making tinfoilhats mandatory? 14:32:42 <Borg> default settings.. 14:32:46 <Eddi|zuHause> why aren't there any people wearing tinfoil masks 14:32:51 <Borg> I paused and saved 14:32:56 <andythenorth> https://youtu.be/e0U29z4iXFo?t=456 14:33:33 <andythenorth> "but you hate magic" 14:33:40 <andythenorth> "yes but it has a small carbon footprint" 14:34:52 *** DasPoseidon has quit IRC 14:36:47 <Eddi|zuHause> oh man that's like a conspiracy gold mine :p 14:37:04 <Eddi|zuHause> and this is from 2009? 14:37:06 *** nielsm has joined #openttd 14:37:15 <Borg> okey.. so noone wanna take a look at my save? 14:39:37 <FLHerne> Where's your save? 14:40:03 <FLHerne> (if it doesn't have a hundred unobtainable grfs) 14:40:59 <Borg> if (m_pBestDestNode == NULL || n < *m_pBestDestNode) { <- uhm.. n is Node (is it class?) can we do comparision like this? 14:42:14 <Borg> FLHerne: nah, just too small GRFs, they are here: 14:42:17 <Borg> ftp://ds-1.ovh.uu3.net/home/borg/openttd/BSPI.grf 14:42:22 <Borg> ftp://ds-1.ovh.uu3.net/home/borg/openttd/X2025.grf 14:42:31 <Eddi|zuHause> oh, i remember why i made an ignore list... they keep having the obscurest problems and don't take the sane advice 14:43:05 <Borg> save is here: http://node.borg.uu3.net/Rand4.sav 14:44:33 <LordAro> are pathfinder settings even saved? 14:44:45 <Eddi|zuHause> almost certainly 14:44:48 <Borg> yes 14:44:56 <Borg> they are in save game.. but... now they are all default 14:45:08 <Borg> except depot penalty.. 14:45:13 <Borg> with in that case have no meaning 14:54:08 *** jottyfan has quit IRC 15:11:00 *** DasPoseidon has joined #openttd 15:22:12 *** gnu_jj has joined #openttd 15:24:38 <supermop_Home> andythenorth ocean water cycle for pool like temperate hotel? 15:30:03 <Borg> FLHerne: hey, are you going to take a look? or no time atm? I have things setup and waiting 15:30:07 <Eddi|zuHause> because pools are known for meter-high waves? 15:32:26 <supermop_Home> Eddi|zuHause the rooftop pool in the temperate base set never looked all that pleasant to swim in 15:32:55 <supermop_Home> though it was one of those things i noticed as a fascinating detail when i was a kid 15:37:19 <Timberwolf> The one that used to drive me made in temperate base was the passenger carriage. 15:37:36 <Timberwolf> The one in arctic/subtropical is so much nicer. 15:39:37 <andythenorth> supermop_Home blue, with a few ocean dots 15:39:51 <TrueBrain> i'm blue daladilada 15:40:37 <Borg> FLHerne: and segment is probably between junction/branches.. can contain many signals... 15:41:30 <supermop_Home> TrueBrain i think it goes da BA di da ba dai 15:42:12 <Eddi|zuHause> some sentences are worse than rickrolling :p 15:42:16 <TrueBrain> turns out it is daba dee ba da die 15:42:30 <Eddi|zuHause> there's a "da" missing 15:42:44 <TrueBrain> la and ba are very hard to differentiate, but yeah 16:03:40 <supermop_Home> i guess landscape architecture is not really my thing - really lackluster groundsprites so far here 16:08:16 *** _2TallTyler has joined #openttd 16:11:13 <supermop_Home> andythenorth do you put greenery on the sprite or let grass show through from a baseset tile? 16:11:32 <andythenorth> I draw greenery usually 16:11:44 <andythenorth> depends how terrain dependent I wanted it to be 16:14:42 <supermop_Home> i guess a hotel has a grounds crew 16:15:33 <supermop_Home> do you think there is enough for ogfx now? 16:16:30 <FLHerne> Borg: What's the issue supposed to be, then? 16:16:56 <FLHerne> (sorry, I tend to squeeze in IRC between other things...) 16:17:40 <FLHerne> I have the save open, nothing looks obviously stuck 16:18:04 <LordAro> FLHerne: you should polish your crystal ball 16:20:58 <Borg> okey.. some final tought.. with yapf.rail_look_ahead_max_signals = 10 YAPF is completly not deterministic to play.. in that track layout (default settings or mine settings) 16:21:07 <Borg> changing that to 20.. makes thing works right!! 16:21:27 <Borg> FLHerne: please redownload Rand4_tmp1.sav 16:21:35 <Borg> because I went futher with tests.. 16:21:46 <Borg> so I copied that snapshot.. 