Author Topic: multipling some trains (Read 10384 times)

gauthier · « **on:** February 09, 2013, 01:29:01 PM »

Is it possible to make Spike duplex and E3 Komachi multiple units ?

EDIT : same for :
RVG R-100
2000_class
TMB_class_500

and maybe a bunch of other trains in pak128 ...

gauthier · « **Reply #1 on:** February 15, 2013, 10:18:16 PM »

... anyone of the pak128 team ?

greenling · « **Reply #2 on:** February 15, 2013, 11:12:13 PM »

Hello gauthier
I can try to make you wish possible.
But first do i sleep a night.

gauthier · « **Reply #3 on:** February 16, 2013, 06:06:17 PM »

Thanks

Anyway, it's just a matter of constraints. However I haven't listed all trains needing this. I will do it tomorow.

gauthier · « **Reply #4 on:** February 17, 2013, 08:23:55 PM »

RVg "Flying Berliner"
SMC RT-1000 "Ugly Duck"
SMC RT-120 "Mighty Duck"
RVg P-100
RVg R-100
Class 2000 (Australia)
Class 620 (Australian)
Haru HST
Pioneer Zephyr
BR-373 "Eurostar"
Haru ACE (plus : its passenger cars don't appear in Electrics tab)
RVg Spike Duplex
Haru E3 "Komachi"
RVg Thunder II
RVg Tigress
Haru X2000
Rvg M1
RVg Pioneer Alladin
TMB Underground Class 3000
TMB Underground Class 500
TMB Underground Class 6000

Mostly Zeno's things, maybe it's intended for some trains of this list.

greenling · « **Reply #5 on:** February 17, 2013, 08:56:46 PM »

OK Gauthier
those trains want you have as multiple units.

Quote from: gauthier on February 17, 2013, 08:23:55 PM

RVg "Flying Berliner"
SMC RT-1000 "Ugly Duck"
SMC RT-120 "Mighty Duck"
RVg P-100
RVg R-100
Class 2000 (Australia)
Class 620 (Australian)
Haru HST
Pioneer Zephyr
BR-373 "Eurostar"
Haru ACE (plus : its passenger cars don't appear in Electrics tab)
RVg Spike Duplex
Haru E3 "Komachi"
RVg Thunder II
RVg Tigress
Haru X2000
Rvg M1
RVg Pioneer Alladin
TMB Underground Class 3000
TMB Underground Class 500
TMB Underground Class 6000
Mostly Zeno's things, maybe it's intended for some trains of this list.

I give you a info than, what for a train, i then have overwork.

dennosius · « **Reply #6 on:** February 18, 2013, 09:36:03 PM »

And there's this one locomotive (the beige German one) that appears in the electrics tab instead of the locomotives tab (yes, it is electric, but all other non-system-specific electric locomotives appear in the locomotives tab).

greenling · « **Reply #7 on:** February 18, 2013, 10:03:48 PM »

dennosius
Please post a photo form the locomotive who you mean.

DirrrtyDirk · « **Reply #8 on:** February 19, 2013, 11:01:06 AM »

IIRC that's BR103 and it happens (or least it was like that in the past, just can't check right now) because it has freight="Passengers" instead of "None", but with a capacity of "0".

The solution for the Haru ACE's passenger cars would be to add the line "engine_type=electric" but without power or gear values - that way they still act like unmotorized cars, but are shown in the electrics tab, too.

If desired, I can do the changes tonight and upload them to the svn

Zeno · « **Reply #9 on:** February 19, 2013, 02:14:49 PM »

You are right, DirrrtyDirk. It was intended to have the BR103 in the passenger tab, by modifying the freight to Passagiere.

About the multiple units I created, well, Ducks are fictional, and could have their constraints changed, np. Other all-around-the-world multiple units, actualy I didn't have enough info to decide whether they were driven in multiple control or not; all Renfe and TMB vehicles have all the proper constraints based on real info, so I will say "I don't want to change it" unless there's a good reason for it. But after all, they are released under pak128 open source license, so my thoughts are just my thoughts; if majority or pak maintainer(s) decide to change them, it will be ok

DirrrtyDirk · « **Reply #10 on:** February 19, 2013, 03:48:51 PM »

Quote from: Zeno on February 19, 2013, 02:14:49 PM

You are right, DirrrtyDirk. It was intended to have the BR103 in the passenger tab, by modifying the freight to Passagiere.

