YAPF - Testers needed!
Moderator: OpenTTD Developers
I think i found another problem:
D - depot
S - signal (two way)
s - signal (one way)
P - platform.
If i have a train in platform one and i send it to the depot I can't send the second train (in the second platform) to the depot (message: can't find path to the depot) until the two way signal changes to green, which is really annoying, especially on busy terminus stations.
Code: Select all
D
-s---X--S-PPPPPPP2
-s---X--S-PPPPPPP1
S - signal (two way)
s - signal (one way)
P - platform.
If i have a train in platform one and i send it to the depot I can't send the second train (in the second platform) to the depot (message: can't find path to the depot) until the two way signal changes to green, which is really annoying, especially on busy terminus stations.
Logjam!
This is a ridiculous track.... but YAPF stops using the inner tracks too soon, resulting in the logjam shown.
To reproduce: Load the save-file, then set all but 2 trains going from the depot (to seize it up sooner, send them all out).
To reproduce: Load the save-file, then set all but 2 trains going from the depot (to seize it up sooner, send them all out).
- Attachments
-
- Kenhall Transport, 25th May 1952.jpg
- (433.79 KiB) Downloaded 354 times
-
- Kenhall Transport, 24th Jun 1951.sav
- (88.74 KiB) Downloaded 282 times
Cheers!
Ade.
Ade.
OK, guys, i see that devs were right that users will get confused and will not understand how the two-way signals work with YAPF. If the first two way signal (first from the current train position) is red, then it is treated as NO-WAY. If you have troubles with it, switch that behavior off:
in the config file (section [yapf]) find the following line:
and change it to:
and then tell me if it helped. thanks
in the config file (section [yapf]) find the following line:
Code: Select all
rail_firstred_twoway_eol = true
Code: Select all
rail_firstred_twoway_eol = false
I have a pretty stupid bug here. Build a depot without any connected roads, then a bus and then start that bus. Click on the bus and try to send it to the depot; it will say it cannot find the route to the depot. It becomes really hard to sell such a vehicle when you cannot send/stop it in the depot. Don't ask me how, but the user did it again .
Desired behaviour: find depot from inside the depot, just like with NPF.
Desired behaviour: find depot from inside the depot, just like with NPF.
TrueLight: "Did you bother to read any of the replies, or you just pressed 'Reply' and started typing?"
<@[R-Dk]FoRbiDDeN> "HELP, this litte arrow thing keeps following my mouse, and I can't make it go away."
<@[R-Dk]FoRbiDDeN> "HELP, this litte arrow thing keeps following my mouse, and I can't make it go away."
I guess that's not about being confused about the way it works but rather about expecting different behaviour - if the train is next to the depot and I hit 'go to a depot' button it shouldn't display a message that it can't find a way - that's what's confusing.KUDr wrote:OK, guys, i see that devs were right that users will get confused and will not understand how the two-way signals work with YAPF. If the first two way signal (first from the current train position) is red, then it is treated as NO-WAY. If you have troubles with it, switch that behavior off:
Actually, I'm happy with this behaviour, it allows me to "override" YAPF's standard balancing with my own balancing .KUDr wrote:OK, guys, i see that devs were right that users will get confused and will not understand how the two-way signals work with YAPF. If the first two way signal (first from the current train position) is red, then it is treated as NO-WAY.
Don't panic - My YouTube channel - Follow me on twitter (@XeryusTC) - Play Tribes: Ascend - Tired of Dropbox? Try SpiderOak (use this link and we both get 1GB extra space)
OpenTTD: manual #openttdcoop: blog | wiki | public server | NewGRF pack | DevZone
OpenTTD: manual #openttdcoop: blog | wiki | public server | NewGRF pack | DevZone
pshemko: it is only logical consequence. And you expect something else because you either don't understand what NO-WAY or DEAD-END means or you don't know that first red signal is treated as dead-end by default. This is what i meant with "confused". I agree, that if you don't know it, it can seem to behave incorrectly.
edit: and maybe i should change the first-red-signal behavior so, that if there was no junction (choice) between train and signal, the DEAD-END will not apply. Would it be better?
edit: and maybe i should change the first-red-signal behavior so, that if there was no junction (choice) between train and signal, the DEAD-END will not apply. Would it be better?
I think that it would be. If there is only one way, even if it's blocked it should be chosen - there is no other alternative.KUDr wrote:pshemko: it is only logical consequence. And you expect something else because you either don't understand what NO-WAY or DEAD-END means or you don't know that first red signal is treated as dead-end by default. This is what i meant with "confused". I agree, that if you don't know it, it can seem to behave incorrectly.[/qoute]
It's like with my windows box when I bought a new printer - I've installed the driver, windows told me that everything was fine, but when I tried to print it was complaining it couldn't communicate with the printer
I believe that when most users clik 'go to a depot' button they expect the train to find a way if there is one, even if this requires waiting at a red signal. Just my 2c
KUDr wrote: edit: and maybe i should change the first-red-signal behavior so, that if there was no junction (choice) between train and signal, the DEAD-END will not apply. Would it be better?
Beside - I didn't notice this problem with 'regular' pathfinding - ie when a train wants to leave a terminus station to get to the next one it doesn't complain about the 'lack of path' - just patiently waits.
Now i'm only waiting for 'track reservation' - pbs like
A question: is possible to add the option to forbid 90 degree turns, like the actual option for NPF?
