Log for on 18th January 2014:
Times are UTC Toggle Colours
02:32:29  *** Supercheese has joined
02:32:29  *** ChanServ sets mode: +v Supercheese
08:00:09  *** adf88 has joined
08:00:09  *** ChanServ sets mode: +v adf88
09:52:31  *** Alberth has joined
09:52:31  *** ChanServ sets mode: +v Alberth
12:31:31  *** Supercheese has quit IRC
12:32:07  *** Supercheese has joined
12:32:07  *** ChanServ sets mode: +v Supercheese
12:42:43  *** adf88 has quit IRC
12:42:56  *** adf88 has joined
12:42:56  *** ChanServ sets mode: +v adf88
13:37:18  *** adf89 has joined
13:37:54  *** adf88 has quit IRC
13:43:21  *** frosch123 has joined
13:43:21  *** ChanServ sets mode: +v frosch123
14:34:06  <fonsinchen> Good idea
15:11:44  <fonsinchen> I tend to leaving out the whole else clause in the OT_CONDITIONAL part of GetNextStoppingStation
15:12:04  <fonsinchen> We can just return both options in that case, too
15:13:13  <fonsinchen> Prediction based on current situation is flaky at best anyway
15:13:59  <fonsinchen> It's much easier to understand that a vehicle will always load cargo for all possibilities when facing a conditional order.
15:37:23  <fonsinchen>
15:37:34  <fonsinchen> This time around it's actually correct.
15:42:10  <frosch123> why is "hops" not incremented when considering both skip_to and advance?
15:45:36  <fonsinchen> because then it returns directly
15:45:52  <fonsinchen> it is already incremented before the second loop
15:46:24  <fonsinchen> Most of the time next == first there
15:46:31  <fonsinchen> no need to waste another hop
15:46:42  <frosch123> oh, that '++hops' is quite hidden
15:47:05  <fonsinchen> technically we allow up to #orders * 2 hops like this, but that's tolerable
15:47:17  <fonsinchen> There's another thing that just came to my mind
15:47:32  <fonsinchen> I have to always consider both options when unloading, too.
15:47:44  <fonsinchen> Otherwise we'll get unbalanced unload/load
15:48:45  <fonsinchen> Which behaviour do you think is better?
15:49:08  <fonsinchen> Only load for both options if condition is based on load percentage or always load for both options?
15:49:18  <fonsinchen> (and unload accordingly)
15:50:49  <fonsinchen> People might use maximum speed for dividing cargo between destinations. It would be somewhat bad to always load for both options then
15:53:28  <frosch123> i would think people use speed and stuff only for waypoints to separate tracks, but not real destinations
15:54:39  <frosch123> load percentage would traditionally have been used to skip stations when already full or almost full; but that does not make sense if the skipped stations are potential unload stations
15:56:13  <frosch123> maybe consider "load percentage > constant" only for loading, and "load percentage < constant" for unloading?
15:56:36  <frosch123> skipping stations because load percentage is high makes sense if the vehicle won't be able to load much
15:56:53  <frosch123> skipping stations because load percentage is low makes sense if the vehicle won't be able to unload much
15:56:55  <fonsinchen> We don't want different conditions for loading and unloading because then vehicles will load the same cargo they've just unloaded
15:57:11  <fonsinchen> We had that with the coop cargodist test game.
15:57:30  <frosch123> hmm, so loading must be superset of unloading?
15:57:49  <fonsinchen> true
16:00:00  <fonsinchen> Actually as I use GetNextStoppingStation() in both cases I don't have to do anything to make sure the results are equal.
16:00:46  <fonsinchen> But if you have a better idea on how to deal with it I'll be happy to change the algorithm.
16:06:45  <fonsinchen> It's bad to ignore the > constant conditions for unloading because the load percentage might actually not be determined by the current load cycle at all.
16:07:13  <fonsinchen> There could be a train with 10 coal wagons and 2 engineering supply wagons.
16:07:52  <fonsinchen> When loading engineering supplies the output will be totally determined by the coal that was loaded before.
16:08:08  <fonsinchen> ^outcome
16:08:22  <frosch123> yeah, you can only blame that on whoever made those orders :p
16:09:23  <fonsinchen> I can easily imagine such a situation. They just want the supplies to be delivered as supplement to the coal to increase the steel production or sth.
16:26:39  *** adf89 has quit IRC
16:35:44  <fonsinchen> So I guess I'll stick with the new behaviour after all. The predictability is more important than the fact that you get unexpected behaviour when selecting cargo destinations by vehicle speed.
18:45:12  *** DorpsGek changes topic to "OpenTTD Dev Channel || Latest SVN: r26264 || Logs: || Voice (talk-right) upon request via #openttd; make sure you are registered to NickServ before asking"
19:57:51  *** adf88 has joined
19:57:51  *** ChanServ sets mode: +v adf88
22:35:11  *** Alberth has left

Powered by YARRSTE version: svn-trunk