Menu
▾
▴
rails-devel — List for discussion of Rails development
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2005 |
Jan
|
Feb
(25) |
Mar
(84) |
Apr
(76) |
May
(25) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
(28) |
Aug
(23) |
Sep
(50) |
Oct
(46) |
Nov
(65) |
Dec
(76) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 |
Jan
(60) |
Feb
(33) |
Mar
(4) |
Apr
(17) |
May
(16) |
Jun
(18) |
Jul
(131) |
Aug
(11) |
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
(1) |
Dec
(5) |
| 2007 |
Jan
(71) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(6) |
Jun
(19) |
Jul
(40) |
Aug
(38) |
Sep
(7) |
Oct
(58) |
Nov
|
Dec
(10) |
| 2008 |
Jan
(17) |
Feb
(27) |
Mar
(12) |
Apr
(1) |
May
(50) |
Jun
(10) |
Jul
|
Aug
(15) |
Sep
(24) |
Oct
(64) |
Nov
(115) |
Dec
(47) |
| 2009 |
Jan
(30) |
Feb
(1) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(2) |
Jun
|
Jul
(5) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(4) |
Nov
(132) |
Dec
(93) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(266) |
Feb
(120) |
Mar
(168) |
Apr
(127) |
May
(83) |
Jun
(93) |
Jul
(77) |
Aug
(77) |
Sep
(86) |
Oct
(30) |
Nov
(4) |
Dec
(22) |
| 2011 |
Jan
(48) |
Feb
(81) |
Mar
(198) |
Apr
(174) |
May
(72) |
Jun
(101) |
Jul
(236) |
Aug
(144) |
Sep
(54) |
Oct
(132) |
Nov
(94) |
Dec
(111) |
| 2012 |
Jan
(135) |
Feb
(166) |
Mar
(86) |
Apr
(85) |
May
(137) |
Jun
(83) |
Jul
(54) |
Aug
(29) |
Sep
(49) |
Oct
(37) |
Nov
(8) |
Dec
(6) |
| 2013 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
(14) |
May
(5) |
Jun
(15) |
Jul
|
Aug
(38) |
Sep
(44) |
Oct
(45) |
Nov
(40) |
Dec
(23) |
| 2014 |
Jan
(22) |
Feb
(63) |
Mar
(43) |
Apr
(60) |
May
(10) |
Jun
(5) |
Jul
(13) |
Aug
(57) |
Sep
(36) |
Oct
(2) |
Nov
(30) |
Dec
(27) |
| 2015 |
Jan
(5) |
Feb
(2) |
Mar
(14) |
Apr
(3) |
May
|
Jun
(3) |
Jul
(10) |
Aug
(63) |
Sep
(31) |
Oct
(26) |
Nov
(11) |
Dec
(6) |
| 2016 |
Jan
|
Feb
(11) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(1) |
Jun
(16) |
Jul
|
Aug
(4) |
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
(4) |
Dec
(1) |
| 2017 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
(1) |
Jun
(20) |
Jul
(4) |
Aug
(1) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2018 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(6) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2019 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(10) |
May
(10) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2020 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(3) |
Apr
(9) |
May
|
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(7) |
Dec
(4) |
| 2021 |
Jan
(5) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(1) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Erik V. <eri...@xs...> - 2011-05-05 21:25:47
|
Phil, Thanks for reporting. This error has crept in when I worked on delayed train obsolescence recently. It should be fixed now. Instead of the 5, the D was moved to the Pool first, before moving it to the company. So that's why the 5-train didn't move. Erik. > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: Phil Davies [mailto:de...@gm...] > Verzonden: donderdag 5 mei 2011 12:29 > Aan: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game > Onderwerp: [Rails-devel] Bug: Trade ins for D's not working in trunk > > I was setting up a test of the auto reload functionality Erik has put in place > and found a bug loading up a game currently in progress in > 1.4.1 when loaded in the current dev code > > Load up the attached save file in 1.4.1 and in the current trunk. you will notice > that CPR is $450 richer in the trunk code compared to > 1.4.1 > > The issue is in OR 4.3, under 1.4.1 CPR exchanges the 5 train for a D and > throws the 5 to the pool, NYNH then buys it from the pool. > > Under the trunk code, when CPR tries to trade in it's 5 for a D, it pays the > $800, then keeps the 5! > > I know saved game compatibility isn't ever high on our list but I imagine this > issue has crept in for other reasons and would still happen were I to play this > game from scratch in the current trunk. > > Phil |
|
From: Phil D. <de...@gm...> - 2011-05-05 10:29:03
|
I was setting up a test of the auto reload functionality Erik has put in place and found a bug loading up a game currently in progress in 1.4.1 when loaded in the current dev code Load up the attached save file in 1.4.1 and in the current trunk. you will notice that CPR is $450 richer in the trunk code compared to 1.4.1 The issue is in OR 4.3, under 1.4.1 CPR exchanges the 5 train for a D and throws the 5 to the pool, NYNH then buys it from the pool. Under the trunk code, when CPR tries to trade in it's 5 for a D, it pays the $800, then keeps the 5! I know saved game compatibility isn't ever high on our list but I imagine this issue has crept in for other reasons and would still happen were I to play this game from scratch in the current trunk. Phil |
|
From: <Dr....@t-...> - 2011-05-04 21:56:17
|
