The International Simutrans Forum

 

Author Topic: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"  (Read 6533 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
[Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« on: December 03, 2017, 09:05:03 PM »
Hello,


*** Announcements ***
* Attention: If you try to connect to the Bridgewater server and fail (timeout), you must restart your game client before connecting to the Canterbury server, or else the latter will also time out. *

* Attention: The server no longer updates nightly version every day. Instead, the currently used version of PAK and executable can be found here:
http://54.37.159.140:15600/ . It is recommended that players who wish to play on both servers keep one copy each of the executable and the pakset folder, for easy switching between the servers.



Dec 2017:
  • The server is up and running a recent nightly version of Simutrans Extended with a recent nightly version of Pak 128 UK Ext. Please note the actual version of the required game files (pak folder and executable) can be found http://54.37.159.140:15600/.
  • The server features [/size]ultra-short joining times and less intensive computing requirements, for now at least.
  • I am seeking volunteers to help with server administration and public works office. Regular forum members may contact me on this.
Map size: 5760*2816


Last nightly update: 10 Dec 2017 AM GMT , November 1820 in-game.

I am preparing to start at least one additional simutrans server(s), hopefully tonight still.


Enjoy the game!













« Last Edit: January 18, 2018, 01:12:05 AM by asaphxiix »

Offline Ves

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 1520
  • Languages: EN, SV, DK
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #1 on: December 03, 2017, 09:55:47 PM »
What is the address to the server?

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #2 on: December 03, 2017, 09:59:24 PM »
While the server is up and running at the moment, for some reason I cannot connect to the game now from my home computer. If you try to connect, please let me know of the results.


The logfile shows the following input:

Code: [Select]
Reading menu configuration ...
Warning: tool_t::read_menu():   toolbar[11][5]: replaced way-builder(id=14) with default param=cityroad by cityroad builder(id=36)
Reading private car ownership configuration ...
loading savegame "4321"
Midi disabled ...
Warning: karte_t::load:   disconnecting all clients
Warning: nwc_routesearch_t::reset:   all static variables are reset
Message: karte_t::load():   Prepare for loading
World destroyed.
Warning: karte_t::load:   Fileversion: 120004
Message: nwc_auth_player_t::init_player_lock_server:   new = 32767
Message: nwc_auth_player_t::init_player_lock_server:   new = 32767
ERROR: loadingscreen_t::set_progress:   too much progress: actual = 241 max = 240
For help with this error or to file a bug report please see the Simutrans forum:
http://forum.simutrans.com


And also:
Code: [Select]
Warning: karte_t::load():   loaded savegame from 0/1750, next month=4194304, ticks=0 (per month=1<<31121)
Running world, pause=0, fast forward=0 ...
Message: check_activity():   Accepted connection from: ****.
Message: socket_list_t::add_client:   add client socket[500] at address 546c3bbcd
Message: network_command_t::rdwr:   read packet_id=1, client_id=0
Warning: network_check_activity():   received cmd id=1 nwc_gameinfo_t from socket[500]
Message: nwc_gameinfo_t::execute:   
Message: network_command_t::rdwr:   write packet_id=1, client_id=0
Message: packet_t::send:   sent 14 bytes to socket[500]; id=1, size=14
Message: socket_list_t::remove_client:   remove client socket[500]
Message: check_activity():   Accepted connection from: ****.
Message: socket_list_t::add_client:   add client socket[500] at address 546c3bbcd
Message: network_command_t::rdwr:   read packet_id=4, client_id=0
Warning: network_check_activity():   received cmd id=4 nwc_join_t from socket[500]
Message: nwc_join_t::execute:   
Message: network_command_t::rdwr:   write packet_id=4, client_id=0
Message: packet_t::send:   sent 22 bytes to socket[500]; id=4, size=22
Message: network_command_t::rdwr:   write packet_id=5, client_id=0
Message: packet_t::send:   sent 26 bytes to socket[500]; id=5, size=26
Message: network_command_t::rdwr:   write packet_id=5, client_id=0
Warning: nwc_sync_t::do_command:   sync_steps 2
Message: network_command_t::rdwr:   write packet_id=6, client_id=0
Message: packet_t::send:   sent 14 bytes to socket[500]; id=6, size=14
Warning: network_send_data:   error "Unknown error" while sending to [500]
Message: socket_list_t::remove_client:   remove client socket[500]
Warning: nwc_sync_t::do_command:   send game failed with: Client closed connection during transfer
Message: karte_t::load():   Prepare for loading
World destroyed.
Warning: karte_t::load:   Fileversion: 120004
Message: nwc_auth_player_t::init_player_lock_server:   new = 32767
Message: nwc_auth_player_t::init_player_lock_server:   new = 32767
ERROR: loadingscreen_t::set_progress:   too much progress: actual = 241 max = 240
For help with this error or to file a bug report please see the Simutrans forum:
http://forum.simutrans.com


