The International Simutrans Forum

 

Author Topic: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.9.0  (Read 162814 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ghlbit

  • Guest
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #175 on: November 28, 2012, 11:36:30 PM »
I was desynced at about 00.20 AM CET (GMT +1).

Since I am trying to connect to the session again.
All I did was changed palyers name.

It is quite frustrating.

I happen to have slow connection of internet at the momment since I am using Broadband internet. Sometimes it gets quite slow speed or bad reception.

Could having a slow internet but stable connection cause issue to connect to server?

Offline ӔO

  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 2345
  • Hopefully helpful
  • Languages: en, jp
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #176 on: November 28, 2012, 11:40:43 PM »
If possible, a direct, wired connection should help. I find wireless does not work too well for online games in general, even simutrans.

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 18763
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #177 on: November 28, 2012, 11:45:21 PM »
AEO is correct - wireless is not a good idea for Simutrans.

ghlbit

  • Guest
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #178 on: November 28, 2012, 11:47:09 PM »
The internet provider, Telenor, generally has stable reception and internet service once I was uploading large files for more than 2 days without losing internet.

But the broadband is only option in my area I am thinking to upgrade broadband modem for better and for 4G network.

Offline ӔO

  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 2345
  • Hopefully helpful
  • Languages: en, jp
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #179 on: November 29, 2012, 04:05:58 AM »
Not entirely sure why, but the server is crashing occasionally.
I am mainly doing line spacing and destination edits when it crashes, but it doesn't always happen, nor does it seem like the server will crash the instant the command is sent.

Will need to do a bit more investigation to find out what is causing it.

Offline rsdworker

  • *
  • Posts: 281
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #180 on: November 29, 2012, 07:55:47 AM »
i like take over companies if person wants to me run the company per AEO stated in other thread

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #181 on: November 29, 2012, 10:55:31 PM »
server just reverted us, not sure how far back... I have saves from 00:34 and 23:37?

Offline AP

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 1202
  • Languages: EN
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #182 on: November 29, 2012, 10:58:24 PM »
It reverted quite a way, as I'd finished the engineering works linking Arlham Junction to Corwell in their entirity, whereas now they are only half built. I don't know what time zone you're quoting in?


Offline ӔO

  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 2345
  • Hopefully helpful
  • Languages: en, jp
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #183 on: November 29, 2012, 11:01:06 PM »
Yes, the server is crashing and reverting for some reason.

I suggest you quite and rejoin to save progress after doing some heavy work.

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #184 on: November 29, 2012, 11:03:43 PM »
ah sorry, 21:37 22:34 GMT. However I loaded those and they are earlier than our current point.

Offline AP

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 1202
  • Languages: EN
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #185 on: November 29, 2012, 11:09:19 PM »
I suggest you quite and rejoin to save progress after doing some heavy work.
A good suggestion. We should all take this approach.

ah sorry, 21:37 22:34 GMT. However I loaded those and they are earlier than our current point.
Why does it not autosave ( at a frequency greater than once an hour)?

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 18763
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #186 on: November 29, 2012, 11:54:02 PM »
Hmm - sorry about the crashes. Has anybody been able to work out what triggers them? The log files don't give any clues, sadly.

I could probably set up a script to force-sync the server ever x minutes, but the trouble with that is that it would interrupt people's playing as the saving/loading takes a bit of a while. Do people think that this would be a good idea nonetheless?

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #187 on: November 30, 2012, 02:21:09 AM »
well the server does save every time someone joins, which is usually often enough and indeed can slow down the game in busy times. That's why it's strange that we seem to have reverted so much today, since the saves were quite often; but maybe there's some illusion there.

On such a busy server, I don't think it's necessary. But on less crowded games it would be good to have an option, since the regular auto save doesn't seem to work.

Offline ӔO

  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 2345
  • Hopefully helpful
  • Languages: en, jp
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #188 on: November 30, 2012, 03:13:24 AM »
If it is possible to save only when 1 player is playing, then I think it would be good.
During busy times, usually there are plenty of people joining for frequent saves.