<html><head><title></title><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"/></head><body><p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; color: #000000;">Hi Guys,</span></p> <p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; color: #000000;">please find enclosed the Startround code for 1880 (without the bit assigning a building right to the started major corporation yet).</span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; color: #000000;">The mechanismn needs to be checked by someone else also :) i havent found an error yet, doesnt mean there isnt one of course.</span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; color: #000000;">And of course theres a problem which i cant figure out how to solve in the moment. After the starting round has ended correctly the priority player in the Stock Round that follows has no action to perform. Somene got any hint where i went wrong ?</span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; color: #000000;">Todo next: Stock round code and Private Company Code handling Building rights on Company Startup and adjusting share mix in the IPO accordingly.</span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; color: #000000;">I'll add a save file for shortening the bid round. </span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; color: #000000;">If the bid code passes the test this can be reused for other variants and might be moved to a non specific class with minor adjustments regarding the price reduction on initial passes. (This is not yet configurable but static coded for 1880).</span></p> <p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; color: #000000;">ToDo: implementing the Startspace/places logic: i.e. per Startspace there are only 4 Public companies allowed to be started with the same par price. Reuse of 1825 formationorder code is possible for the actual runorder determination lateron.<br /></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; color: #000000;">Missing: a routine to update the Statuswindow ->playerorder if that changes.</span></p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; color: #000000;">Feedback is appreciated :)<br /></span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; color: #000000;">Regards,</span></p> <p><span style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; color: #000000;">Martin<br /></span></p></body></html> |
|
From: brett l. <bre...@gm...> - 2011-05-04 20:50:35
|
Sounds good to me. I was waiting for the churn generated by the new features to die down a bit. I'll roll one out as soon as I can. I'm at Red Hat Summit this week, and then I'm heading to one of $dayjob's data centers before heading home around the middle of next week. I might have some free time this weekend to do a release, but it's likely to slip until next weekend. ---Brett. On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Erik Vos <eri...@xs...> wrote: > Brett, > > How about a new release one of these days? > > A new release has already been requested a few times by some people, and I > think by now we have gathered more than enough changes to warrant it. > I'm also asking because I would like to give the new Autosave/load feature > more exposure to real users. > > Erik. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software > The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network > management toolset available today. Delivers lowest initial > acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd > _______________________________________________ > Rails-devel mailing list > Rai...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel > |
|
From: Erik V. <eri...@xs...> - 2011-05-04 20:41:00
|
Scott, I would certainly be willing to work on the 1846 special rules over time, but you shouldn't expect quick progress. Several people (including you) are/have been working on other games, like 18GA, 18TN, 18VA, 1880, 1830 Coalfields, all of which need more work, and much of that work will in all likelihood be waiting for me to pick it up. Then we have 1870, 1825, both barely started, and 1835, which still may need the finishing touch. And on my own wish list I have more of the Hecht games, generally my favourites, where I'm in particular looking at 1826 and 18Scan. Reworking train management is not so easy, but high on my priority list as it is clearly the next fundamental architectural change to implement. For the rest, I'm generally doing easy bits first, so you'll probably find me cherry-picking elements from many of these games over time. So much to do. Erik. Van: Scott Petersen [mailto:sc...@re...] Verzonden: woensdag 4 mei 2011 21:44 Aan: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game Onderwerp: [Rails-devel] 1846 Erik, 1846 has a plethora of special rules and the X/Y trains will make it difficult to implement the revenue calculation...but I like the game and would be willing to assemble the XML files. Would you be up for implementing the special rules? This would also be a good chance to implement the dual type trains that apply to many other games (possibly including the OS 2-train from 18GA). I don't expect that your 1846 question will get an answer here, but I'll post it to BGG and probably get an answer within an hour or so. :-) |
|
