rails-devel

[Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles

[Stefan F. <ste...@we...>]

Actually I found this mail sitting in my draft folder.
It intended to provide half hexes for 1825. 
I do not know if this is still required, I lost track on the progress of 1825 
lately (if there has been any).
Stefan


Some time ago I edited the SVG files of the empty hex to create the half hex, 
but forgot to send them out. I know that the current support of 1825 already 
allows to lay track off the map, but there is no visual hint, where this is 
possible. So I wonder if they could be added. 
My experience now that for small changes it is actually much easier to edit 
the SVG directly than using Inkscape (the edit took hardly more time than 
writing this mail)

Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles

[Erik V. <eri...@xs...>]

Thanks, Stefan. As you say, a visual cue might be helpful.

There hasn't been any significant development on 1825 after I created the
maps.  Most of the XML (except for Unit 1) still has to be done.
I did already prepare that to some extent by adding quantity increments as a
configuration option.

Erik.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...]
> Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 10:39 AM
> To: 'Development list for Rails: an 18xx game'
> Subject: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles
> 
> Actually I found this mail sitting in my draft folder.
> It intended to provide half hexes for 1825.
> I do not know if this is still required, I lost track on the progress of
1825 lately
> (if there has been any).
> Stefan
> 
> 
> Some time ago I edited the SVG files of the empty hex to create the half
hex,
> but forgot to send them out. I know that the current support of 1825
already
> allows to lay track off the map, but there is no visual hint, where this
is
> possible. So I wonder if they could be added.
> My experience now that for small changes it is actually much easier to
edit
> the SVG directly than using Inkscape (the edit took hardly more time than
> writing this mail)

Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles

[Erik V. <eri...@xs...>]

I'm including these half-tiles into 1825 Unit 1, and it basically works.
As expected, it turns out, that adding these half-tiles makes the existing
"open" attributes redundant. This attribute achieves the same thing: that
track can be laid towards the board edge.

However, the question arises how to interpret the rule that "Tiles may be
placed so that a railway terminates against the edge of the board or against
the side of an incomplete hexag"  in some specific cases where laying track
would not be allowed if the adjacent board was actually present.  For Unit
1, this refers to the Q row hexes, of which only the southernmost corner is
just visible on the Unit1 game board.  If taken literally, the cited rule
would allow track lays against all edges of the Q row hexes if Unit2/R3 are
absent.  

However, if both Unit2 and Kit R3 are present, hex Q11 (Wolverton) would be
only reachable from the SE, and hex Q21 (The Wash, i.e. sea) not at all.
And that is how I had implemented it also for the case that Unit2/R3 are
absent (I only vaguely remember that we might have had some discussion about
this issue).

My current preference is to use a half-tile on hex Q11 (to which therefore
track can be laid from both the SW and SE directions), and to omit it on hex
Q21 (which therefore cannot be laid any track against).  To replicate the
current behaviour, I would have to omit the half-tile from Q11, and keep
using the existing 'open' attribute instead, so that Q11 can only be laid
track against from the SE.

Any opinions?

Erik.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erik Vos [mailto:eri...@xs...]
> Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 12:52 PM
> To: 'Development list for Rails: an 18xx game'
> Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles
> 
> Thanks, Stefan. As you say, a visual cue might be helpful.
> 
> There hasn't been any significant development on 1825 after I created the
> maps.  Most of the XML (except for Unit 1) still has to be done.
> I did already prepare that to some extent by adding quantity increments as
a
> configuration option.
> 
> Erik.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...]
> > Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 10:39 AM
> > To: 'Development list for Rails: an 18xx game'
> > Subject: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles
> >
> > Actually I found this mail sitting in my draft folder.
> > It intended to provide half hexes for 1825.
> > I do not know if this is still required, I lost track on the progress
> > of
> 1825 lately
> > (if there has been any).
> > Stefan
> >
> >
> > Some time ago I edited the SVG files of the empty hex to create the
> > half
> hex,
> > but forgot to send them out. I know that the current support of 1825
> already
> > allows to lay track off the map, but there is no visual hint, where
> > this
> is
> > possible. So I wonder if they could be added.
> > My experience now that for small changes it is actually much easier to
> edit
> > the SVG directly than using Inkscape (the edit took hardly more time
> > than writing this mail)
> 
> 
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
> demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
> Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn about
> Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel

Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles

[John D. G. <jd...@di...>]

On 2011-10-28 13:22, Erik Vos wrote:
> However, the question arises how to interpret the rule that "Tiles may be
> placed so that a railway terminates against the edge of the board or against
> the side of an incomplete hexag"  in some specific cases where laying track
> would not be allowed if the adjacent board was actually present.  For Unit
> 1, this refers to the Q row hexes, of which only the southernmost corner is
> just visible on the Unit1 game board.  If taken literally, the cited rule
> would allow track lays against all edges of the Q row hexes if Unit2/R3 are
> absent.  
> 
> However, if both Unit2 and Kit R3 are present, hex Q11 (Wolverton) would be
> only reachable from the SE, and hex Q21 (The Wash, i.e. sea) not at all.
> And that is how I had implemented it also for the case that Unit2/R3 are
> absent (I only vaguely remember that we might have had some discussion about
> this issue).
> 
> My current preference is to use a half-tile on hex Q11 (to which therefore
> track can be laid from both the SW and SE directions), and to omit it on hex
> Q21 (which therefore cannot be laid any track against).  To replicate the
> current behaviour, I would have to omit the half-tile from Q11, and keep
> using the existing 'open' attribute instead, so that Q11 can only be laid
> track against from the SE.
> 
> Any opinions?

What does any player have to gain from laying dead-end track?  Do people do it
to use up a critical tile?  To prevent someone else from connecting that line
to a destination?

The only reason I can see wanting to do it is to enable a player to place a
city tile with lots of exits at the edge of the board even though some of the
exits run off the board (thus avoiding the need to include tiles with some
blank sides, such as 1870's #170 "P" cities, in the tile mix).  In which case
either a narrow rule allowing just those city-tile lays, or a board that has
dead-end tracks adjoining the unused sides of those city hexes, would have
made more sense than the general rule.

Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles

[Stefan F. <ste...@we...>]

Could you not lay the half tile on Q11 and block the SW side
of hex tile Q11 using the existing mechanism?

On Friday, October 28, 2011 10:22:45 pm Erik Vos wrote:
> I'm including these half-tiles into 1825 Unit 1, and it basically works.
> As expected, it turns out, that adding these half-tiles makes the existing
> "open" attributes redundant. This attribute achieves the same thing: that
> track can be laid towards the board edge.
> 
> However, the question arises how to interpret the rule that "Tiles may be
> placed so that a railway terminates against the edge of the board or
> against the side of an incomplete hexag"  in some specific cases where
> laying track would not be allowed if the adjacent board was actually
> present.  For Unit 1, this refers to the Q row hexes, of which only the
> southernmost corner is just visible on the Unit1 game board.  If taken
> literally, the cited rule would allow track lays against all edges of the
> Q row hexes if Unit2/R3 are absent.
> 
> However, if both Unit2 and Kit R3 are present, hex Q11 (Wolverton) would be
> only reachable from the SE, and hex Q21 (The Wash, i.e. sea) not at all.
> And that is how I had implemented it also for the case that Unit2/R3 are
> absent (I only vaguely remember that we might have had some discussion
> about this issue).
> 
> My current preference is to use a half-tile on hex Q11 (to which therefore
> track can be laid from both the SW and SE directions), and to omit it on
> hex Q21 (which therefore cannot be laid any track against).  To replicate
> the current behaviour, I would have to omit the half-tile from Q11, and
> keep using the existing 'open' attribute instead, so that Q11 can only be
> laid track against from the SE.
> 
> Any opinions?
> 
> Erik.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Erik Vos [mailto:eri...@xs...]
> > Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 12:52 PM
> > To: 'Development list for Rails: an 18xx game'
> > Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles
> > 
> > Thanks, Stefan. As you say, a visual cue might be helpful.
> > 
> > There hasn't been any significant development on 1825 after I created the
> > maps.  Most of the XML (except for Unit 1) still has to be done.
> > I did already prepare that to some extent by adding quantity increments
> > as
> 
> a
> 
> > configuration option.
> > 
> > Erik.
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...]
> > > Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 10:39 AM
> > > To: 'Development list for Rails: an 18xx game'
> > > Subject: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles
> > > 
> > > Actually I found this mail sitting in my draft folder.
> > > It intended to provide half hexes for 1825.
> > > I do not know if this is still required, I lost track on the progress
> > > of
> > 
> > 1825 lately
> > 
> > > (if there has been any).
> > > Stefan
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Some time ago I edited the SVG files of the empty hex to create the
> > > half
> > 
> > hex,
> > 
> > > but forgot to send them out. I know that the current support of 1825
> > 
> > already
> > 
> > > allows to lay track off the map, but there is no visual hint, where
> > > this
> > 
> > is
> > 
> > > possible. So I wonder if they could be added.
> > > My experience now that for small changes it is actually much easier to
> > 
> > edit
> > 
> > > the SVG directly than using Inkscape (the edit took hardly more time
> > > than writing this mail)
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> - --
> 
> > The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
> > demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
> > Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn about
> > Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities.
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rails-devel mailing list
> > Rai...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --- The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
> demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
> Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn
> about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel

Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles

[Erik V. <eri...@xs...>]

The "existing mechanism" only allows opening hex edges that would otherwise
be closed, not the other way around.
Of course we can extend (or replace) that mechanism.  I'm just trying to
find out if this very minor issue (as JDG correctly points out) is really
worth it to create an exception for, also in the light of the uncertainty
about what the rules (as cited) really say.

BTW: Q11 is Crewe, not Wolverton.  

Erik.


> From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...]
> 
> Could you not lay the half tile on Q11 and block the SW side of hex tile
Q11
> using the existing mechanism?
> 
> On Friday, October 28, 2011 10:22:45 pm Erik Vos wrote:
> > I'm including these half-tiles into 1825 Unit 1, and it basically works.
> > As expected, it turns out, that adding these half-tiles makes the
> > existing "open" attributes redundant. This attribute achieves the same
> > thing: that track can be laid towards the board edge.
> >
> > However, the question arises how to interpret the rule that "Tiles may
> > be placed so that a railway terminates against the edge of the board
> > or against the side of an incomplete hexag"  in some specific cases
> > where laying track would not be allowed if the adjacent board was
> > actually present.  For Unit 1, this refers to the Q row hexes, of
> > which only the southernmost corner is just visible on the Unit1 game
> > board.  If taken literally, the cited rule would allow track lays
> > against all edges of the Q row hexes if Unit2/R3 are absent.
> >
> > However, if both Unit2 and Kit R3 are present, hex Q11 (Wolverton)
> > would be only reachable from the SE, and hex Q21 (The Wash, i.e. sea)
not
> at all.
> > And that is how I had implemented it also for the case that Unit2/R3
> > are absent (I only vaguely remember that we might have had some
> > discussion about this issue).
> >
> > My current preference is to use a half-tile on hex Q11 (to which
> > therefore track can be laid from both the SW and SE directions), and
> > to omit it on hex Q21 (which therefore cannot be laid any track
> > against).  To replicate the current behaviour, I would have to omit
> > the half-tile from Q11, and keep using the existing 'open' attribute
> > instead, so that Q11 can only be laid track against from the SE.
> >
> > Any opinions?
> >
> > Erik.

Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles

[Charles S. <men...@gm...>]

Playing a game of 1830 w/ Coalfields. A company was allowed to buy access to
the coal fields without having the full amount of funds in the treasury.
Instead of showing a popup not allowing it, like it does with tokens & paid
tile lays. This pushed the company's treasury into the negative, which also
had the side effect of not allowing a regular tile lay (which showed a cost
of $0).

Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles

[Erik V. <eri...@xs...>]

Fixed.  The Coalfields cost was not checked against the company cash.

 

(Sorry Stefan, it's OperatingRound again; I have only changed buyRights()).


Erik.

 

From: Charles Strong [mailto:men...@gm...] 
Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 6:17 PM
To: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game
Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles

 

Playing a game of 1830 w/ Coalfields. A company was allowed to buy access to
the coal fields without having the full amount of funds in the treasury.
Instead of showing a popup not allowing it, like it does with tokens & paid
tile lays. This pushed the company's treasury into the negative, which also
had the side effect of not allowing a regular tile lay (which showed a cost
of $0). 

Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles

[Stefan F. <ste...@we...>]

I was under the impression that the "impassable" attribute actually does 
exactly that. Or is it not possible to use it in the scenario below for a 
different reason?
Stefan

On Saturday, October 29, 2011 02:07:00 pm Erik Vos wrote:
> The "existing mechanism" only allows opening hex edges that would otherwise
> be closed, not the other way around.
> Of course we can extend (or replace) that mechanism.  I'm just trying to
> find out if this very minor issue (as JDG correctly points out) is really
> worth it to create an exception for, also in the light of the uncertainty
> about what the rules (as cited) really say.
> 
> BTW: Q11 is Crewe, not Wolverton.
> 
> Erik.
> 
> > From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...]
> > 
> > Could you not lay the half tile on Q11 and block the SW side of hex tile
> 
> Q11
> 
> > using the existing mechanism?
> > 
> > On Friday, October 28, 2011 10:22:45 pm Erik Vos wrote:
> > > I'm including these half-tiles into 1825 Unit 1, and it basically
> > > works. As expected, it turns out, that adding these half-tiles makes
> > > the existing "open" attributes redundant. This attribute achieves the
> > > same thing: that track can be laid towards the board edge.
> > > 
> > > However, the question arises how to interpret the rule that "Tiles may
> > > be placed so that a railway terminates against the edge of the board
> > > or against the side of an incomplete hexag"  in some specific cases
> > > where laying track would not be allowed if the adjacent board was
> > > actually present.  For Unit 1, this refers to the Q row hexes, of
> > > which only the southernmost corner is just visible on the Unit1 game
> > > board.  If taken literally, the cited rule would allow track lays
> > > against all edges of the Q row hexes if Unit2/R3 are absent.
> > > 
> > > However, if both Unit2 and Kit R3 are present, hex Q11 (Wolverton)
> > > would be only reachable from the SE, and hex Q21 (The Wash, i.e. sea)
> 
> not
> 
> > at all.
> > 
> > > And that is how I had implemented it also for the case that Unit2/R3
> > > are absent (I only vaguely remember that we might have had some
> > > discussion about this issue).
> > > 
> > > My current preference is to use a half-tile on hex Q11 (to which
> > > therefore track can be laid from both the SW and SE directions), and
> > > to omit it on hex Q21 (which therefore cannot be laid any track
> > > against).  To replicate the current behaviour, I would have to omit
> > > the half-tile from Q11, and keep using the existing 'open' attribute
> > > instead, so that Q11 can only be laid track against from the SE.
> > > 
> > > Any opinions?
> > > 
> > > Erik.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --- Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in
> minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for
> the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it
> is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel

Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles

[Erik V. <eri...@xs...>]

Ah yes, of course we could use that.
But the question if we *should* do it has not yet been answered.