Offline kierongreen

  • Dev Team, Coder/patcher
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 2269
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #189 on: November 30, 2012, 08:16:02 AM »
You could maybe force an autosave only if there has't been a save for other reasons in the last 30 minutes for example.

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 18763
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #190 on: November 30, 2012, 12:46:43 PM »
You could maybe force an autosave only if there has't been a save for other reasons in the last 30 minutes for example.

Hmm - not sure how one would check this...?

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #191 on: November 30, 2012, 04:51:22 PM »
perhaps it is also worth noting on the server introduction that it won't really run on weaker machines, I think this map has requirements that are somewhat above the basic game requirements, not just the amount of tiles, but of course the amount of lines and convoys as well that encumbers the machine quite much.

Perhaps for future games, smaller maps for less players should be considered as well (e.g. half size for 8 players, etc.). This could reduce requirements and load times, as well as general load and playability on the server. 16 players I guess is just too much for today's computers. But then, Timothy's games have been hosting 16 players for quite long now, right? Perhaps there's a difference from standard here.

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 18763
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #192 on: November 30, 2012, 05:52:21 PM »
Experimental is more CPU-intensive than Standard because some of the more sophisticated features make it so. Large maps are important to get the most out of Experimental's more precise approach to distances and times. On the other hand, the passenger factor is far too high at present. This is greatly increasing the number of passenger and mail based convoys above what would be a realistic level, which will put great extra strain on people's computers. Once this is corrected, the computational load will be less extreme.

Out of interest, what are your specifications, and what trouble are you having?

There is much to be said for having multiple Simutrans-Experimental servers, however, some smaller and some larger, and with different paksets. I am very fond of large maps myself, but those who prefer smaller maps might do well to club together and run a server between them. As far as servers are concerned, the more the merrier!

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #193 on: November 30, 2012, 06:21:37 PM »
thanks James. I'm actually into larger maps myself as well, the larger the better - but playability is also important. I can run the current just fine on my home computer, for now (although I'm already running 40% cpu on my dual core, 50 is the limit I believe), but I understand that many other players are having trouble connecting (and when trying, inadvertently causing problems to players already on the server), and from a weaker computer at work I can't load the game (but it's really weak). I guess we'll just have to be patient for now, and when less pax are generated it will be better.

About pax generation, 2 cents: for my size of network, say, I wouldn't say pax generation is over the top, even for this era. It's just a bit too much in its very heart maybe, but generally over the network it's quite manageable, especially on long distance lines on sea that run empty. However in AEO's network and South's mail network, it's obvious that there's way too much traffic.

I think the game may still be taking legacy from standard's growth pattern, where growth in size of the network exponentially increases traffic in it. I know STX has some mechanisms to reduce this phenomenon, but maybe on such a large scale, this is still not sufficiently mitigated. Yesterday I added a two or three towns to my network before going to work, when I was back, incomes were up 10% I think.

So while it does make sense that increasing the network will reduce 'no route' and put more pax on it, I think it's worth considering, at least for very large maps, to further reduce this effect with some kind of mechanism, as always time tolerance sounds like a great tool, even though I still don't understand it very well. Also it's possible that map size should be a reverse factor in pax generation.

Offline AP

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 1202
  • Languages: EN
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #194 on: November 30, 2012, 06:41:52 PM »
Just FYI for other players - am away this weekend without internet, so in the event of catastrophic gridlock, I'll be completely ignorant until Sunday night. I'm hoping the game won't reach 1830 (trains!!) before then...

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #195 on: November 30, 2012, 06:46:37 PM »
trains will be at 1825. will take longer than this weekend :)

Offline ӔO

  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 2345
  • Hopefully helpful
  • Languages: en, jp
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #196 on: November 30, 2012, 08:51:08 PM »
I think quite a significant percentage of traffic in my network is the result of pax trying to find alternative routes after they decide to abandon lindley lines at oakwich.