I wonder if a simple restart may be needed?

Thanks

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #3 on: December 03, 2017, 09:59:55 PM »
The server address is vps488756.ovh.net at the moment.

Offline Ves

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 1520
  • Languages: EN, SV, DK
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #4 on: December 03, 2017, 10:03:22 PM »
I can connect just fine  ;D

edit:
I think I crashed the server...

Offline Wormer

  • *
  • Posts: 11
  • Languages: RU, EN
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #5 on: December 03, 2017, 10:24:27 PM »
I am connected  :D looks good so far...

Offline DrSuperGood

  • Dev Team
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 2496
  • Languages: EN
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #6 on: December 04, 2017, 12:36:18 AM »
I have a slight concern that this might compete for players with bridgewater.

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #7 on: December 04, 2017, 12:43:20 AM »
In that sense, two questions arise:
1. The merits of competition, especially if the two servers serve somewhat different crowds and tastes (e.g. smaller map/less players for improved performance, different era, etc), so in this sense it may even slightly increase the size of the "cake". This also diversifies the testing and proofing of the game.
2. How many active players are expected in total for both, and for the bridgewater alone. In truth, I expect that if there aren't too many players, my server may not be played all that much. But it's also good just to have it there.

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 17633
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #8 on: December 04, 2017, 01:05:53 AM »
Asaph - thank you for creating this. I note that I have now fixed the map generation bug, which fix should be available in the next nightly build. You might want to c consider re-starting to-morrow.

As for competing for players, there is much to be said for having multiple servers. In the long term, it would be good to have different servers running in different eras and rotating so that players who prefer some eras to others always have their favoured eras available, although quite what will happen if some eras are more popular than others will have to be considered if that problem arises.

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 17633
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #9 on: December 05, 2017, 01:52:39 AM »
I notice that the server does not automatically update to the latest nightly build of Simutrans-Extended in the way that the Bridgewater-Brunel server does - as bugs are quite frequently fixed, it might be a good idea to look into doing this, although I do not know whether the OVH system is able to do this automatically.

One thing that I am having trouble with and in respect of which your server might be very helpful for testing purposes is trying to understand why the Bridgewater-Brunel server takes so much longer to load the saved game than the client takes to do the same thing. Currently, this server is very quick at loading the saved game - but it is a much smaller map. It would be very helpful if you could, just for testing purposes, use the same map as on the Bridgewater-Brunel server so that we can test whether differences in the configuration of the servers causes the difference in loading times, or whether the loading times are universally that long with a server build and a map of that size.

Thank you again for your work on this.

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #10 on: December 05, 2017, 08:39:16 AM »
Hi James,

1. It is a Windows server just like my home computer, so I wouldn't expect OVH to provide such a solution. Do you know of a method I can use to achieve automatic updates? I will look into this later this week. By the way, is there no GUI-less executable for the server any more?

2. The server is now updated with the current nightly. I suppose this means that I can now start a new map for a real game.

3. The server is now running the BW game from recent days. I can confirm it took me seconds to unpause after connecting to it (transferring and saving etc did not take long either, the entire process taking exactly 36 seconds from join to unpause). This finding was verified before and after updating the nightly. If you wish to check this yourself on the server, I can provide you with the credentials. It does seem that the problem on BW can perhaps be isolated to the infrastructure there, unless you are using some non-default game settings there which I am unaware of (or running linux?).
« Last Edit: December 05, 2017, 10:42:02 AM by asaphxiix »

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 17633
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #11 on: December 05, 2017, 11:41:57 AM »
Thank you very much for that - that is most helpful.

