The International Simutrans Forum

Per the post in "what is left to do" thread:

Quote from: VS on November 17, 2010, 01:27:25 PM
Well. There isn't much left to do. In principle, if some transitional incompatibility was allowed, the game would be playable anyway. Just a few buildings and bridges, that were inaccessible in the nightlies anyway. Which brings a question: should the missing objects be simply removed, or should I drop in placeholder graphics and hope that someone will create new versions?

Opinions?

I'm between remove them, I want play right now!! and playability first, let's make a proper replacement for each of them.

I voted for replace.  Playability is important, especially for new players.  Otherwise, they'll chose another pak (and draw for that pak  ;D).  If people can clearly see that stuff is missing, they might draw their replacements.

I like a place holder like "Your graphic could be here"

Quote from: Lmallet on November 17, 2010, 03:16:01 PM
Playability is important, especially for new players.

I agree with Lmallet's opinion, it's the best option to attract new players.
Anyway, a "place your graphic here" like placeholder would hurt my eyes though, so I vote other because I'd prefer
1) wait until playability is improved to a minimum/acceptable level and
2) if can't wait anymore, just release as it is (I would save placeholders and ask for help in the forum/splash-screen instead)

I am for placeholder there can you view what´s for Pakfile are missing it!

greenling

Just got an idea... a bit crazy one: with or without placeholders, what about putting additional advertisement buildings? I mean one/some city buildings with a glowing sign/poster asking for painters, and a description of what is needed in the detail text of those buildings. I don't know if it would be effective, but it would be curious, funny and cool! 8)

Great idea Zeno. Maybe some billboards telling "PAINT ME!!". It sure attract attention.

Those objects which are needed for playing (because there is no alternative to them) should have placeholder. The others can be removed till a replacement has been developed.

Generally I lean towards the placeholder idea.

Generally some 80% want placeholders, so... :o

That's difficult. So far I was under the impression that you have 80% replaced already, and 20% left to do ...

With only 20% real graphics it will be really hard.

QuoteWith only 20% real graphics it will be really hard.

I think VS is talking about the results of the poll, not about the amount of graphics that need replacement.

Of course! 20%, I'd just go shoot myself or something :P

People want to play it SO HARD. :D

Wasn't Igor supposed to paint something?  :)

"Me" is supposed to design buildings in real world. ;)

why playing simutrans on a computer, when he can play simcity for real?

My guess would be lack of save/load function :)

Quote from: VS on December 02, 2010, 10:59:49 PM
My guess would be lack of save/load function :)

I would also miss switching to the public service function :P

Worst part is when bankrupt you cannot just hit Esc and keep going anyway

Wlindley wins...  :award:

Ok, now back to topic. Which objects do need placeholders? I guess these are candidates (let's make a list):
- 160 & 300 km/h rail bridges
- Post office extensions
... anything else? Were there any industries removed?

Quote from: Zeno on December 04, 2010, 08:25:03 AM
Ok, now back to topic. Which objects do need placeholders? I guess these are candidates (let's make a list):

A few more ships, e.g. the Hovermarine and the modern looking Ocean liner.

Thanks to lots of attention in the past, industries are not a concern :D

Worth a few tears:
* Post offices and modern warehouse
* Rail bridges
* Trams that can drive in 4s

---

Warehouse tangent split to another topic:

http://forum.simutrans.com/index.php?topic=6314.0

Quote from: VS on December 04, 2010, 12:15:23 PM
* Trams that can drive in 4s

I don't understand this.

I think he means trams with 4 wagons.

shouldn't it be possible to couple any number of single car trams? (i mean the non articulated)

here's a picture of some (primordial) american australian ones (random google find)
(http://www.fotothing.com/photos/e80/e804ffc6f47515096b2ecd40985a5e76_54c.jpg)

Yes, but there would have to be some of these first... Or more precisely: there should be some in the later 20th century. The 1930 period has been covered well by Raven's stuff.

perhaps i don't remember correctly, and mix up something with other paks, but i thought those early single car trams already in the pak couldn't be coupled?

---

something different,
is this:
http://128.simutrans.com/download/128svn-export@827.7z
the latest source release of pak128?

Some of the early trams can have more unpowered parts. But for the second half of century there is a number of trams that will be removed...

And no, the source is definitely not recent.

ok, so that 7ziped source is not recent, i couldn't find a more recent version. Perhaps i should rephrase my question is that file the most recent openly available source at the moment? If not, could you please point me towards to a download link?

Here's a somewhat more recent version?

http://128.simutrans.com/download/128svn-export@1111.7z

děkuji pěkně!

---

edit
just managed to build a running version of the pak. Thanks again.

btw, what does

FOLDERS-IF
unfree

in pakmak do?
Is it only related to unfree stuff not contained in this release, and it can be ignored?

Those pakmak files have been a good guide when building the Makefile. Seems much more straight forward to use pakmak.py in comparison to mose.py. However i haven't tried it yet.

VS thanks for the new 128svn-export@1111 zipfile
It´s very usefull!
I hate with the last zipfile 128svn-export@827 make a testvehicle with they i have beginning to test the powerlevel of some vehicles!

greenling

sdog:

If you create environment variable PAKMAK_ALL and set it to 0 or 1, it controls if the unfree stuff is included. 0 = only open, 1 = everything (default).

Pakmak is "folder recursive" by design - directly inspired by makefiles in fact :) There are small oopsies here and there, but generally it does what I want. If you come up with makefiles, I'll be definitely interested in testing them. The main reason to not use them is that python is almost 1-click install on windows.

you can find my Makefile in my git repository:

https://github.com/sdog/simutrans-pak128

It is not well tested yet, i just had a brief glance if it works. It will be quite difficult to check completeness, since i haven't used the pak in quite a while.