16:22:15 <Borg> FLHerne: so if you have time now.. we can go step by step 16:23:01 <FLHerne> ok 16:23:04 <Borg> okey, let me open it too 16:23:23 <Borg> Now locate train 37 16:23:31 <Borg> also, please set show reserved paths 16:23:56 <Borg> train 37 now selected path is kinda wrong 16:24:15 <Borg> it destination is Pratbourne Halt 16:24:43 <Borg> it should chose that path straight on that junction under bridge 16:24:51 <Borg> its shorter.. it doesnt have 4500 penalty 16:25:05 <Borg> and there is nothing wrong with it.. its also.. EMPTY 16:25:29 <Borg> if you follow the path the train will go now.. 16:25:52 <Borg> you will see PBS signal after bridge and junctions... and 3 PBS back signals 16:25:59 <Borg> this is my aux path.. w/ should be selected rary 16:26:15 <Borg> or just unpase the game.. and track the train 16:26:18 <Borg> will be easier I think 16:26:45 <Borg> if you got it.. you can just unpause the game.. and watch most trains go that way 16:29:46 <Borg> you can also play with: debuglevel yapf=3 16:29:55 <Borg> and pause game in right moment and check paths costs.. 16:29:59 <FLHerne> I can see it, that is a little odd 16:30:13 <Borg> I still didnt fugured out what is open vs closed 16:30:30 <Borg> yeah.. very odd.. especially. if you cound all signals on path.. they are <10 16:30:37 <Borg> s/cound/count/ 16:31:56 <Borg> now.. change the setting: yapf.rail_look_ahead_max_signals = 20 16:32:02 <Borg> and they should now select correct path 16:33:19 <FLHerne> LordAro: fwiw, the issue is reproducible with default PF settings and doesn't seem obviously explicable 16:33:58 <Borg> the only place I found that MIGHT influence this: 16:35:01 <LordAro> intriguing 16:35:08 <Borg> trying to find it.. now.. 16:35:16 <LordAro> presumably needs some reducing to a minimal example 16:35:28 <Eddi|zuHause> it goes away if you turn the intermediate signals into path signals 16:35:44 <FLHerne> Eddi|zuHause: hah, that's exactlt what I was just doing 16:36:16 <Borg> got it: if (n.m_num_signals_passed >= m_sig_look_ahead_costs.Size() / 2) return 0; 16:36:23 <Borg> but.. I aint expert... so.. hard to say 16:36:36 <Eddi|zuHause> hm, no 16:37:10 <Borg> Eddi|zuHause: I doubt it go away.. because block signals penalty is added only when they are RED 16:37:24 <Borg> if they are GREEN.. no penalty.. and checking them to PBS.. means no penalty either 16:37:37 <Borg> s/checking/changing/ 16:38:20 <Eddi|zuHause> right, turned some more signals, now it seems to work better 16:38:22 <FLHerne> Eddi|zuHause: Which ones? It doesn't work for me 16:38:36 <FLHerne> I tried the pair by the lake, then all of them on both routes 16:38:55 *** gelignite has joined #openttd 16:39:10 <Eddi|zuHause> it's weird, sometimes it works for a moment, and then it stops 16:40:01 <Borg> wtf! 16:40:05 <Borg> now its even more weirded 16:40:10 <Borg> I removed all PBS back signals.. 16:40:27 <Borg> and it works as it SHOULD.. because upper path.. should have imo sligher cost.. that down path 16:40:47 <Borg> the only difference is.. im still at look_ahead_max_signals = 20 16:41:39 <Eddi|zuHause> now i also turned the ones right after the destination station 16:43:01 <Eddi|zuHause> what makes this more difficult to diagnose is that servicing is enabled 16:44:13 <Borg> but all trains have goto depoint for maintenance? and it kicks not often.. 540 days 16:44:26 <Borg> so it should not influence it at all? 16:45:45 <Borg> also u can turn on: order.no_servicing_if_no_breakdowns 1 16:45:46 <Eddi|zuHause> well, my conclusion: don't mix block and path signals 16:45:50 <Borg> I have no break doents 16:46:06 <Borg> Eddi|zuHause: huh?!! how come.. block signals are essecinal for balancing 16:46:21 <Borg> parameters: yapf.rail_look_ahead_signal_p* 16:46:36 <Borg> without block signals.. penalties never kick in.. 16:46:57 <Borg> Eddi|zuHause: did you make my track works only by changing signals to PBS? all of them? 16:47:21 <Eddi|zuHause> anyway, they still take the long detour sometimes, when the routes are blocked. this is usually because the more signals they go through on the alternate path makes it drop the check whether paths are reserved, which makes it APPEAR shorter 16:47:37 <Borg> Eddi|zuHause: thats good!! even more.. excelent.. thats what AUX path is for 16:47:43 <Borg> take it.. when stuff is blocked.. 16:47:51 <Borg> but if not... go primary :) thats the goal design here 16:48:06 <Eddi|zuHause> if you remove some signals, that situation should be less likely 16:48:24 <Borg> but.. now.. train do go AUX.. even when PRI is empty.. and free 16:48:30 <Borg> okey.. lets try it 16:48:56 <Eddi|zuHause> which leads to the other conclusion: don't give the trains too many options 16:49:23 <Borg> Eddi|zuHause: there are just 2 options there.. 16:49:25 <Borg> okey.. 3 at best 16:49:30 <Borg> is that too much already? :( 16:50:45 <Borg> okey..I removed some block signals 16:50:49 <Borg> still wrong path selected 16:50:59 <Borg> can you provide me your save game? 16:51:03 <Borg> I wanna see design now 16:51:49 <Borg> to sum up... Im kinda happy that yapf.rail_look_ahead_max_signals have big influence on that 16:52:02 <Borg> so... I need to recalc p0,p1,p2 tables again.. and might be nice workaround 16:53:17 <Borg> hmmm 16:53:19 <Eddi|zuHause> there's no real reason for this "AUX" path to exist. it doesn't have more capacity for holding trains, and no overflow depot 16:53:28 <Borg> I removed last block signal on path.. and.. it started to work.. 16:53:39 <Borg> oh.. there is 16:53:54 <Eddi|zuHause> in the worst case, it locks up, and blocks your other routes 16:54:12 <Borg> just stop 2 trains there 16:54:18 <Borg> you will see how AUX path gets used 16:54:20 <Borg> thats the point 16:54:26 <Borg> if its blocked.. get detour 16:54:58 <Borg> AUX path was first also.. I added botton path to unload the AUX because its used for other trains.. 16:55:31 <Borg> I remember I had problems w/ block signals before.. that somehow paths w/ block signals were more preffered.. somehow 16:55:39 <Borg> but I never dug up this in source code.. 16:57:11 <Borg> heh weird 16:57:20 <Borg> I rememoved block signals.. and for few trains it worked 16:57:26 <Borg> now.. they still select AUX path... wtf 16:57:35 <Borg> okey.. not all.. 16:57:49 <Borg> nows its feel kinda balanced 16:58:00 <Borg> when its a bit blocked... then AUX path is used 16:58:02 <Borg> not bad.. 16:59:08 <Borg> adding ONE block signal.. into AUX path.. just after that crossing bridge 16:59:13 <Borg> completly change YAPF behavior.. 16:59:27 <Borg> now all trains go via AUX path.. 16:59:44 <Borg> and I cant find that in source code.. cost calculator.. 17:00:02 <Borg> SignalCost() is easy 17:00:53 <FLHerne> Borg: It's kind of bad form to spam IRC with 20 lines of stream-of-consciousness rambling 17:00:53 <Borg> if its RED.. and not PbsSignal.. just add cost 17:01:15 <Borg> FLHerne: sorry... 17:02:45 <Eddi|zuHause> here's what i think is happening: https://ibin.co/5n6vbgvxe6mH.png 17:03:01 <Eddi|zuHause> that path has 10 signals, and after 10 signals, the "is this track occupied?" check is dropped 17:03:31 <Eddi|zuHause> so if both the platforms and the holding tracks before them are occupied, this longer route is being treated as "shorter" 17:03:55 *** Wormnest has joined #openttd 17:04:19 <Borg> Eddi|zuHause: w000t? . how come? how more signals make it shorter? 17:04:50 <FLHerne> Because it only cares about track occupancy in the first 10 signal sections 17:05:04 <Borg> Eddi|zuHause: also: please removed back signals.. it will make it <10 signals and it will be still prefered 17:05:04 <FLHerne> And track occupancy is very high-cost 17:05:33 <Borg> FLHerne: whats the variable name of it? I want to check sources.. to understand this... 17:09:33 <Borg> for now I only see one place with that in yapf_costrail.hpp, and it add yapf.rail_lastred_exit_penalty = 10000 to cost. But in my settings I have it set to 0, but still dont help. is there any other places? 17:11:14 <Borg> Eddi|zuHause: also, even if.. this is weird because cost is always added.. so more signals.. more possible costs (not less) so this is counter intuitive as well.. 17:11:15 <Eddi|zuHause> maybe it's also seeing some loop which will increase signal count 17:11:28 <FLHerne> Borg: I think you want yapf.rail_pbs_cross_penalty and yapf.rail_pbs_station_penalty 17:11:46 *** _2TallTyler has quit IRC 17:11:59 <FLHerne> (cost per tile of conflicting track reservation, latter case for stations) 17:12:06 <Borg> FLHerne: that is pbs_cross_penalty ? I had to increase it in my setting.. so trains better balance at platform entrances.. but I dont understand code :( 17:12:47 <Borg> 300 -> 1000 make it nice... trains dont wait for platform when some reservation blocks them. they select other uncoopuied platform.. 17:12:59 <Borg> with 300.. they were just waiting unnecessary.. blocking flows. 17:13:01 <Eddi|zuHause> the settings are "pbs_cross_penalty" for occupied track, and "pbs_station_penalty" for occupied station. "lastred_exit" doesn't apply because you don't have any exit signals, and PBS signals aren't red or green 17:14:02 <Borg> Eddi|zuHause: okey, I have pbs_station_penalty default... 800 what should I try? 17:14:14 <Eddi|zuHause> i've temporarily set them both to 100 (= normal track), and i've not seen a train using the AUX track 17:14:25 <Borg> hmm lets try.. 17:15:59 <Borg> Eddi|zuHause: ARGH!! thx :) 17:16:01 <Eddi|zuHause> (those are not good settings, just for testing) 17:16:17 <Borg> setting pbs_station_penalty 800 -> 100 made it alone! 17:16:20 *** jottyfan has joined #openttd 17:16:21 <Borg> all other are default settings 17:16:35 <Eddi|zuHause> i still think you should just remove the AUX track 17:17:33 <Borg> :( 17:17:34 *** jottyfan has quit IRC 17:18:12 <Borg> no no.. I will keep it 17:18:27 <Eddi|zuHause> remember, the 800 (=8 tiles) is per station tile, so a 7 tile station will allow for 56 tiles worth of penalties as potential detour 17:18:45 <Borg> wow.... alot.. 17:19:16 <Borg> but 800 is default with 100... 17:20:01 <Borg> also.. I dont need to touch pbs_cross_penatly then.. because pbs_station_penalty was also breaking my platform balancing.. damn! one little setting.. so high PF influence.. 17:20:28 <Eddi|zuHause> you can reduce that, but you should still have it higher than 100, so trains would choose a free track over an occupied track 17:20:30 <Borg> okey.. thanks a LOT guys.. now I will revert back to my own settings and adjust only pbs_station_penalty and I will check what will happen now.. 17:21:23 <Eddi|zuHause> setting it to 100 will probably wreak havoc on other places of your network 17:21:24 <Borg> Eddi|zuHause: if it will be problematic.. it will quickly appear on that Nonningwell West station w/ 5 platforms.. when trains will just wait.. instead tacking unocuppied.. :) 17:21:43 <Borg> still.. worth a try :) 17:27:59 <Borg> so far so good.. w/o PBS back signal at AUX.. its being selected.. with is fine... adding one PBS signal.. solves problem.. it because AUX.. selected only when other blocked.. now lets see if other places have issues now 17:29:55 <Borg> yep.. 17:30:07 <Borg> there are problem in other places.. DAMN.. :( 17:32:47 <Borg> time to do RTFS more.. what exacly that pbs_station_penalty do 17:33:54 <Borg> AHA! its near the code I pasted earlier about weird look_ahead_max_signals/2 code in ReservationCost() 17:34:48 <Borg> in one fuction.. all those settings are there.. as well pbs_cross_penalty 17:36:35 <Borg> but. luicky.. those 2 are seems to be used only in ReservationCost() 17:36:44 <Borg> so.. it should be easy to tune it up correctly! :) 17:41:52 <Borg> with is.. not easy 17:45:15 *** frosch123 has joined #openttd 17:54:43 <Borg> okey.. now I slowly get picture of whats going on.. 17:58:59 <frosch123> there is over 6 hours of yapf talk in the log. i guess i was lucky i had to work today? 17:59:09 <Borg> ;D 17:59:28 <Borg> yeah... consider yourself lucky... 18:01:23 <Eddi|zuHause> frosch123: probably better :) 18:02:20 <Borg> is there any reason to cut in half look ahead signal in Reservation Cost? 18:03:11 <Borg> I think best solution would be to set it to larger number like 20? perhaps 30 even.. and carefully recalculate table so past away signals have minor influence on path. 18:03:43 <Borg> touching pbs_station_penalty makes havoc indeed.. like Eddi|zuHause predicted (if you use PBS to balance platforms) 18:04:44 <Borg> as low as I can go there is pbs_station_penalty = 500 18:05:03 <Borg> for for 3 tiles platforms.. it gets 1500. and its enough to balance w/o PBS back signal 18:07:43 *** Wolf01 has joined #openttd 18:18:13 <Samu> #8492 - I've been all day trying to make terraforming less restrictive 18:19:06 <Samu> while it diminishes the cases of flooded houses, it doesn't totally eliminate the issue as it currently stands in the PR 18:20:17 <Samu> the PR approach totally eliminates flooding 18:20:46 <Samu> but might be "overkill" in some cases, I'm unsure yet 18:23:20 *** Progman has joined #openttd 18:31:18 <andythenorth> le oof 18:31:27 <andythenorth> also hi 18:31:33 <Borg> Eddi|zuHause: I think this is a bug... in ReservationCost() that div 2 18:31:54 <Borg> I just made new p0,p1,p2 params adjusted for look_ahead_max_signals=20 18:31:57 <Borg> and it works nicely 18:32:29 <Borg> BUT of course.. I can be unlucky again.. and create path w/ exaclt 20 signals vs shoter.. and it will break again.. 18:32:33 <andythenorth> ships ships ships ships ships 18:32:35 * andythenorth ships 18:32:42 <andythenorth> names of ships are Hard 18:36:33 <Borg> so, any YAPF guru, please take a look at ReservationCost() function and comment why we check only on half of look ahead signals here... what was the reasoning.. 