Offline wlindley us

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 979
    • Hacking for fun and profit since 1977
  • Languages: EN, DE
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #197 on: November 30, 2012, 10:17:10 PM »
I won't have much time this weekend to sort things.  As the game has progressed, performance is suffering badly here... suggestions on what I can do to help the Whole Game along?

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #198 on: November 30, 2012, 11:33:47 PM »
what's your specs and system?

You can try closing any non-necessary processes from task manager
including even explorer.exe and using the task manager's command menu to run simutrans. this may save a bit of resources depending on how much is running now. Other than that, it's machinery I guess.

Offline ӔO

  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 2345
  • Hopefully helpful
  • Languages: en, jp
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #199 on: December 01, 2012, 12:20:09 AM »
my netbook, which has an E-350 and 6GB of RAM is woefully inadequate to run the game in its current state.
I think it has something to do with the sheer number of convoys, which is around 7000, in the game.

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #200 on: December 01, 2012, 01:21:13 AM »
yes. we should also consider that once transportation starts getting faster, we'll need a lot less of these. Skipping a few years  may be in place...

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 18763
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #201 on: December 01, 2012, 01:41:35 AM »
thanks James. I'm actually into larger maps myself as well, the larger the better - but playability is also important. I can run the current just fine on my home computer, for now (although I'm already running 40% cpu on my dual core, 50 is the limit I believe), but I understand that many other players are having trouble connecting (and when trying, inadvertently causing problems to players already on the server), and from a weaker computer at work I can't load the game (but it's really weak). I guess we'll just have to be patient for now, and when less pax are generated it will be better.

About pax generation, 2 cents: for my size of network, say, I wouldn't say pax generation is over the top, even for this era. It's just a bit too much in its very heart maybe, but generally over the network it's quite manageable, especially on long distance lines on sea that run empty. However in AEO's network and South's mail network, it's obvious that there's way too much traffic.

I think the game may still be taking legacy from standard's growth pattern, where growth in size of the network exponentially increases traffic in it. I know STX has some mechanisms to reduce this phenomenon, but maybe on such a large scale, this is still not sufficiently mitigated. Yesterday I added a two or three towns to my network before going to work, when I was back, incomes were up 10% I think.

So while it does make sense that increasing the network will reduce 'no route' and put more pax on it, I think it's worth considering, at least for very large maps, to further reduce this effect with some kind of mechanism, as always time tolerance sounds like a great tool, even though I still don't understand it very well. Also it's possible that map size should be a reverse factor in pax generation.


For CPU load, have you looked at the more detailed breakdown of load by core? Simutrans-Experimental is single threaded, so 100% on one core is the maximum.

Even on your network, I think, the passenger loading is far too high: the test is not whether it is manageable, but whether it is realistic. In this era, very few people would have travelled more than short distances because of the time involved.

I am coming to suspect that the exaggerated network effect of which you write is caused in part by the high proportion of passengers wishing to travel long distances. In the next version of the pakset, I shall be greatly reducing long distance travel from 14% to 5% of all trips, and mid-range travel from 28% to 25% of all trips. (Indeed, I might adjust it further given proper consideration of the matter). The fewer long distance passengers that there are, the fewer passengers that will start to travel only when networks are well connected, and the less the network effect.

(The other mitigation mechanism is the alternative destinations feature. Currently, it is set to 6 out of a maximum of 7 - is there something to be said for increasing it to the full 7?)

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #202 on: December 01, 2012, 11:19:41 AM »
For CPU load, have you looked at the more detailed breakdown of load by core? Simutrans-Experimental is single threaded, so 100% on one core is the maximum.

Even on your network, I think, the passenger loading is far too high: the test is not whether it is manageable, but whether it is realistic. In this era, very few people would have travelled more than short distances because of the time involved.

I am coming to suspect that the exaggerated network effect of which you write is caused in part by the high proportion of passengers wishing to travel long distances. In the next version of the pakset, I shall be greatly reducing long distance travel from 14% to 5% of all trips, and mid-range travel from 28% to 25% of all trips. (Indeed, I might adjust it further given proper consideration of the matter). The fewer long distance passengers that there are, the fewer passengers that will start to travel only when networks are well connected, and the less the network effect.

(The other mitigation mechanism is the alternative destinations feature. Currently, it is set to 6 out of a maximum of 7 - is there something to be said for increasing it to the full 7?)


I think 5% long range will fit with what I found in a bit of research on RL transport - closer to 1% there, I think.

Re-balancing this way has more effects, though, like making it much easier to start the game small, and reducing service instability when expanding the network. While this is called for, perhaps another way to challenge service stability (if by a bit) might be desired, so expansion won't be too easy? I guess self-changing demand patterns and changing schedules (daily or seasonly) are the way to go, but that's a big project there.
« Last Edit: December 01, 2012, 11:25:28 AM by asaphxiix »

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 18763
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #203 on: December 01, 2012, 11:38:08 AM »
I considered changing demand patterns very carefully a few months ago, and concluded that they weren't feasible with the routing system as it is, or with timescales as they are. More interesting things to challenge stability include:

(1) competition, especially in conjunction with the multiple destinations feature (where a competitor might take away one's passengers to where they really want to go);
(2) better handling of wear and obsolescence planned for the future, requiring overhauls for vehicles and renewal of ways, the maintenance costs for both increasing as they are used more;
(3) town growth; and
(4) industrial growth then decline.

All of these present longer term challenges to stability of the network which are more useful and require less micromanagement than varying demand.

Offline asaphxiix

  • *
  • Posts: 723
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #204 on: December 01, 2012, 11:51:54 AM »
I considered changing demand patterns very carefully a few months ago, and concluded that they weren't feasible with the routing system as it is, or with timescales as they are. More interesting things to challenge stability include:

(1) competition, especially in conjunction with the multiple destinations feature (where a competitor might take away one's passengers to where they really want to go);
(2) better handling of wear and obsolescence planned for the future, requiring overhauls for vehicles and renewal of ways, the maintenance costs for both increasing as they are used more;
(3) town growth; and
(4) industrial growth then decline.

All of these present longer term challenges to stability of the network which are more useful and require less micromanagement than varying demand.

Nice :)

I love this game.

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 18763
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #205 on: December 01, 2012, 12:07:36 PM »
I should note for all intending players that there is now one free slot available for playing...

Offline rsdworker

  • *
  • Posts: 281
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #206 on: December 01, 2012, 12:56:07 PM »
I should note for all intending players that there is now one free slot available for playing...

i will take up now :)


edit; can you make the slot as company because i tried to open the company but i clicked on square button next to slot but nothing happens

please PM with password

Company name - RSD express co
« Last Edit: December 01, 2012, 01:30:17 PM by rsdworker »

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 18763
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #207 on: December 02, 2012, 12:48:45 AM »
i will take up now :)


edit; can you make the slot as company because i tried to open the company but i clicked on square button next to slot but nothing happens

please PM with password

Company name - RSD express co

May I ask - can you describe your problem in more detail? If this is a bug, I'd like to be able to fix it. You were able to set up the company, but the name and password don't seem to have registered. You weren't able to click on the green button? The name of the company in the game is "Player 13".

Sadly, Lindley Lines has been liquidated after its revenues fell away precipitously after 1805.

Offline ӔO

  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 2345
  • Hopefully helpful
  • Languages: en, jp
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #208 on: December 02, 2012, 12:55:00 AM »
Last I checked, didn't lindley lines have around 1,500,000 credits?


I see some of my lines giving around 20,000 credit refunds.

Offline jamespetts gb

  • Simutrans-Extended project coordinator
  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 18763
  • Cake baker
    • Bridgewater-Brunel
  • Languages: EN
Re: bridgewater-brunel.me.uk - Simutrans-Experimental - Pak128.Britain-Ex 0.8.4
« Reply #209 on: December 02, 2012, 01:03:02 AM »
Unfortunately, we can't check Lindley's refunds, as he's been liquidated.