Re: [Rails-devel] Automatic route calculation

[brett l. <bre...@gm...>]

Orientation is (IIRC) an integer denoting the number of clockwise
rotations away from the default orientation of the image file we've
made.

We've got two styles of hexes, EWHex and NSHex, the difference being
whether the hex is oriented with two sides running horizontally
parallel, or vertically parallel.

Have a look through the Hex and MapHex classes. All of the rotational
math is in those classes and the EW/NS subclasses.

---Brett.



On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 7:26 PM, alexti <al...@sh...> wrote:
> Hi Stefan,
>
> Format you've suggested is fine. I don't see any problem reading it. I
> assume tile-ID is the same thing as tile# printed on real tiles? I may not
> have more exotic tiles defined, but that should be easy to add. How
> orientation is encoded (in terms of N,NE,NW,S,SE,SW notation)? I would
> also need map orientation (letters are column or rows and the "oddness" of
> map).
>
> Thanks,
> Alex.
>
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 13:56:32 -0600, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...> wrote:
>
>> Hi Alex,
>> my time constraints are similars to yours, thus do not expect anything
>> before
>> the we and even then not too much.
>>
>> I am still wondering how you convert our map layout into your graph
>> definition
>> (without manual work, especially with respect to tile orientation), but I
>> will leave that up to you.
>>
>> I can easily provide a list with
>> Map-ID, tile-ID, orientation
>>
>> as used internally by Rails.
>>
>> for example (orientation is random here)
>> A2, 9, 1
>> A4, 24, 2
>> A6, 8, 3
>> etc.
>>
>> Is that ok?
>>
>> Stefan
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday 24 March 2010 04:52:14 alexti wrote:
>>> Hi Stefan,
>>>
>>> I like your idea. It makes sense that artificially complicated track
>>> layout with lack of station markers in a simpler game may create more
>>> difficult problem than the realistic scenario in a more complex game
>>> will.
>>>
>>> If you are volunteering to create such setup for 1870 I can try to build
>>> similar scenario for 1856 (with couple of diesels, for example). In what
>>> form can you export such setup? Something simple (for example
>>> comma-separated tile ids) will do. I won't have time to do it until the
>>> weekend though...
>>>
>>> Alex.
>>>
>>> On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 16:35:52 -0600, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Alex:
>>> > Some more comments on a potential test for automatic route
>>> calculation:
>>> >
>>> > I think there is no need for one of the more "exotic" types (18US,
>>> 18C2C,
>>> > 1844) to create a (reasonable) difficult scenario.
>>> >
>>> > It is easy to create a quite involved track layout with maps and tiles
>>> > of one
>>> > of titles already implemented in Rails (for this even the partially
>>> > implemented 1835 or 1870 would work).
>>> >
>>> > Then rails could supply:
>>> >
>>> > * A map (here I mean the collection) with map hexes and tiles. From my
>>> > point
>>> > of view it is still open, how it is converted to the graph you need to
>>> > run
>>> > your algorithm.
>>> >
>>> > * The trains available to the one company could be easily changed. And
>>> > we can
>>> > make things more difficult by requesting scenarios, which are not
>>> > possible in
>>> > 1870: For example running a  8, 10 and 12 at once.
>>> >
>>> > * I think, that there is no need for tokens so far (either simply
>>> assume
>>> > that
>>> > there are none (which would allow even more connections than usual) or
>>> > create
>>> > a network that is usually available to one company after considering
>>> the
>>> > effects of tokening, if we want to built a more realistic test case).
>>> >
>>> > If no other wants to jump in, I would volunteer to create such a
>>> network
>>> > on
>>> > the 1870 map.
>>> >
>>> > Stefan
>>> >
>>> >> >> Perhaps it can be tested? There is no need to have complete
>>> support
>>> >>
>>> >> of
>>> >>
>>> >> >> such games in Rails to make experiment. We could create a graph
>>> >> >> representing "difficult case" and run algorithm on it.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Yes, though it could take time to manually build the graph the way
>>> >>
>>> >> your
>>> >>
>>> >> > algorithm wants it.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> > Some I would look at would be 18US, 18C2C (for sheer size and
>>> the
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> ability
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> > for a company to run lots of large trains), 1844 (which adds
>>> >>
>>> >> tunnels
>>> >>
>>> >> >> and
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> > mountains that affect the route score), and 1860.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Unfortunately, I don't own any of them :(
>>> >> >
>>> >> > The complete rules are available for at least 18US and 1844, and
>>> >>
>>> >> ps18xx
>>> >>
>>> >> > includes the map/tiles for all of them.
>>> >>
>>> >> Are there some cases you would consider examples of "difficult" ones
>>> >> that
>>> >> are available in some kind of format? From some PBEM games perhaps?
>>> It
>>> >> might be relatively easy to convert them into the graph I need. And
>>> it's
>>> >> difficult to get an impression of what realistic end game layout
>>> would
>>> >> be
>>> >> without playing the game.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >----- Download Intel&#174; Parallel Studio Eval
>>> > Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
>>> > proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
>>> > See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
>>> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Rails-devel mailing list
>>> > Rai...@li...
>>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Download Intel&#174; Parallel Studio Eval
>> Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
>> proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
>> See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rails-devel mailing list
>> Rai...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>
>
> --
> Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Download Intel&#174; Parallel Studio Eval
> Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
> proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
> See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>