Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 map

[Phil D. <de...@gm...>]

On 22 September 2010 23:07, Erik Vos <eri...@xs...> wrote:
> I have added almost the whole of the 1825 map: units 2 and 3 and the
> regional kits R1-3. The map has holes where yet unimplemented preprinted
> tiles exist.
> The map now also correctly displays 'strange' hex names like AA99 (Penzance
> in R2).

The '25 stock market also looks a little weird, since the X-axis goes
up to Z then the next columns are [ and \.  It works it just looks a
little strange and I thought it wasn't worth worrying about an
overhaul of the stockmarket code just for that.

> I have *not* applied this concept yet to any other components: layable
> tiles, trains, companies etc. I will create all missing tiles; for now I
> suppose I can leave the rest of the configuration to Phil.

Excellent, I want to focus on getting 1 unit at least playable to
conclusion but all of this means it should in theory be able to go
from Unit 1 playable to the whole set playable with minimal additional
complexity

> For the tile and train quantities we will need a new facility to add up (+)
> numbers. For instance:
>        <Tile id="6" quantity="2">
>                <IfOption name="Include" parm="Unit1" value="yes">
>                        <Attributes quantity="+2"/>
>                </IfOption>
>                <IfOption name="Include" parm="Unit2" value="yes">
>                        <Attributes quantity="+2"/>
>                </IfOption>
>                (etc.)
>                <Upgrade id="12,13,14,15"></Upgrade>
>        </Tile>

There is also an odd scenario around tokens, LNWR has different token
numebrs and home bases depending on if you are using unit 1, unit 2 or
a combination of both.  This is probably possible within the current
framework but again it's more weight to the XML file.

> The configuration of money and certificate limits may get complicated;
> perhaps we'll have to devise new tricks, or hardcode things (such as the
> limits in 1856).
> In any case, some of the 1825 XML files will become unusually bulky...

As I mentioned in my other mail, I think having the facility for
slightly more freeform parameters as part of the game setup would help
immensely, especially where bank sizes are concerned.  It would open
the way for people to houserule a little more and take away some of
the need to manually add variants as game options.

Phil