Sidewinder
Italian Town names patch for OTTD (R5266) now in trunk since 0.4.8
For typo, errors or bug on OTTD italian translation, please PM me.
unofficial italian TTD/OpenTTD forum: http://wolf01.game-host.org/forum/index.php
Italian Town names patch for OTTD (R5266) now in trunk since 0.4.8
For typo, errors or bug on OTTD italian translation, please PM me.
unofficial italian TTD/OpenTTD forum: http://wolf01.game-host.org/forum/index.php
There is one, enable NPF and disable 90 degree turns, it will also work with YAPF.
Don't panic - My YouTube channel - Follow me on twitter (@XeryusTC) - Play Tribes: Ascend - Tired of Dropbox? Try SpiderOak (use this link and we both get 1GB extra space)
OpenTTD: manual #openttdcoop: blog | wiki | public server | NewGRF pack | DevZone
OpenTTD: manual #openttdcoop: blog | wiki | public server | NewGRF pack | DevZone
KUDr wrote:There is only wrong text ("requires NPF") in the GUI.
Thanks
Sidewinder
Italian Town names patch for OTTD (R5266) now in trunk since 0.4.8
For typo, errors or bug on OTTD italian translation, please PM me.
unofficial italian TTD/OpenTTD forum: http://wolf01.game-host.org/forum/index.php
Italian Town names patch for OTTD (R5266) now in trunk since 0.4.8
For typo, errors or bug on OTTD italian translation, please PM me.
unofficial italian TTD/OpenTTD forum: http://wolf01.game-host.org/forum/index.php
Firstly, changing that setting has zero effect on the setup in the screenshot, which doesnt work because the EOL code forces the train into the depot. Im assuming with it set to false, the train should ignore the depot and wait at the red signal. I do wonder if having to turn that off for what is, imo, a silly pathfinding decision, will mean losing functionality in other layouts; but I havent been playing with YAPF enough yet.OK, guys, i see that devs were right that users will get confused and will not understand how the two-way signals work with YAPF. If the first two way signal (first from the current train position) is red, then it is treated as NO-WAY. If you have troubles with it, switch that behavior off:
in the config file (section [yapf]) find the following line:
rail_firstred_twoway_eol = true
and change it to:
rail_firstred_twoway_eol = false
and then tell me if it helped. thanks
- Attachments
-
- Pretfingford Transport, 24th Feb 1940.png
- (242.64 KiB) Downloaded 304 times
sc79: i don't know what silly decision you are talking about. But in your railway design the change mentioned will help. Try to change it in config and then start new game (don't load existing savegame, where the old config was saved and will override the new one), or change the setting using console. Advanced users can use the default yapf behavior for better optimizing their network, but yes, in such cases as yours it can be disturbing. For such users as you are, the recommended setting change should help. Or you can change your signal to pre-signal and add one exit signal between it and depot.
Or simply make your railway design better - place your depot close to the station (on crossing) and use two-way exit signals at the station and one way signals for connecting it to your network.
You cannot ask me to support all stupid railway designs - i can always show you many other stupid designs that will not work with any pathfinder.
And arguing that with some other pathfinder it does what you want, but with yapf it does something else will lead nowhere. Then only what i can tell you is to either:
- use another pathfinder
- use recommended config setting on new game to change its behavior
- learn more about how it works and how you can benefit from it
btw: the same as on your pic you can see with TTDP. This feature was there in original TTD too. It should help to prevent dead-locks when two trains would decide to pass the same signal from opposite directions. It also allows many advanced features such as waiting loops and so on.
edit: using the game console you can switch it off during gameplay - with immediate effect:
Or simply make your railway design better - place your depot close to the station (on crossing) and use two-way exit signals at the station and one way signals for connecting it to your network.
You cannot ask me to support all stupid railway designs - i can always show you many other stupid designs that will not work with any pathfinder.
And arguing that with some other pathfinder it does what you want, but with yapf it does something else will lead nowhere. Then only what i can tell you is to either:
- use another pathfinder
- use recommended config setting on new game to change its behavior
- learn more about how it works and how you can benefit from it
btw: the same as on your pic you can see with TTDP. This feature was there in original TTD too. It should help to prevent dead-locks when two trains would decide to pass the same signal from opposite directions. It also allows many advanced features such as waiting loops and so on.
edit: using the game console you can switch it off during gameplay - with immediate effect:
patch yapf.rail_firstred_twoway_eol 0
What really would be great was a pathfinding that makes trains not change course if not needed. Look at the station picture: I want that train to move straight over that junction even though the way to that platform is a bit longer. When there will be PBS with YAPF such behaviour just brakes other trains.
The trains on the picture is supposed to unload and than pick the slope at the upper left end of the picture where you can see the other trains coming out of the depot. With current pathfindung, it crosses all slopes when coming from the bridge to get to platform 1 and then crossing all slopes again to get out of the station's peripherie.
Trains simply shouldn't change their slope as long as they haven't to, even though they need to go a slightly longer distance: Look the small picture, there is no need at all to change the slope.
Will this be fixed?
The trains on the picture is supposed to unload and than pick the slope at the upper left end of the picture where you can see the other trains coming out of the depot. With current pathfindung, it crosses all slopes when coming from the bridge to get to platform 1 and then crossing all slopes again to get out of the station's peripherie.
Trains simply shouldn't change their slope as long as they haven't to, even though they need to go a slightly longer distance: Look the small picture, there is no need at all to change the slope.
Will this be fixed?
- Attachments
-
- 18th Nov 1962.png (19.44 KiB) Viewed 4691 times
-
- Station.png
- (205.39 KiB) Downloaded 183 times
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests