The International Simutrans Forum

 

Author Topic: More energy for pak96  (Read 15555 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tomas

  • *
  • Posts: 251
More energy for pak96
« on: March 16, 2009, 08:50:18 PM »
Hi,
I know that the issue is controversial (e.g. ekoterorists in Austria), but i paint some parts of Nuclear-energy industry.
My idea:
1) Uranium mine produces Uranium ore (bulk good).
2) Uranium ore consume Uranium processing.
3) Uranium procession produces nuclear fuel (special - dangerous good).
4) Nuclear fuel consume Nuclear powerplant.
5) Powerplant make electric energy.

But i have BIG problem: I can't write true parameters into .dat file :(

Regards Tomas

PS: many, many parts and colors in next images are pirated from buildings in pak96. I am prepared to delete this parts on reguest.
PPS: sorry for my english  :-[

Offline sojo

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 851
  • Maintainer pak96.comic
    • German home of Simutrans
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #1 on: March 16, 2009, 08:55:08 PM »
First you can use parts from pak96.comic for pak96.comic. This is no problem.

But I don't like nuclear-energy. Its not friendly enogh for pak96.comic. Also we use this pictures for a mystical new and friendly energy. What dou you think about? We need only a name for this energy.

Myby a mystic-dark-light? :D

Edit: The tower from power-plant is not from the right direction. It must be more from the side, not from top!? Or must it on top smaler?

Offline VS

  • Senior Plumber (Devotee)
  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 4856
  • Vladimír Slávik
    • VS's Simutrans site
  • Languages: CS,EN
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #2 on: March 16, 2009, 09:54:15 PM »
Quote
Myby a mystic-dark-light?
Strong interaction?
« Last Edit: March 17, 2009, 04:59:04 PM by VS »

Offline Tomas

  • *
  • Posts: 251
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #3 on: March 17, 2009, 04:52:48 PM »
But I don't like nuclear-energy. Its not friendly enogh for pak96.comic.
Ok. I'm understand you. So, i would'n include this industry into oficial pak, but distributing as add-on.

Also we use this pictures for a mystical new and friendly energy. What dou you think about? We need only a name for this energy.
Myby a mystic-dark-light? :D
I'm not protest.

Edit: The tower from power-plant is not from the right direction. It must be more from the side, not from top!? Or must it on top smaler?
Huh?!

Strong interaction?
Problem is not here. Problem is in my free time. I can't testing best rate of income, production, etc. These pictures are very old ...

Offline VS

  • Senior Plumber (Devotee)
  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 4856
  • Vladimír Slávik
    • VS's Simutrans site
  • Languages: CS,EN
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #4 on: March 17, 2009, 04:58:04 PM »
That reply has nothing to do with my link, you know ;) Edited for clarification.

Who has time? Hands up! ;D

Offline Alex. Brose

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 387
  • C.E.O. Graphic Factory
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #5 on: March 17, 2009, 05:11:10 PM »
Tomas, your style is very clean and precisely fitting. Really nice!

By the way, sojo was talking about the cooling towers. I modified the area for you.

Offline sojo

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 851
  • Maintainer pak96.comic
    • German home of Simutrans
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #6 on: March 17, 2009, 07:05:52 PM »
Tomas if you can change the towers than I will use this buildings in the main pakset.

But they get a other name, no nuclear-power. If you have a name then we can use this. If not, I will find a name.

Offline vilvoh

  • One of the good guys
  • Administrator (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 4504
  • I'm the constructor, the architect
    • Escala real
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #7 on: March 17, 2009, 11:21:26 PM »
what about nucelar power?  ::)

Offline Isaac Eiland-Hall

  • Benevolent Dictator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 3924
  • Providing hosting for Simutrans projects
    • pc2.io
  • Languages: EN
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #8 on: March 18, 2009, 12:08:41 AM »
I'm curious - I don't want to stir up any more trouble than this appears to be on the verge of, but I am curious: To my mind, those are very clearly nuclear cooling towers. Does any other industry use ones that look like that?

So to me, it's not a problem; but wouldn't it be a problem for those that disagree with nuclear power?

Those are not rhetorical or leading questions; just trying to see if maybe my thinking is off :)

EDIT: If an alternate-but-similar name works, I heartily recommend "nucular", like Bush always said ;-)

EDIT2: Protonic power? hehe

Offline Lmallet

  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 727
  • 128 on the brain...
  • Languages: FR, EN
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #9 on: March 18, 2009, 03:17:49 AM »
I'm curious - I don't want to stir up any more trouble than this appears to be on the verge of, but I am curious: To my mind, those are very clearly nuclear cooling towers. Does any other industry use ones that look like that?

I've seen coal power plants use "nuclear"  style cooling towers. 

Offline Isaac Eiland-Hall

  • Benevolent Dictator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 3924
  • Providing hosting for Simutrans projects
    • pc2.io
  • Languages: EN
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #10 on: March 18, 2009, 04:15:54 AM »
Huh. A bit of wiki reading and now I have too. Cool. :D

Offline VS

  • Senior Plumber (Devotee)
  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 4856
  • Vladimír Slávik
    • VS's Simutrans site
  • Languages: CS,EN
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #11 on: March 18, 2009, 09:46:50 AM »
When you have to cool something down... you need to radiate the heat somehow :) Linked to the sad fact there is no simple known (and industrial scale) way to convert most forms of energy to electricity except for E->heat->mechanical force->generator->el. Unless the input energy is already kinetic, such as with dams and wind turbines.

Offline Isaac Eiland-Hall

  • Benevolent Dictator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 3924
  • Providing hosting for Simutrans projects
    • pc2.io
  • Languages: EN
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #12 on: March 18, 2009, 01:15:49 PM »
Well, sure ;-) I just hadn't seen that *shape* used outside nuclear facilities -- but I have now :D

Offline Tomas

  • *
  • Posts: 251
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #13 on: March 18, 2009, 05:19:57 PM »
Nice debate :)

Tomas, your style is very clean and precisely fitting. Really nice!
My style is mix of styles in official pak. No more. No art.

If you have a name then we can use this. If not, I will find a name.
I have name - nuclear energy. 8) But this is unacceptable. Therefore you will find a name...

Tomas if you can change the towers ...
Yes, i can fix towers. But you must wait. I don't have free time. Who have time? I buy it!

Offline Alex. Brose

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 387
  • C.E.O. Graphic Factory
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #14 on: March 18, 2009, 05:22:05 PM »
Maybe we'd better create a time machine for simutrans.

But i don't (!!!) wanna be the very first crashtest dummy. :D

Offline sojo

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 851
  • Maintainer pak96.comic
    • German home of Simutrans
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #15 on: March 18, 2009, 07:08:22 PM »
Maybe we'd better create a time machine for simutrans.
You can draw a time machine!!! :D

Yes, i can fix towers. But you must wait. I don't have free time. Who have time? I buy it!
I have fixed it. With Alex. green template was this no problem. And I will find a new name.
What do you think about "mystical-power"?
Or "Superlight Heavy-Power"?
Or "Lightly volatile halogenated Superpower"? *lol*

Offline Tomas

  • *
  • Posts: 251
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #16 on: March 18, 2009, 08:29:06 PM »
Ok. Here are "Uran-ore" and "Uran-processing" with winter version:
http://dl.simutrans.cz/uranium_mine.png
http://dl.simutrans.cz/uran_processing.png

Second have incomplete snow version. When you can complete, please...
Thanks
« Last Edit: March 22, 2009, 08:38:42 PM by Tomas »

Offline Isaac Eiland-Hall

  • Benevolent Dictator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 3924
  • Providing hosting for Simutrans projects
    • pc2.io
  • Languages: EN
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #17 on: March 19, 2009, 05:43:57 AM »
"Uran-ore"?, eh? But I'm *not* an ore!

</pun> ;-)

(they look nice :D )

Offline Tomas

  • *
  • Posts: 251
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #18 on: March 19, 2009, 08:05:20 AM »
Omg! :-[ :D

Offline Alex. Brose

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 387
  • C.E.O. Graphic Factory
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #19 on: March 19, 2009, 08:41:31 AM »
You hava a droll humour, Isaac. :D
Very pak96.comic-ish. ;) *lol*

Sven, how could a time machine industry chain look?
...Spineless simuthans > padded cell > time machine? Hehe...

No, seriously... I think such chain would be nice. :)
For later years, 2050+.

Offline Isaac Eiland-Hall

  • Benevolent Dictator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 3924
  • Providing hosting for Simutrans projects
    • pc2.io
  • Languages: EN
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #20 on: March 19, 2009, 04:17:08 PM »
If there is a time machine industry... one of the little map goodies (like the little ponds and stuff that appear randomly) should be... time machines. :D And these should appear from the earliest year possible, of course.

(Of course, better if they looked somewhat like... rocks or something innocent, until the time machine industry appeared, in which case you'd see them stacked, and on trucks and trains - and realize - THOSE ARE TIME MACHINES ALL OVER THE MAP! SINCE 1200!!! hehehehe)

Offline DameShirley

  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #21 on: March 23, 2009, 12:14:36 AM »
How about the planet Uranus?

ANYWAY, here's to nucular energy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3Bma3vBG5g



As a more serious sidenote, I really don't see what's so controversial about nuclear energy that it cannot be used in the Simutrans world.

Offline mobo

  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 199
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #22 on: March 23, 2009, 12:42:24 AM »


As a more serious sidenote, I really don't see what's so controversial about nuclear energy that it cannot be used in the Simutrans world.

There have been debates about this years ago, and most people were contra nuclear power. So we agreed to exclude it from simutrans' official pak sets (the 2 that existed). For p96 sojo may decide freely of course. And he did.

Offline Isaac Eiland-Hall

  • Benevolent Dictator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 3924
  • Providing hosting for Simutrans projects
    • pc2.io
  • Languages: EN
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #23 on: March 23, 2009, 05:12:36 AM »
As a more serious sidenote, I really don't see what's so controversial about nuclear energy that it cannot be used in the Simutrans world.

Certain countries have cultural distastes for certain things. Most commonly to include war/military and nuclear power/energy. These are sensitive subjects in many places.

Definitely in pak64, they will never have a place. I suppose it is up to each pak creator as to whether they appear in any given pack, but all things being equal, they are generally discouraged, simply to provide greater comfort and enjoyment for Simutrans players all around the world.

Offline VS

  • Senior Plumber (Devotee)
  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 4856
  • Vladimír Slávik
    • VS's Simutrans site
  • Languages: CS,EN
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #24 on: March 23, 2009, 11:20:42 AM »
It never made sense to me, either. I suppose it's a belief thing. So I let it it be and don't touch - let sleeping dogs lie... so far no problems :)

Offline Isaac Eiland-Hall

  • Benevolent Dictator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 3924
  • Providing hosting for Simutrans projects
    • pc2.io
  • Languages: EN
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #25 on: March 23, 2009, 01:38:47 PM »
You know, dogs are offensive to certain religions... ;-) (I think it's perfectly fine to say, I'm just being silly at you)

Well, I can understand it -- I would personally prefer no churches -- no religion in Simutrans. But my view is very minority, such that I was the only voice on that issue... So I think I can see both sides of it. But I can therefore understand the ability to put up with something I wouldn't personally desire -- the fact is simple on churches: they definitely exist in the real world.

Of course, that argument applies to military and nuclear, too. OTOH, better to refrain from offending a few, as it does provide a friendly environment - and hopefully a larger community, and perhaps someone who might not otherwise contribute has done something that we really liked and would have otherwise missed... ;-)

Offline mobo

  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 199
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #26 on: March 23, 2009, 02:51:54 PM »

Well, I can understand it -- I would personally prefer no churches -- no religion in Simutrans

Ideologically I'd agree. But not when it comes to esthetics/architecture. Most of the modern stuff they build here in Berlin right now is so **** ugly, soulless and free of any relation to the landscape around it or the history/architectonical style of the region (could as well be Peking, Rio or Moscow), that you really feel relief (esthetic not religious) when you discover something old (like a church) somewhere.


Offline DameShirley

  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #27 on: March 29, 2009, 11:51:04 AM »
Really, this is a simulation, not a propaganda vehicle. The fact that churches would be included does not promote any religion, or religion as such at all. It just mirrors the actual world where churches do exist and, IMHO, enrich the urban (and rural) landscape. I've been to a former church in the Netherlands that seemed to serve as a pop culture venue (IIRC, they held a food festival inside at that time).

Offline Isaac Eiland-Hall

  • Benevolent Dictator
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 3924
  • Providing hosting for Simutrans projects
    • pc2.io
  • Languages: EN
Re: More energy for pak96
« Reply #28 on: March 29, 2009, 05:21:48 PM »
But by that argument, if military or nuclear buildings were added, they would also merely reflect the reality out there; and yet, we refrain from putting those in for the sake of offending a clear minority (at least in terms of the number of countries, though I of course have no idea of the exact percentages)...

(I reiterate that I'm 99.9% fine with churches in Simutrans, since in past debates that fact has been close to lost - by even myself sometimes :D -- also, I enjoy friendly debate and discussion, so I'm not at all trying to "convert" anyone, pun intended ;-) )