18:39:46 <Borg> removing that div 2 fixes everything... and makes things work as it should 18:40:48 <michi_cc> Borg: It fixes everything for your very specific case, nothing more and nothing less. 18:41:12 <Borg> and actually.. im not sure if its wise to have it here at all.. why the check? if we reach Platform Reservation check.. why checking how many signals we passed anyway? 18:41:47 <Borg> is that calc expensive? 18:46:26 <Eddi|zuHause> Borg: the limit is there because it is a) pretty expensive to check, and b) pretty meaningless if you have a 1000k tile route to the other end of the map, because the situation will be different once you get there 18:50:40 <Eddi|zuHause> the "expensive" part is that it cannot be cached, because it changes all the time 18:52:26 <michi_cc> And yes, the limit to reservation cost is there to prevent to following complaint: "Why does the train go this other long way, the train in front would be long gone until if it just continued straight". 18:52:43 <michi_cc> Strike on until, please. 19:02:50 <Borg> Eddi|zuHause: okey right.... 19:02:56 <Borg> michi_cc: yeah.. valid point too 19:04:08 <Borg> okey.. so there is more understanding to this now.. lets try other way around.. shorter look ahead... 19:07:07 <andythenorth> it amuses me when people think we have gurus and experts :) 19:07:18 <andythenorth> instead of people just desperately trying to make it work :) 19:09:17 <Eddi|zuHause> andythenorth: how much difference is there really? :) 19:09:28 <andythenorth> very good question 19:12:23 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/team] alisaffari97 opened issue #120: [fa_IR] Translator access request https://git.io/JLbeF 19:14:14 <Borg> hooly shit.. now it looks even better 19:14:33 <Borg> look ahead max signals = 5 didt splendit work 19:16:39 <Borg> and thanks to that div/2 19:17:36 <Borg> only final PBS signal check for platform availability 19:18:30 <andythenorth> 1926 cargo ship: design speed 11 knots; 2020 hybrid propulsion cargo ship: design speed 11 knots 19:18:34 <andythenorth> lol ships 19:21:34 <LordAro> ooh, Persian 19:21:44 <LordAro> did we have one of them before? 19:22:40 <LordAro> ooh, that's one of the unfinished langs 19:22:51 <LordAro> can eints even handle those? 19:23:27 <frosch123> yes 19:23:40 <frosch123> though possibly not tested as much :) 19:25:55 <frosch123> the previous persian translator was last active 2016-06-12 :) 19:28:37 *** iSoSyS has joined #openttd 19:28:43 <LordAro> :) 19:28:54 <supermop_Home> andythenorth catamaran ferries 19:29:13 *** iSoSyS has quit IRC 19:29:15 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/team] LordAro commented on issue #120: [fa_IR] Translator access request https://git.io/JLbeF 19:29:16 <andythenorth> yes but not for logs 19:30:14 <FLHerne> The newer ones have vastly lower operating costs 19:30:24 <FLHerne> But no-one cares about running cost in OTTD 19:31:04 <FLHerne> I think with ships you kind of have to accept that the differences are for visual happiness more than gameplay :-/ 19:31:13 <FLHerne> (or reinvent the economy) 19:31:15 <andythenorth> yes 19:31:21 <andythenorth> it's just very inconvenient of reality 19:31:31 <andythenorth> it should be arranged for gameplay 19:36:46 *** Trucks has joined #openttd 19:38:06 *** Trucks has quit IRC 19:38:21 <andythenorth> hmm Train Whack is broken 19:38:30 <andythenorth> it doesn't understand dual-headed engines 19:39:36 <Wolf01> Fix it 19:39:45 <FLHerne> I think it's broken by existing, tbh :p 19:39:51 <Wolf01> Ahaha 19:41:29 * Wolf01 sits down, "let's do something", runs netflix... 19:44:41 <andythenorth> still don't know what to call this type of ship http://www.workboatsinternational.com/small-gen-cargo-pallet-carrier-lpc3581.html 19:44:46 <andythenorth> http://www.workboatsinternational.com/small-gen-cargo-pallet-carrier-lpc3581.html 19:45:03 <andythenorth> the shipping industry calls them 'general cargo' but that doesn't mean general cargo 19:45:28 <andythenorth> it means specifically packaged cargo in palettes, bundles, crates or bags 19:45:44 <andythenorth> general cargo goes in a multi-purpose vessel 19:47:18 <andythenorth> and generally if it's mixed breakbulk it goes in a tweendecker for better use of space 19:47:46 <andythenorth> it's also called packet cargo, but packet cargo doesn't go in a packet ship or a ship in the packet trade, that's for mail and valuables 19:48:17 <andythenorth> the cargo class for this is piece