From: Rick W. <wes...@pu...> - 2011-05-04 20:07:59
|
----- Scott wrote ----- > I don't expect that your [Erik's] 1846 question will get an answer here, but > I'll post it to BGG and probably get an answer within an hour or so. > :-) Or at least an opinion or two. I suspect that this issue has never been covered. Personally I find it hard to come up with a scenario where there would be phased-out trains in the bank pool. A company would need to either (a) have 4 trains going into phase III or (b) have 3 phase II/III trains going into phase IV. Not impossible but given the total number of phase I/II trains available it seems highly unlikely. The simple solution is to just prevent companies from purchasing phased-out trains. As Erik points out this is like 'AL, etc. thus the code would be consistent. -- Rick |
|
From: Scott P. <sc...@re...> - 2011-05-04 19:44:01
|
Erik, 1846 has a plethora of special rules and the X/Y trains will make it difficult to implement the revenue calculation...but I like the game and would be willing to assemble the XML files. Would you be up for implementing the special rules? This would also be a good chance to implement the dual type trains that apply to many other games (possibly including the OS 2-train from 18GA). I don't expect that your 1846 question will get an answer here, but I'll post it to BGG and probably get an answer within an hour or so. :-) |
|
From: Erik V. <eri...@xs...> - 2011-05-04 19:41:08
|
Brett, How about a new release one of these days? A new release has already been requested a few times by some people, and I think by now we have gathered more than enough changes to warrant it. I'm also asking because I would like to give the new Autosave/load feature more exposure to real users. Erik. |
|
From: Erik V. <eri...@xs...> - 2011-05-04 19:38:24
|
I have committed code to tighten the new Autosave/load feature, primarily for Dropbox users. It now does the job in most, but not yet in all cases. Aspects that need more work: - It is sometimes hard to see who has the turn and what is the active window or dialog. Not sure how to address that; I'm currently considering an extra line in the Status window (above the menu) that mentions: the local player name, the current player name, the active window, and the active dialog name (if any). - The (currently fixed) popup that informs a player that it is his turn again often does not show up; I haven't yet investigated why. - When a player loses the turn, most menu items and buttons are now disabled, but not yet all of these. - For clarity, in particular during testing, I found it necessary to center popup dialogs on the currently active window. This has not yet been accomplished for all dialogs yet. - I know of one case where a question is asked to a different player than the one who must answer it: in 18EU, when a minor merges with a company that has a different president, the question whether or not the minor home base token must be exchanged or not is put to the former minor company president rather than to the major company president who must in fact answer it. This is not easy to change, as it is hardcoded in the UI rather than handled by the game engine. It is quite possible that more such cases exist; I'd be grateful for reports. I now above all need feedback from users to what extent this all works or does not work for them. Erik. |
|
From: Erik V. <eri...@xs...> - 2011-05-04 19:05:00
|
That's an omission in the 1856 config files. The actual upgrades are #45 and #46 (all of this you correctly stated in the bug report). I have fixed it. Erik. > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: Aliza Panitz [mailto:ali...@gm...] > Verzonden: woensdag 4 mei 2011 20:06 > Aan: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game > Onderwerp: [Rails-devel] 1856 bug: tile 25 promotions > > Last night I discovered that Rails 1.4.1 won't let a #25 upgrade to a > 46 or 47 (only a #40), and I've filed bug 3297293 on it. > > Ref: http://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/22712/1856-tile-upgrade-chart-v2- > full-game-pdf > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software The most > intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network management toolset > available today. Delivers lowest initial acquisition cost and overall TCO of any > competing solution. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd > _______________________________________________ > Rails-devel mailing list > Rai...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel |
|
From: Aliza P. <ali...@gm...> - 2011-05-04 18:05:46
|
Last night I discovered that Rails 1.4.1 won't let a #25 upgrade to a 46 or 47 (only a #40), and I've filed bug 3297293 on it. Ref: http://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/22712/1856-tile-upgrade-chart-v2-full-game-pdf |
|
From: brett l. <bre...@gm...> - 2011-05-04 17:50:22
|