1. I am not aware of any specific means of automatically updating a Windows server, as I have never run a Windows server, although I imagine that this must be possible somehow. You may need to look into this yourself. As to the command line server, I have not set up automated builds for this for Windows because I had not realised that there was a demand for Windows servers and because working with cross-compiled builds is very labour-intensive. I will have a look into setting up a cross-compiled build for this if and when I have time.

2. Yes, indeed - thank you.

3. That is a very helpful test, thank you. I have just tested myself and verified your conclusion. I am struggling to understand why the Bridgewater-Brunel server takes so much longer to load the saved games than this server. Can you give me some more details about the specification of your server? The Bridgewater-Brunel server is indeed running Linux, but all of the game settings should be saved with the saved game, so that should not in principle be an issue, and it is hard to see how running Linux should make such a difference.

Thank you again.

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #12 on: December 05, 2017, 11:49:48 AM »
The details I could find on the server were:
2 vCore(s)
2.4 GHz
12 GB RAM

They don't say much more than that. I am thinking out loud as a layman, perhaps there is an issue with the way the code compiles, or runs on linux that causes this delay? It would make sense to test this on another linux machine, even a home one. Perhaps I can install a virtual linux machine on my OVH server. However, when I first opted to use a linux machine for the server, I have to confess that I could not make it work.

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 17633
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #13 on: December 05, 2017, 11:52:28 AM »
The details I could find on the server were:
2 vCore(s)
2.4 GHz
12 GB RAM

They don't say much more than that. I am thinking out loud as a layman, perhaps there is an issue with the way the code compiles, or runs on linux that causes this delay? It would make sense to test this on another linux machine, even a home one. Perhaps I can install a virtual linux machine on my OVH server.

I can test on my own Linux machine at some point, but my time is limited at present, so it may be a while before I have a chance to do so. It seems unlikely that this is specific to Linux, however, as this is not something that has been noticed before.

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #14 on: December 05, 2017, 01:27:41 PM »
I wonder, is it normal that industries are bunched up now, with extensive parts of it lacking any industry (even where there are towns)? Do we expect many more industries to be established throughout the game to make up for this? Or perhaps, should I use town clusters to avoid many towns with no available goods?


And in general, how many industries should I set per city?

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 17633
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #15 on: December 05, 2017, 02:45:26 PM »
It is normal that industries will now spawn closer to each other than they formerly did, especially in 1750. As the game progresses and towns grow, new industries will spawn; and, in later eras, industries will spawn progressively further away from their consumers than they will in 1750.

I do strongly recommend using town clusters and also setting at least 5 industries per town when generating a map.

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #16 on: December 05, 2017, 02:50:05 PM »
Then, how many clusters/town? I am using the default map size number of towns. When I tried 3-20 clusters, I didn't like the results very much, as it made extensive parts of the map quite empty and barren. Do we really want that?

So I went for 0 clusters, as that seemed to produce a result more similar to the bridgewater-brunel game, but this can be changed.

(side note that I am starting in 1820).


Edit:


So how about, 5760x2816 with 490 towns and 2620 industries? 11 big cities, 10 clusters.


Let's generate and see.

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 17633
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #17 on: December 05, 2017, 03:07:59 PM »
What I did in the Bridgewater-Brunel game was to generate with about 10 clusters, but then manually to add quite a number of smaller villages in the spaces left between the clusters, so as to produce areas of different population densities, rather than some areas with a high population density and some areas completely bereft of habitation.

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #18 on: December 05, 2017, 03:15:52 PM »
May I ask then, why use the clusters if they have this effect that requires manual modification of the map? And also, what does the 'cluster size' parameter do?


Edit:


A map of 10 clusters, with cluster size set to 320, rather than 200, yielded much better results to my eyes. You can connect now to check it out if you wish.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2017, 03:26:54 PM by asaphxiix »

Offline SouthernTransport225

  • *
  • Posts: 660
  • Languages: EN
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #19 on: December 05, 2017, 03:58:52 PM »
Will this server be open later?