Hi Zeno, yes, I know...

And personally I have no problem with the status quo - but I think it's probably really a little counterintuitive for most players, so maybe we should change that back to standard-engine behaviour, especially since it doesn't have any constraints limiting it to certain (passenger) cars or such...

Quote from: Zeno on February 19, 2013, 02:14:49 PM

About the multiple units I created, well, Ducks are fictional, and could have their constraints changed, np. Other all-around-the-world multiple units, actualy I didn't have enough info to decide whether they were driven in multiple control or not; all Renfe and TMB vehicles have all the proper constraints based on real info, so I will say "I don't want to change it" unless there's a good reason for it. But after all, they are released under pak128 open source license, so my thoughts are just my thoughts; if majority or pak maintainer(s) decide to change them, it will be ok

Since I'm a huge fan of realism, I'm not too fond of the idea of giving all these trains the ability to be used in multiple units, especially the ones created after real life models... on the other hand, pak128 has kind of a history of basically ignoring realism to a certain amount, so I wouldn't call it entirely out of character for the pakset, but still I'm not convinced that it's a good idea...

Edit: I changed the Haru ACE's waggons to be shown in the electric tab, along with its head and tail units. BR103 still open for discussion, as is the question about MU'ing some or all the mentioned trains above.

Zeno · « **Reply #11 on:** February 19, 2013, 07:39:11 PM »

Cool Dirk. About the BR103, I'd say we can either set some constraints for its pullable wagons or move it back to the generic tab, for the reason that you just said about being counterintuitive.
About other vehicles... probably if their driving cabins are somehow aerodynamic shaped, I'd suggest not to MU'ing them (would look odd); otherwise, it's open for discussion...

Just to start a discussion, here are my opinions on the particular vehicles of the list included before:

Quote

RVg "Flying Berliner" -> I'd say no
SMC RT-1000 "Ugly Duck" -> Not sure
SMC RT-120 "Mighty Duck" -> Not sure
RVg P-100 -> Ok
RVg R-100 -> Ok
Class 2000 (Australia) -> Ok
Class 620 (Australian) -> Ok
Haru HST -> Not sure
Pioneer Zephyr -> No way!
BR-373 "Eurostar" -> Ok
Haru ACE -> Ok
RVg Spike Duplex -> Ok
Haru E3 "Komachi" -> Ok
RVg Thunder II -> Ok
RVg Tigress -> Ok
Haru X2000 -> Ok
Rvg M1 -> Ok
RVg Pioneer Alladin -> I'd say no
TMB Underground Class 3000 -> No way!
TMB Underground Class 500 -> No way!
TMB Underground Class 6000 -> No way!

VS · « **Reply #12 on:** February 19, 2013, 07:47:41 PM »

Dirk, Zeno, anyone from team - do as you think is best - I do not have anything to say and doubt I will have once I could. Regarding Simutrans, I have zero time units to spend this turn (week)

DirrrtyDirk · « **Reply #13 on:** February 19, 2013, 08:11:04 PM »

My preference for the BR103 would be to move it back to the other engines rather than using constraints, since (at least according to german wikipedia page on the BR103) it was also (rarely) used for freight trains in the early 1990s in reality. In Simutrans this shouldn't really pay off with most goods anyway, so I'd say: let people try if they want.

I'll have to look through all the other trains to check against your list, not sure when I'll have time for that.

But as a Shinkansen fan, I can already tell you, that the Haru E3 "Komachi" is used in MU in the real world as well, but only in combination with e.g. the E2 series, not with another E3.

greenling · « **Reply #14 on:** February 19, 2013, 08:57:31 PM »

Hello
I Think that we change the name for The RVg "Flying Berliner" in Rvg Flying Kölner or in Rvg Flying Hamburger.
A Flying Kölner can drive in Double traction.
The flying Hamburger can drive in Double traction too.

gauthier · « **Reply #15 on:** February 19, 2013, 10:25:40 PM »

Well thanks for these changes, anyway, about trains which haven't been changed, I'd say it's not that easy to play with small trains on busy lines.
* - then, use longer trains. *
I'd like to do so, if only longer trains were as recent(and efficient) as small ones.

dennosius · « **Reply #16 on:** February 19, 2013, 10:47:11 PM »

Quote from: Zeno on February 19, 2013, 07:39:11 PM

counterintuitive.

What is the intended intuition, by the way? Locomotives are all in one tab, no matter if electric or not. In the electric tab, there are electric system trains (is there any better expression for engines and cars that belong together exlusively?). Non-electric system trains are in the passenger tab together with the general pax and mail cars that can go with electric and non-electric locomotives. Is that about how it should be?

It's probably not pak-specific and one gets used to it, but it is anyway far from being intuitive.

DirrrtyDirk · « **Reply #17 on:** February 20, 2013, 10:40:10 AM »

Quote from: dennosius on February 19, 2013, 10:47:11 PM

What is the intended intuition, by the way? Locomotives are all in one tab, no matter if electric or not. In the electric tab, there are electric system trains

[...]

Quote from: dennosius on February 19, 2013, 10:47:11 PM

(is there any better expression for engines and cars that belong together exlusively?).

EMU probably. I avoided the term in this discussion so to not confuse things with the use of the term "multiple unit" in this thread before.

Quote from: dennosius on February 19, 2013, 10:47:11 PM

Non-electric system trains are in the passenger tab together with the general pax and mail cars that can go with electric and non-electric locomotives. Is that about how it should be?

It's probably not pak-specific and one gets used to it, but it is anyway far from being intuitive.

You're right it is not pak-specific, it's just "how depots work" in simutrans. To me (as a player and pak developer/maintainer, but not code-developer) it appears to work something like this:

At first it is really simple: if it is powered it goes into "Locomotives" tab, if not it goes into the "Cars" tab, (almost) regardless of freight type. But no rule without exceptions so...

...when freight type is set to either passengers or mail, the vehicle goes to "Passenger trains" tab instead (this time regardless of being powered or non-powered).

And now comes the last special case: the "Electrics" tab, which is (as far as I can tell) just a subsection of the "Passenger train" tab, just filtering all the "engine_type=electric" from that tab and leaving the rest there.

Probably not intuitive at all, but after so many years with Simutrans, people like myself have simply got used to it, I think...

Anyhow, that's all we have to work with as pak-maintainers. So, as you can see, our influence on vehicles in this matter is fairly limited.

Fabio · « **Reply #18 on:** February 20, 2013, 08:53:51 PM »

A better sorting of depots would be:
- EMUs
- DMUs
- Powered engines
- Unpowered engines
- pax & mail cars
- freight cars
Would 6 tabs be too many?
If so, just 4
- *MUs
- engines
- pax & mail cars
- freight cars
Electric engines and MUs would have a different background color, or a lightning icon.

VS · « **Reply #19 on:** February 21, 2013, 12:51:42 PM »

I coded a depot tab for trolleybuses, Devs made it for trains too... That's the whole story.

greenling · « **Reply #20 on:** February 21, 2013, 06:15:19 PM »

Who!
Here get a new idea for new tabs in the depot.

gauthier · « **Reply #21 on:** February 22, 2013, 05:41:01 PM »

Fabio's sorting looks perfect, anyway vehicles would need one more dat parameter to be sorted this way, else an EMU with engine would go into powered locs, EMU cars will go in cars, same for DMUs.

Fabio · « **Reply #22 on:** February 22, 2013, 07:29:35 PM »

Emu cars could have power=-1 and emu engines pax=-1.
Negative values would count 0 but be used for sorting.

gauthier · « **Reply #23 on:** February 22, 2013, 09:14:31 PM »

In most EMUs, many vehicles have engine + seats ...

Fabio · « **Reply #24 on:** February 22, 2013, 10:39:12 PM »

I meant MUs are the engines and cars with power <>0 and payload <>0. -1 would just be a trick to avoid seeing them to 0.