Thanks for the heads up. I'll get that changed. ---Brett. On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Rick Westerman <wes...@pu...> wrote: > build.xml has references to batik-1.6; these need to be changed to batik-1.7 -- I am not sure how the rest of you are compiling rails but without that change I get all sorts of warnings. > > -- > Rick Westerman > wes...@pu... > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software > The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network > management toolset available today. Delivers lowest initial > acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd > _______________________________________________ > Rails-devel mailing list > Rai...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel > |
|
From: Rick W. <wes...@pu...> - 2011-05-04 17:06:32
|
build.xml has references to batik-1.6; these need to be changed to batik-1.7 -- I am not sure how the rest of you are compiling rails but without that change I get all sorts of warnings. -- Rick Westerman wes...@pu... |
|
From: Erik V. <eri...@xs...> - 2011-05-04 16:23:08
|
It looks to me, that the only not yet covered feature is: -Phased out trains do not count against a corporation's train limit (this is unique as far as I can tell) Should not be a big deal to implement. The following 1846 rule (6.51) suggests that companies may buy 'phased out' trains from the Bank (Pool): -Phased out trains may not be purchased from a corporation but a comment in the margin of that rule says : "corporations may not buy phased out trains", which suggests that the above rule should in fact be read as: -Phased out trains may not be purchased by a corporation That sounds more logical, and would be in line with the 18AL etc. rules. Does anyone know about a ruling in this matter? Erik. Van: Scott Petersen [mailto:sc...@re...] Verzonden: woensdag 4 mei 2011 16:26 Aan: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game Onderwerp: Re: [Rails-devel] Obsolete Trains On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Scott Petersen <sc...@re...> wrote: I'll put together my survey of obsoleting train rules sometime soon. I'll do some test cases at that point. Here's a survey of train obsolescence rules. Are there others? If the rules are implemented as Erik earlier wrote, I think they are to my liking. I will do test cases when I have a chance. 18AL, 18Mex & 18TN -Purchase of the second 6-train (7-train in 18AL) obsoletes 4-trains -Remove obsolete trains from open market -No purchasing obsolete trains Additionally, 18AL adds: -Immediately remove trains discarded to the Open Market (I think this should apply to all games) 1846 -Phased out trains may not be purchased from a corporation -Phased out trains do not count against a corporation's train limit (this is unique as far as I can tell) -2-trains "hard rust" on a Phase IV train purchase 1830 Coalfields/Reading -Little detail other than mentioning the obsoletion concept--I prefer that it is handled as in the Derrick games. |
|
From: Chris S. <chr...@gm...> - 2011-05-04 14:39:34
|
In 1844, when a new type of train is purchased, the previous rank are converted into H trains. -- Chris Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 7:26 AM, Scott Petersen <sc...@re...> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Scott Petersen <sc...@re...>wrote: > >> I'll put together my survey of obsoleting train rules sometime soon. I'll >> do some test cases at that point. >> > > Here's a survey of train obsolescence rules. Are there others? If the > rules are implemented as Erik earlier wrote, I think they are to my liking. > I will do test cases when I have a chance. > > 18AL, 18Mex & 18TN > -Purchase of the second 6-train (7-train in 18AL) obsoletes 4-trains > -Remove obsolete trains from open market > -No purchasing obsolete trains > Additionally, 18AL adds: > -Immediately remove trains discarded to the Open Market (I think this > should apply to all games) > > 1846 > -Phased out trains may not be purchased from a corporation > -Phased out trains do not count against a corporation's train limit (this > is unique as far as I can tell) > -2-trains "hard rust" on a Phase IV train purchase > > 1830 Coalfields/Reading > -Little detail other than mentioning the obsoletion concept--I prefer that > it is handled as in the Derrick games. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software > The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network > management toolset available today. Delivers lowest initial > acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd > _______________________________________________ > Rails-devel mailing list > Rai...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel > > |
|
From: Scott P. <sc...@re...> - 2011-05-04 14:26:51
|
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Scott Petersen <sc...@re...>wrote: > I'll put together my survey of obsoleting train rules sometime soon. I'll > do some test cases at that point. > Here's a survey of train obsolescence rules. Are there others? If the rules are implemented as Erik earlier wrote, I think they are to my liking. I will do test cases when I have a chance. 18AL, 18Mex & 18TN -Purchase of the second 6-train (7-train in 18AL) obsoletes 4-trains -Remove obsolete trains from open market -No purchasing obsolete trains Additionally, 18AL adds: -Immediately remove trains discarded to the Open Market (I think this should apply to all games) 1846 -Phased out trains may not be purchased from a corporation -Phased out trains do not count against a corporation's train limit (this is unique as far as I can tell) -2-trains "hard rust" on a Phase IV train purchase 1830 Coalfields/Reading -Little detail other than mentioning the obsoletion concept--I prefer that it is handled as in the Derrick games. |
|
From: Erik V. <eri...@xs...> - 2011-04-29 14:09:01
|
This has now been implemented. * Allow private companies to be purchased during OR1 (only) for exactly face value. Each player may only sell one private company in this manner during OR1. After OR1, it is only allowed to buy privates after the first 3-train is purchased and follows normal rules. |
|
From: Erik V. <eri...@xs...> - 2011-04-28 19:45:52
|
I have committed this patch. I have also created a page for 1830 in the Wiki, which describes the current status of the Rails implementation of this game and its variants. Please let me know if I have omitted or misrepresented anything. Does anyone know who provided the Pere Marquette variant? I cannot find that name in the archives. Erik. Van: Erik Vos [mailto:eri...@xs...] Verzonden: donderdag 28 april 2011 20:56 Aan: 'Development list for Rails: an 18xx game' Onderwerp: Re: [Rails-devel] 1830 Reading > On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Scott Petersen < <mailto:sc...@re...> sc...@re...> wrote: > I attached another patch which adds a new combined "Coalfields and Reading" variant. I also alphabetized the public companies by their abbreviation in the Company Manager. Sorry if this makes the patch confusing to add. |
|
From: Erik V. <eri...@xs...> - 2011-04-28 18:55:49
|
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Scott Petersen < <mailto:sc...@re...> sc...@re...> wrote: > I attached another patch which adds a new combined "Coalfields and Reading" variant. I also alphabetized the public companies by their abbreviation in the Company Manager. Sorry if this makes the patch confusing to add. > One rule that is not implemented (and I do not consider it to be worth the trouble unless it is easy) is that the N&W has an extra (non-president) 20% share that replaces two 10% shares. This only applies to the combined variant. Eventually, it might be nice to implement this because 1849 has a form of this rule too--except there it is restricted to the last share that goes up for sale in the IPO. > Van: John A. Tamplin [mailto:ja...@ja...] > Lots of games have some certificate which are different than one share: 18MEX has half-shares, 18TN has a 30% presidency, 1880 has 20/30/40% presidencies determined by the president floating it, most of Gary Mroczka's recent designs have a 20% certificate as the last available certificate from the IPO, IIRC 1835 has lots of special certs, etc. Having both 10% and 20% certificates is already supported in Rails for a long time, as 1835 has this feature. However, IPO shares are currently required to be bought in a fixed sequence. So it would be OK with the 20% cert being at the bottom of the stack. Offering a choice to buy either 10% or 20% from the IPO may not be too difficult to achieve, as such a capability already exists for buying from the Bank Pool (open market). Erik. Van: John A. Tamplin [mailto:ja...@ja...] Verzonden: donderdag 28 april 2011 18:13 Aan: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game Onderwerp: Re: [Rails-devel] 1830 Reading On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Scott Petersen <sc...@re...> wrote: I attached another patch which adds a new combined "Coalfields and Reading" variant. I also alphabetized the public companies by their abbreviation in the Company Manager. Sorry if this makes the patch confusing to add. One rule that is not implemented (and I do not consider it to be worth the trouble unless it is easy) is that the N&W has an extra (non-president) 20% share that replaces two 10% shares. This only applies to the combined variant. Eventually, it might be nice to implement this because 1849 has a form of this rule too--except there it is restricted to the last share that goes up for sale in the IPO. Lots of games have some certificate which are different than one share: 18MEX has half-shares, 18TN has a 30% presidency, 1880 has 20/30/40% presidencies determined by the president floating it, most of Gary Mroczka's recent designs have a 20% certificate as the last available certificate from the IPO, IIRC 1835 has lots of special certs, etc. -- John A. Tamplin |
|
From: Erik V. <eri...@xs...> - 2011-04-28 18:43:33
|