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #20 on: December 05, 2017, 04:00:43 PM »
The server is actually open now, and I might keep this recently generated map I have now, though I'm not sure. Please do connect to it and let me know if you like the map.


Offline SouthernTransport225

  • *
  • Posts: 660
  • Languages: EN
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #21 on: December 05, 2017, 04:38:45 PM »
Nice

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #22 on: December 05, 2017, 05:01:56 PM »
Hello,

The Canterbury and Whitstable game is now officially open, starting from the year of our Lord 1820.

The map is somewhat smaller than Bridgewater and also a bit less dense, in order to allow more lower-ended machine-owners to enjoy the game. However it has somewhat more land to it in proportion. Loading times are currently very low, and I will try to keep the server up as much as possible.

The rules of the game are similar to those of the Bridgewater game, with the addition that players may not willingly obstruct public right of way (at the moment, to obstruct means a standstill of vehicles or excessive waiting/loading times).

Please feel free to join the game and start playing. Enjoy!

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 17633
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #23 on: December 05, 2017, 06:32:12 PM »
Excellent! Thank you for starting this.

Offline Wormer

  • *
  • Posts: 11
  • Languages: RU, EN
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #24 on: December 05, 2017, 08:59:50 PM »
For some reason Pak128-Britain-Ex-0.9.3 which I got from http://bridgewater-brunel.me.uk/downloads/nightly/pakset/ is incompatible with this game. Need help to find the correct version.

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #25 on: December 05, 2017, 09:01:14 PM »
Ah. That might be because I only downloaded the nightly executable, not the pakset. I suppose I should... Will I need to restart the map?

Offline Vladki cz

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 2321
    • My addons, mostly roadsigns
  • Languages: EN, CS
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #26 on: December 05, 2017, 09:10:27 PM »
asaphxiix: I can run your map on the listing server - it has automatic updates. Just send me the save.

James: I can run also the big map on the listing server if you wan to compare performance on different computers. Again send me the savegame.

(I do not have current client due to work on smoke-improvements branch).

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #27 on: December 05, 2017, 09:12:29 PM »
The server is now running the latest nightly of the pakset. Wormer, can you try again now, please?

Vladki: I'm not sure I understand, what do you mean, you can run the bridgewater-game and this game on the listing server? does it have really good and unused CPU capacity? Or do you want to just do this for testing purposes?

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 17633
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #28 on: December 05, 2017, 09:16:51 PM »
asaphxiix: I can run your map on the listing server - it has automatic updates. Just send me the save.

James: I can run also the big map on the listing server if you wan to compare performance on different computers. Again send me the savegame.

Yes, that would be helpful, thank you. It would be helpful to know more about the system configuration on the listing server, too. Thank you again.

Offline Vladki cz

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 2321
    • My addons, mostly roadsigns
  • Languages: EN, CS
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #29 on: December 05, 2017, 09:53:16 PM »
Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-2130 CPU @ 3.40GHz (2-core + HT), 8 GB RAM

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 17633
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #30 on: December 05, 2017, 10:07:49 PM »
Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-2130 CPU @ 3.40GHz (2-core + HT), 8 GB RAM

Splendid, thank you. Is it running Linux or Windows? Do let me know when you have it set up.

Offline Vladki cz

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 2321
    • My addons, mostly roadsigns
  • Languages: EN, CS
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #31 on: December 05, 2017, 10:26:34 PM »
Linux 64-bit. Just give the save game and I will run it.

Offline Ves

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 1520
  • Languages: EN, SV, DK
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #32 on: December 05, 2017, 10:30:23 PM »

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 17633
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #33 on: December 05, 2017, 10:31:03 PM »
Ves - thank you. That file should indeed suffice.

Offline Wormer

  • *
  • Posts: 11
  • Languages: RU, EN
Re: [Extended] "Canterbury and Whitstable"
« Reply #34 on: December 05, 2017, 10:35:06 PM »
The server is now running the latest nightly of the pakset. Wormer, can you try again now, please?

Oh, yes! It works now! It's unfortunate I got to go sleep :-) be joining the game tomorrow! (ooooups! I'm sorry if I accidentally made the second player, don't know how to delete it)