goods, but nobody knows what that is? 19:48:28 <Wolf01> I think you are going too much specific 19:48:56 <andythenorth> you can drive trucks and forklifts onto this type of ship with the ramp, but it's not a ro-ro ship 19:49:06 <andythenorth> Wolf01 yes, I just need a name P 19:49:43 <Wolf01> Simba 19:49:49 <andythenorth> and a working : key 19:50:21 <andythenorth> "Simba Delete This Sprite There is No Valid Name For This Ship Type"? :) 19:51:13 <FLHerne> andythenorth: It's sort of like a big OSV 19:51:58 <andythenorth> gameplay-wise, it's like a railway goods van 19:52:02 <andythenorth> 'van ship' 19:52:16 <FLHerne> Then what exactly is wrong with 'general cargo'? 19:52:28 <andythenorth> it only refits piece goods 19:52:29 <andythenorth> not bulk 19:52:45 <andythenorth> I could change that 19:53:06 <FLHerne> I don't think that's an issue 19:53:19 <andythenorth> it's all kind of lolz anyway, because the ship names can't be seen in game :) grf.farm/images/ship-buy-menu-width.png 19:53:33 <andythenorth> https://grf.farm/images/ship-buy-menu-width.png 19:53:37 <FLHerne> In principle you *could* ship bulk cargoes in bags on something like that, but no-one would 19:54:13 <andythenorth> maybe you're right 19:54:22 <andythenorth> I don't try and name Horse wagons for what they carry 19:54:27 <andythenorth> I just name them for having a name 19:57:14 <andythenorth> maybe Cargo Liner 19:58:29 <andythenorth> the earlier generation will be something like https://www.shippingwondersoftheworld.com/nora_maersk.html 19:58:34 <andythenorth> which is quite a cool ship imo 20:06:11 <supermop_Home> andy it sounds like a box truck for boats? 20:06:15 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] perezdidac updated pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under extractive industries https://git.io/JLFsM 20:07:20 <supermop_Home> also i tried to give all my road vehicles brand names, model numbers, description etc 20:07:26 <supermop_Home> mostly a waste 20:08:26 <supermop_Home> groundsprites grass and snow done btw 20:09:11 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] perezdidac updated pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under extractive industries https://git.io/JLFsM 20:10:21 <supermop_Home> just call it a box boat or pallet ship 20:10:51 <andythenorth> box boat! 20:11:53 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] perezdidac commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under mines https://git.io/JLbUq 20:12:08 <supermop_Home> kassebåd 20:12:19 <supermop_Home> Doosboot 20:14:25 <FLHerne> Hm, "box boat" to me always means containers 20:15:06 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] perezdidac commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under mines https://git.io/JLbUC 20:15:58 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] perezdidac commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under mines https://git.io/JLbUB 20:16:10 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] perezdidac commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under mines https://git.io/JLbUE 20:16:21 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] perezdidac commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under mines https://git.io/JLbUg 20:18:02 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] perezdidac commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under mines https://git.io/JLbU6 20:20:44 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] perezdidac commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under mines https://git.io/JLbUQ 20:22:06 <supermop_Home> andythenorth ok apparently I PM'd myself the hotel construction sprites last night 20:22:35 <andythenorth> 'oops' 20:26:09 <Samu> https://github.com/OpenTTD/OpenTTD/blame/24f857ed5edab0bf79b1f0f2c18b9a6280103ffb/town_cmd.c#L538 interesting, it was always there 20:26:31 <Samu> I was wondering why add a cost check for the terraform 20:27:07 <Samu> with costmods that check is gonna not be effective 20:28:06 <Samu> like when water is made cheaper to clear 20:30:44 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] 2TallTyler commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under mines https://git.io/JLbTZ 20:30:48 *** jottyfan has joined #openttd 20:49:04 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] Eddi-z commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under mines https://git.io/JLbkj 20:51:29 <andythenorth> how about industries with no-fly zone? o_O 20:55:14 <frosch123> how can we establish "decide whether something is wanted first, before discussing details how it is done"? 