> Van: Scott Petersen [mailto:sc...@re...] > Is runThrough a better term than driveThrough? Or maybe "drive" has a special definition in the code that I am not aware of. Yes, runThroughStation sounds a lot better to me. > Van: Chris Shaffer [mailto:chr...@gm...] > Related to this, you might want driveToStation="tokenOnly" to support 18Scan and perhaps others. In 18Scan, you are not allowed to score a red offboard city unless you have a token in it. That would be 'runToStation' then. Agreed, and, as others have pointed out, it applies to several games. > Van: John A. Tamplin [mailto:ja...@ja...] > You should also consider similar mechanisms in other games: > 18GL ferry - requires ownership of the ferry private, or pay its owner each round used > 1832/1850 coal fields - may not trace a route to or through (even for track laying) the coal fields without ownership of a coal token > Van: Scott Petersen [mailto:sc...@re...] > Yes, and the currently implemented 1830 Coalfields variant is somewhat hard to play because it assumes that all companies have coal access rights. By the late game when the big runs are kicking in, lots of companies have a route to the coalfields, so the route calculation is incorrect for those that do not have the rights. These cases are different, although parts of the underlying mechanism would probably be similar. Erik. |
|
From: Scott P. <sc...@re...> - 2011-04-28 16:15:13
|
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Chris Shaffer <chr...@gm...>wrote: > 18VA has similar issues. I believe 18VA's special rule is that the token confers an extra right (doubles city), rather than allowing a train to run to the city as applies to most of the games in this discussion. |
|
From: John A. T. <ja...@ja...> - 2011-04-28 16:13:27
|
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Scott Petersen <sc...@re...>wrote: > I attached another patch which adds a new combined "Coalfields and Reading" > variant. I also alphabetized the public companies by their abbreviation in > the Company Manager. Sorry if this makes the patch confusing to add. > > One rule that is not implemented (and I do not consider it to be worth the > trouble unless it is easy) is that the N&W has an extra (non-president) 20% > share that replaces two 10% shares. This only applies to the combined > variant. Eventually, it might be nice to implement this because 1849 has a > form of this rule too--except there it is restricted to the last share that > goes up for sale in the IPO. > Lots of games have some certificate which are different than one share: 18MEX has half-shares, 18TN has a 30% presidency, 1880 has 20/30/40% presidencies determined by the president floating it, most of Gary Mroczka's recent designs have a 20% certificate as the last available certificate from the IPO, IIRC 1835 has lots of special certs, etc. -- John A. Tamplin |
|
From: Chris S. <chr...@gm...> - 2011-04-28 16:02:19
|
18VA has similar issues. -- Chris Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 8:42 AM, John A. Tamplin <ja...@ja...> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Chris Shaffer <chr...@gm...> > wrote: >> >> Related to this, you might want driveToStation="tokenOnly" to support >> 18Scan and perhaps others. In 18Scan, you are not allowed to score a >> red offboard city unless you have a token in it. > > You should also consider similar mechanisms in other games: > > 18GL ferry - requires ownership of the ferry private, or pay its owner each > round used > 1832/1850 coal fields - may not trace a route to or through (even for track > laying) the coal fields without ownership of a coal token > > -- > John A. Tamplin > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software > The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network > management toolset available today. Delivers lowest initial > acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd > _______________________________________________ > Rails-devel mailing list > Rai...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel > > |
|
From: Scott P. <sc...@re...> - 2011-04-28 15:55:38
|
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 10:42 AM, John A. Tamplin <ja...@ja...> wrote: > > You should also consider similar mechanisms in other games: > > - 18GL ferry - requires ownership of the ferry private, or pay its > owner each round used > - 1832/1850 coal fields - may not trace a route to or through (even for > track laying) the coal fields without ownership of a coal token > > Yes, and the currently implemented 1830 Coalfields variant is somewhat hard to play because it assumes that all companies have coal access rights. By the late game when the big runs are kicking in, lots of companies have a route to the coalfields, so the route calculation is incorrect for those that do not have the rights. |
|
From: John A. T. <ja...@ja...> - 2011-04-28 15:51:18
|
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Chris Shaffer <chr...@gm...>wrote: > Related to this, you might want driveToStation="tokenOnly" to support > 18Scan and perhaps others. In 18Scan, you are not allowed to score a > red offboard city unless you have a token in it. > You should also consider similar mechanisms in other games: - 18GL ferry - requires ownership of the ferry private, or pay its owner each round used - 1832/1850 coal fields - may not trace a route to or through (even for track laying) the coal fields without ownership of a coal token -- John A. Tamplin |
99 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
