Menu
▾
▴
Re: [Rails-devel] Running to and through stations
|
From: Erik V. <eri...@xs...> - 2011-07-01 23:20:06
|
Good point.
type={major|minor|medium|halt|pass} and whatever else might exist and have its own rules.
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: Chris Shaffer [mailto:chr...@gm...]
> Verzonden: vrijdag 1 juli 2011 23:59
> Aan: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game
> Onderwerp: Re: [Rails-devel] Running to and through stations
>
> Will this proposal address halts, as in 1860, and distinguish them from small
> stations?
>
> --
> Chris Shaffer
>
> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>
> On Jul 1, 2011, at 2:19 PM, "Erik Vos" <eri...@xs...> wrote:
>
> > Stefan (& others):
> >
> > I'm having another look at the station properties that we have
> > discussed a while ago.
> >
> > Let's first state what my approach would probably be.
> >
> > 1. The City class will be renamed to HexStation, because that
> > describes best what it is: the relationship between a Station (a
> > potential train stop on a tile) and a Hex (where a tile with such a Station has
> been laid upon).
> > It is this relationship that defines an actual train stop.
> >
> > 2. The HexStation objects will provide you the station properties to
> > be discussed below.
> >
> > 3. The station properties can be defined in either MapHex (<Hex> in
> > Map.xml) or in Tile (<Tile> in TileSet.xml), or both; in the last
> > case, <Hex> takes precedence, as it is more specific.
> >
> > 4. In both places I propose to define these properties as a subtag
> > <Access> that has attributes that define the station properties. If
> > necessary, a restriction could be added to one station on a
> > multi-station tile, but I'm not aware of any cases where we would need
> > that (perhaps 1841 Venezia, but I think defaults would apply there).
> >
> > 5. Hex defaults can be defined per hex type (colour) in Map.xml and
> > Tile defaults can be defined per tile station type (town, city) in TileSet.xml.
> >
> > Now the question arises what attributes and values we need. Your
> > approach was a bit different from mine - in fact part of it is exactly
> > orthogonal to mine.
> >
> > In a different thread I had already proposed the following two attributes:
> >
> > - runTo={no|yes|tokenOnly}. "no" would apply to e.g. Birmingham in
> > 18AL before phase 4 and Elsaß-Lothringen in 1835 except in phase 2.
> "tokenOnly"
> > would apply to the 18Scan red cities. The "no" examples imply that
> > this property should be settable as a result of phase changes. Would
> > that be helpful?
> >
> > - runThrough={no|yes|tokenOnly}. "no" would apply to e.g. standard
> > off-map areas, "tokenOnly" would apply to 1830 Altoona (PRR base).
> > Your values "RunThrough" and "NoAccess" for closedStationAllows
> > suggest that I should also add "always" (or "evenIfClosed") and
> > "notIfClosed", but do we really need these values? Where?
> >
> > I would think that runTo and runThrough would better describe the kind
> > of conditions that you would be looking for when you are constructing
> > routes, than the openStationAllows and closedStationAllows attributes
> > that you propose, but of course I may be wrong. It's really up to you.
> >
> > Not mentioned by me before, but inspired by your proposal:
> >
> > - loop={yes|no}. This defines whether one train may visit a hex/tile
> > more than once. This would replace your station naming proposal. I
> > think this is simpler.
> >
> > - type={major|minor|medium} as you propose, except that I have added
> > medium, which appears in some games. IMO this station type would be
> > train-independent; train-specific usage of station types is to be
> > defined per train type. It could be useful in some cases where the
> > tile looks like a town, or is internally defined as a town (such as
> > most off-map areas), but is actually a non-tokenable city.
> >
> >
> > Finally two questions about your proposal:
> >
> > 1. Is there any semantic difference between runFrom and runTo? To me,
> > these words describe exactly the same aspects, at least in the 18xx
> > universe, where trains run directionless (perhaps I should say that "to" and
> "from"
> > are quantum-superimposed?).
> >
> > 2. Do we really need N/A? I’d say: if it does not matter, it does
> > not matter.
> >
> > Erik.
> >
> >
> >> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> >> Van: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...]
> >> Verzonden: woensdag 15 juni 2011 7:11
> >> Aan: 'Development list for Rails: an 18xx game'
> >> Onderwerp: Re: [Rails-devel] 1830 Reading
> >>
> >> Erik:
> >>
> >> is there any reason, why you put the driveThroughStation on map.xml
> >> instead in tile.xml, other than the one discusses previously, that
> > tiles.xml is
> >> not game specific?
> >>
> >> However the tiles you defined are (very) game specific already.
> >>
> >> Both from logical and implementation issues I would prefer to define
> >> attributes of stations in the station tag instead of the hex tag.
> >>
> >> Coalfields:
> >> For the coalfield hex a mechanism to buy the coalfield tokens is
> >> needed
> > first.
> >> Then it is easy to add the adjustment to the revenue calculator via
> >> the
> > static
> >> modifier approach similar to the bonus tokens.
> >>
> >> Stefan
> >>
> >> By the way:
> >>
> >> I have thought about similar issues in my mailing last year
> >> (04/29/10) on "Changes to the Station objects", which cover some more
> >> cases due to a more general approach.
> >>
> >> A) Each station adds the following (additional) attributes:
> >>
> >> tokenAllows = {RunThrough, RunFrom, NoAccess, N/A} If a token is laid
> >> it allows to run through, to run from or no access?
> >>
> >> openStationAllows = {RunThrough, RunTo, NoAccess, N/A} If a token is
> >> laid
> > it
> >> allows to run through, to run to or none?
> >>
> >> closedStationAllows = {RunThrough, RunTo, NoAccess, N/A} If the
> >> station is fully tokened and the company does not own a token there,
> >> what are the possibilities?
> >>
> >> To allow an easier definition I suggest to use station type
> >> definitions
> > like the
> >> company types etc.
> >>
> >> A station is closed if the number of tokens equals the number of
> >> slots, otherwise it is open.
> >>
> >> By this definition a town is always closed, but by setting
> > closedStationAllows
> >> to RunThrough that is not an issue.
> >>
> >> B) Different off-board locations:
> >> There is a substantial variation of different kind of off-board locations.
> >> There are at least four cases, may be more.
> >>
> >> 1) Standard off-board locations (as in 1830) The off-board areas act
> >> as
> > sinks
> >> for all companies.
> >> No tokens allowed.
> >> (tokenAllows = N/A, openStationAllows = N/A, closedStationAllows =
> >> RunTo)
> >>
> >> 2) Tokenable off-board locations (example: SP base in 1870) A base
> >> token
> > can
> >> be layed in at least one of the areas.
> >> The rules claim that off-board areas are still sink for all
> >> companies,
> > except for
> >> the company with a token which can start a train there.
> >> But it cannot run its trains through the hex (thus SP cannot have the
> >> same train enter from NE and then continue to the E).
> >>
> >> (tokenAllows = RunFrom, openStationAllows = RunTo,
> >> closedStationAllows =
> >> RunTo)
> >>
> >> 3) Run-through off-board locations (as Hamburg in 18EU) A
> >> non-tokenable station (similar to towns), that allows running through it.
> >>
> >> (tokenAllows = N/A, openStationAllows = N/A, closedStationAllows =
> >> RunThrough)
> >>
> >> And another from an non-implemented game:
> >> 4) Tokenable run-to off-board locations (as in 18Scan) Here a
> >> base-token
> > is
> >> needed to run to the station.
> >>
> >> (tokenAllows = RunFrom, openStationAllows = NoAccess ,
> >> closedStationAllows =
> >> NoAccess)
> >>
> >> In general a station is fully tokened if the nb of slots equals the
> >> nb of
> > tokens.
> >> This implies that (default) towns are fully tokened (0=0), but the
> >> fullyTokened attribute would be set to RunThrough.
> >>
> >> StationTypes should be added to provide defaults.
> >>
> >> C) Other new station attributes
> >> runStationType = {Major, Minor}
> >> Is it counted as city-type or town-type for plus-trains and
> > express-trains?
> >>
> >> name = {...}
> >> I would like to add is a "name" attribute for stations on tiles.
> >> Identical
> > names
> >> would imply that those stations are mutually exclusive for train runs.
> > They
> >> would be automatically added to the list of exclusions to the revenue
> >> calculator.
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -------- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is
> > seriously valuable.
> > Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance,
> > security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this
> > data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rails-devel mailing list
> > Rai...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable.
> Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security
> threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
> sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
|