20:56:12 <frosch123> it's a pretty as**ole move have random people request changes, and more work from the PR author, when people are still discussion the feature in general 20:57:21 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] mattkimber commented on pull request #8485: Codechange: improve performance for complex vehicle chains by resolving sprites less often https://git.io/JLbIR 20:58:47 <LordAro> frosch123: there's the "candidate: *" tags 20:59:27 <LordAro> can't really stop "random people" (even if they're eddi) requesting changes on "unassessed" PRs 21:00:14 *** Wormnest has quit IRC 21:03:25 <andythenorth> is the feature 'tunnels' or 'industries can request limitations'? 21:03:46 <andythenorth> or I could just stay out of it also, quite happily 21:05:04 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC 21:05:31 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd 21:07:05 <frosch123> it's a weird feature. it tries to enforce a certain game-style 21:07:07 <FLHerne> https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/depth_and_breadth_2x.png 21:07:23 <frosch123> but imo players should enforce their own-playstyle by just playing like that 21:07:42 <FLHerne> Eh 21:07:47 <frosch123> so, i tend to: no religion in ottd 21:08:02 <DorpsGek> [OpenTTD/OpenTTD] perezdidac commented on pull request #8495: Feature: Prevent tunnels from being built under mines https://git.io/JLbIS 21:08:30 <FLHerne> By that argument there should be no costs, no town ratings, no date restrictions, etc. 21:08:44 <andythenorth> FLHerne I swear I didn't draw that XKCD, but I wish I had 21:10:05 <andythenorth> for whatever it's worth, I wouldn't use a restrictions flag in FIRS 21:10:13 <andythenorth> it would just lead to requests for a parameter 21:11:22 <andythenorth> I think there are more interesting things to do than spend extending content API in that direction 21:11:26 <andythenorth> spend time * 21:11:34 <frosch123> FLHerne: what about disallowing to raise/lower corners further than 3 heightlevels from where they were during map generation? 21:11:36 <Borg> I now play for a hour or so.. and no anomalies spotted.... YAPF works fine :) 21:12:17 <FLHerne> frosch123: Oh yes please 21:12:36 <FLHerne> Also, indestructible rivers 21:14:27 <frosch123> ok, second attempt: how annoying is it, when a new industry is constructed over your tunnels, you want to adjust the track layout, remove the tunnel temporary, and notice you cannot put it back? 21:15:00 <frosch123> looks like the town-authority-analogy holds up 21:15:19 <FLHerne> frosch123: Well, they shouldn't be able to mine over your tunnels 21:15:32 <FLHerne> So the industry construction check should fail 21:15:33 <Eddi|zuHause> frosch123: i think the logical conclusion would be, that such industries cannot be founded above tunnels 21:17:22 <andythenorth> ok so it's flag, and it has to be handled in per-tile location checks? 21:17:40 <andythenorth> maybe just industry location checks 21:17:48 <frosch123> also, how often does this scenario even happen? 21:18:00 <frosch123> how often do you tunnel under an industry, and how often is it a mine? 21:18:33 <Eddi|zuHause> frosch123: i vaguely remember this feature existing in the past 21:18:43 <frosch123> people tend to ignore superfluous secondary industries, and tunnel under them if they are in the way 21:18:50 <frosch123> but primary are always intesrting to service 21:18:59 <Eddi|zuHause> but i haven't bothered checking out which patchpack that might have been 21:19:28 <FLHerne> My imaginary proper solution: 21:19:38 <FLHerne> - Industries have classes, like cargo-classes 21:19:50 <FLHerne> (including 'IC_MINE') 21:19:53 <frosch123> https://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?t=21438 21:20:12 <Eddi|zuHause> <frosch123> but imo players should enforce their own-playstyle by just playing like that <-- i'm sceptical about this approach, because often it's easier to follow a rule if it's actually enforced 21:20:22 <FLHerne> - GameScripts or similar can filter all actions like I was proposing before 21:20:23 <andythenorth> FLHerne start a discussion! :) 21:20:51 <FLHerne> - Thus, someone who cares can write a GS that refuses to allow a tunnel if it goes under a mine 21:21:13 <frosch123> please start less discussions about features noone is going to implement :) 21:21:51 <andythenorth> TL;DR we already know this shouldn't be a setting because (1) policy: content > settings (2) newgrf industries won't respect the setting meaningfully 21:21:53 <frosch123> a discussion needs something to be discussed 21:22:23 <andythenorth> if someone turns up with a fully working newgrf patch, a test grf, docs, and an nml PR, then...fine? 21:22:40 <FLHerne> frosch123: Yeah, that's my feeling 21:22:59 <Eddi|zuHause> FLHerne: i can't imagine GS having the proper access to allow/deny constructions 21:23:41 <FLHerne> Eddi|zuHause: My idea was that you could register a Squirrel callback to run on each action 21:23:58 <FLHerne> Not just construction 21:24:00 <Eddi|zuHause> yes, but there's no such thing as squirrel callbacks 21:24:42 <Eddi|zuHause> <FLHerne> - Industries have classes, like cargo-classes <-- what would these classes do differently than the current flags? 21:25:20 <Eddi|zuHause> other than being completely arbitrary and difficult to standardize between different GRF/GS authors 21:25:43 <Eddi|zuHause> i think your suggestion is effectively unimplementable 21:25:58 <FLHerne> Eddi|zuHause: The current flags are even more arbitrary :p 21:26:02 <Eddi|zuHause> completely aside of the fact that nobody would do it 21:26:06 <FLHerne> It seems to mostly work for cargo-classes 21:26:16 <frosch123> Eddi|zuHause: there is a "save" callback 21:26:32 <FLHerne> You get a few odd-looking combinations where vehicle and industry authors didn't quite agree what some flag meant 21:26:57 <FLHerne> But it means that most vehicle grfs work pretty well even with FIRS' 50-whatever cargos 21:27:15 <FLHerne> Which weren't even conceived of when most of those grfs were written 21:28:07 <FLHerne> It may be a bit late for that, of course 21:33:34 *** Borg has quit IRC 21:37:19 *** Progman has quit IRC 21:38:58 <Samu> can this code be simplified further? https://pastebin.com/pSQZGfw9 21:39:11 <Samu> simplified, readable, that kind of stuff 21:41:40 *** frosch123 has quit IRC 21:49:17 *** Wormnest has joined #openttd 21:51:09 * andythenorth finds these ship diagrams fascinating https://www.shippingwondersoftheworld.com/wpimages/wpe8357759_05_06.jpg 21:51:17 <andythenorth> found loads of them 21:51:27 <andythenorth> much easier to draw when you understand the function of each part 21:57:52 <andythenorth> 'trains' cargo? :P https://beta.maerskline.com/-/media/ml/about/our-history/maersk-line-at-90/05-special-cargo/1280x800-herta-maersk-train.jpg?h=450&w=720&la=en&hash=FDB6572F39B550D10F7D7E754496AE8F43EECAA8 21:59:15 *** jottyfan has quit IRC 22:03:56 <FLHerne> andythenorth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvyIrsZ7Zhs 22:04:29 <andythenorth> always a good watch :) 22:04:32 <andythenorth> nobody died, just 22:06:19 <andythenorth> http://www.cargolaw.com/2012nightmare_emd-loco.html 22:07:15 <supermop_Home> give objects -z height, like discussed for bridges over stations 22:08:12 <supermop_Home> vanilla mines can have a 'depth' of 0, but if andy wants to make mines with -10 depth he can 22:09:17 <andythenorth> andy doesn't :P 22:09:33 <andythenorth> I have zero interest in having industries limit routes 22:09:50 <andythenorth> the nice thing about content APIs is someone else could :P 22:10:02 <supermop_Home> or be crazy and have depth like the meat packing plant 22:18:07 *** Samu has quit IRC 22:21:18 <supermop_Home> andythenorth do the spritesheets for the ogfx hotel need to arranged same as the current one? 22:21:38 <andythenorth> yup 22:22:06 <andythenorth> I don't mind doing that, but I have my head in other things currently :) 22:23:04 <supermop_Home> k i can do it quickly 22:31:10 *** WormnestAndroid has quit IRC 22:31:14 *** WormnestAndroid has joined #openttd 22:33:40 *** sla_ro|master has quit IRC 22:37:52 <supermop_Home> which hotel do you want for the base set version? 22:41:22 <supermop_Home> UGH actually my hotel is 5px taller than base set version 22:49:09 *** Wolf01 has quit IRC 22:57:09 <andythenorth> hotel K BR TR for base set? 22:59:21 * andythenorth must to sleep oops 22:59:30 <andythenorth> so failing to do sensible bedtimes :P 22:59:54 *** andythenorth has quit IRC 23:06:57 *** gelignite has quit IRC 23:12:06 *** jottyfan has joined #openttd 23:26:11 *** nielsm has quit IRC 23:49:01 *** Wormnest__ has joined #openttd 23:52:49 *** Wormnest has quit IRC