The International Simutrans Forum


Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 10
[FR]Français (French) / Re: Matériel Français
« Last post by Lieven on Today at 03:15:20 PM »
La version bleu diesel est pratiquement finie, elle est sur une 66000, il ne reste plus qu'à l'ajuster par rapport au reste du matériel, je pense attaquer un autre livrée par l suite, qui sera sur une 66600, je pense à la livrée Vecchietti, et peut être faire une 66400 En livrée Fret plus tard (Je pensais faire également une 69400 en livrée Infra mais, comme la Bleu Roi, elle risque de ne pas bien rendre dans le jeu... (et puis parce qu'il y a beaucoup de dérivés esthétiques de la 66000 sur lesquels j'aimerais bien passer aussi... (63000, 60000, G1206BB, G1000BB...)

Si personne n'a envie particulière, je pense suivre à peu près ce programme dans la période à venir...

EDIT : Je voudrais également faire le wagon chaudière qui était présent dans la quasi totalité des compositions voyageurs de l'époque (Il servait à assurer le chauffage dans les rames)
Afin de lui donner de l'intérêt dans le jeu, je pensais lui attribuer une puissance...
Qu'en pensez vous ?
My thanks to both of you. Those are very helpful.

The "Mail:" needs to be moved much right so the colons are benieth each other.
Yeah, you are right.

It looks more better.

If I read "passenger service not provided" I assume that is because there actually is no passengerlines or -convoys that are scheduled to stop at that stop. If, however, there where a problem somewhere that hinders my convoys to serve the stop and the two months had passed, I would much rather have it written out "passenger service interrupted" or "passenger service down since 2 months" or something similar that states that there is a problem.

What (1) intends is, judging from the state of the station and the record, the station has a passenger (or mail) attribute , but in the months a (mail) convoy is not in operation there and there is no record on passengers(or mail).
Roughly speaking, "No (mail) convoy operation past a few months".
NOTE: Mail can accurately determine the presence or absence of mail convoy, but passengers can not. (It may be that just I do not know how to do that, and of course if you add new code it will probably be possible). Thus, in the case of passengers, it will announce whether there is a convoy being operated.

(2) shows the situation where the passenger's (or mail) convoy is operating but there is no user at all (eg the station is on the wilderness).

Are these explanations gotten to the point?

I am not an English speaker, so I think I can not prepare a suitable English text there.
Can you think of text that accurately conveys these to players?
Due to the problem of the number of characters, it can not be a long sentence. You can refer to above images for restrictions on the number of characters.

how it would look like if you either added a green hint on the smiley, or made the smiley green, and all associated yellow colors green?

I tried making only the bar green, but I think it's not so good. (´・ω・`)
What do you guys think?

Another point that I have been thinking about, but which would require some work, is that everywhere else in the game, the color yellow has been associated with some kind of attention to problems of some sort. However the color green is the color that is associated with "everything is fine".
Yes, I noticed this point. I also know that Ves has written TODO about station status (text) in the code.
Station status bar is indicates whether or not it is operating normally like signal. And it displays only one color but evaluation indicator is "帯グラフ".
(I don't know what name is in English.)
Band graph? Bar chart? It does not seem to have a dedicated word like Japanese.
Since it use many colors at the same time, the possibility of color conflict is high.
And in this window, a happy icon suggests the meaning of color.

Since the yellow color of the station status bar represents empty, I do not think it is a suitable color.(or decision criterion)
[FR]Français (French) / Re: Nouveaux addons
« Last post by Lieven on Today at 03:03:10 PM »
Avec le pak128, il est considéré comme extension de station...
Pak128.Britain-Ex / Re: 1870-1890's carriages lack class definitions
« Last post by Spenk009 on Today at 12:15:17 PM »
I can make the changes and if James sees fit they'll be incorporated. I'll try to post the improvements side by side.

Luggage cars have higher comfort (no luggage on your knees) and higher loading time.

I see your point, but I mean nothing about adding a  mail hold nor  accessible luggage catering during the trip (even if corridored sets allow this). I mean that a dedicated luggage carriage would allow passengers from others to decide that leaving their luggage in the separate car is sensible from a certain length of journey on (trips longer than 2/3 hours aren't usually routine commutes). So if the player adds a luggage carriage to a long distance train, it would be beneficial to longer trip taking pax (class dependent).
Splendid, thank you: now incorporated.
Simutrans Extended Development / Re: Dialog layout fix for 64 size pakset
« Last post by Ranran on Today at 08:51:57 AM »
I am very sorry, I noticed my mistake. :-[
Although I checked the display in English, I missed the mistake because I did not update old of testing folder.
I threw a pull request for fix it.
Pak128.Britain-Ex / Re: 1870-1890's carriages lack class definitions
« Last post by Vladki on Today at 07:57:16 AM »
Hi spenk,

I started to dig into this issue because of bad appearance. If you use some if the shorter carriages, you'll get irregular spaces between carriages.

However the capacity issue is also important. Especially the 3rd suburban vs. 3rd luggage is striking (shorter, less compartments but higher comfort at the same capacity?)

I wouldn't add mail nor tpo to luggage versions. There are already dedicated mail /tpo carriages and the mail brake van has also quite a lot mail capacity. Catering also does not make much sense when you cannot walk between cars during the ride.

Suburban vs. Luggage is already differentiated by comfort and loading time. That's fine. Luggage cars have higher comfort (no luggage on your knees) and higher loading time.
Patches & Projects / Re: Merge Station Tool
« Last post by HyperSim on Today at 05:34:14 AM »
I updated the patch.

Update feature
- Add "allow_merge_distant_halt" parameter in  Default value is false.  If this is disabled, you can't merge station located outside of the station coverage.
- You can change allow_merge_distant_halt in setting dialog.
- Change the formula of merge cost.  The cost is 2 ^ distance * COST(defined in

.diff file based on the source code (on Dec. 25th 2018) is attached.
Here's the branch of my github.
Any questions and idea are welcome.
Thenk you.
Patches & Projects / Re: Use of player/player_/p in class arguments
« Last post by ACarlotti on Yesterday at 09:54:57 PM »
When a member function takes a parameter that has the same name as a member variable, there are some possible cases I know of:
The function assigns the parameter to the member variable: Call the parameter new_player, or p, or similar.
I think there's a (related) fourth case, in which your suggestions don't necessarily work. In the case of a constructor of a member variable named 'owner', using the form "new_owner" would seem odd because it suggests that there was also a old value for owner. The obvious abbreviation 'o' is also a bad idea. I think in these sorts of cases appending an underscore (e.g. 'owner_'), which is already in use in many places, seems like a good idea, particularly when it's only used in an initialisation list.
Yes! I should probably just do those before uploading it - the 707s are already in service and the 717s aren't far away...
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 10