Erik.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...]
> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 2:14 PM
> To: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game
> Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles
> 
> I was under the impression that the "impassable" attribute actually does
> exactly that. Or is it not possible to use it in the scenario below for a
different
> reason?
> Stefan
> 
> On Saturday, October 29, 2011 02:07:00 pm Erik Vos wrote:
> > The "existing mechanism" only allows opening hex edges that would
> > otherwise be closed, not the other way around.
> > Of course we can extend (or replace) that mechanism.  I'm just trying
> > to find out if this very minor issue (as JDG correctly points out) is
> > really worth it to create an exception for, also in the light of the
> > uncertainty about what the rules (as cited) really say.
> >
> > BTW: Q11 is Crewe, not Wolverton.
> >
> > Erik.
> >
> > > From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...]
> > >
> > > Could you not lay the half tile on Q11 and block the SW side of hex
> > > tile
> >
> > Q11
> >
> > > using the existing mechanism?
> > >
> > > On Friday, October 28, 2011 10:22:45 pm Erik Vos wrote:
> > > > I'm including these half-tiles into 1825 Unit 1, and it basically
> > > > works. As expected, it turns out, that adding these half-tiles
> > > > makes the existing "open" attributes redundant. This attribute
> > > > achieves the same thing: that track can be laid towards the board
edge.
> > > >
> > > > However, the question arises how to interpret the rule that "Tiles
> > > > may be placed so that a railway terminates against the edge of the
> > > > board or against the side of an incomplete hexag"  in some
> > > > specific cases where laying track would not be allowed if the
> > > > adjacent board was actually present.  For Unit 1, this refers to
> > > > the Q row hexes, of which only the southernmost corner is just
> > > > visible on the Unit1 game board.  If taken literally, the cited
> > > > rule would allow track lays against all edges of the Q row hexes if
> Unit2/R3 are absent.
> > > >
> > > > However, if both Unit2 and Kit R3 are present, hex Q11 (Wolverton)
> > > > would be only reachable from the SE, and hex Q21 (The Wash, i.e.
> > > > sea)
> >
> > not
> >
> > > at all.
> > >
> > > > And that is how I had implemented it also for the case that
> > > > Unit2/R3 are absent (I only vaguely remember that we might have
> > > > had some discussion about this issue).
> > > >
> > > > My current preference is to use a half-tile on hex Q11 (to which
> > > > therefore track can be laid from both the SW and SE directions),
> > > > and to omit it on hex Q21 (which therefore cannot be laid any
> > > > track against).  To replicate the current behaviour, I would have
> > > > to omit the half-tile from Q11, and keep using the existing 'open'
> > > > attribute instead, so that Q11 can only be laid track against from
the SE.
> > > >
> > > > Any opinions?
> > > >
> > > > Erik.
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -----
> > --- Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry
> > PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports
> > Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover
> > just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rails-devel mailing list
> > Rai...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> 
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in
> minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for
> the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it
is!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel

Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles

[Stefan F. <ste...@we...>]

Erik:
from my point of view it is clear, however I have not checked the rules again. 
Especially as the 1825 rules are ambiguous in many respect anyway and then the 
1825 Unit 1 some rules are different (at least in wording) to those of unit 2 
and 3.

So I would not allow running to Q11 and Q21 even if unit 2 and/or R3 are not 
present: My main reasoning here is that there are visual clues for both the 
brown edge without track for Q11/SW and the blue/green sea for Q21.

Thus I suggest to add both Q11 and make the edge impassable. I would even 
consider adding Q21 and make both edges impassable if this looks better on a 
whole.

Stefan


On Saturday, October 29, 2011 03:45:37 pm Erik Vos wrote:
> Ah yes, of course we could use that.
> But the question if we *should* do it has not yet been answered.
> 
> Erik.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...]
> > Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 2:14 PM
> > To: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game
> > Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles
> > 
> > I was under the impression that the "impassable" attribute actually does
> > exactly that. Or is it not possible to use it in the scenario below for a
> 
> different
> 
> > reason?
> > Stefan
> > 
> > On Saturday, October 29, 2011 02:07:00 pm Erik Vos wrote:
> > > The "existing mechanism" only allows opening hex edges that would
> > > otherwise be closed, not the other way around.
> > > Of course we can extend (or replace) that mechanism.  I'm just trying
> > > to find out if this very minor issue (as JDG correctly points out) is
> > > really worth it to create an exception for, also in the light of the
> > > uncertainty about what the rules (as cited) really say.
> > > 
> > > BTW: Q11 is Crewe, not Wolverton.
> > > 
> > > Erik.
> > > 
> > > > From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...]
> > > > 
> > > > Could you not lay the half tile on Q11 and block the SW side of hex
> > > > tile
> > > 
> > > Q11
> > > 
> > > > using the existing mechanism?
> > > > 
> > > > On Friday, October 28, 2011 10:22:45 pm Erik Vos wrote:
> > > > > I'm including these half-tiles into 1825 Unit 1, and it basically
> > > > > works. As expected, it turns out, that adding these half-tiles
> > > > > makes the existing "open" attributes redundant. This attribute
> > > > > achieves the same thing: that track can be laid towards the board
> 
> edge.
> 
> > > > > However, the question arises how to interpret the rule that "Tiles
> > > > > may be placed so that a railway terminates against the edge of the
> > > > > board or against the side of an incomplete hexag"  in some
> > > > > specific cases where laying track would not be allowed if the
> > > > > adjacent board was actually present.  For Unit 1, this refers to
> > > > > the Q row hexes, of which only the southernmost corner is just
> > > > > visible on the Unit1 game board.  If taken literally, the cited
> > > > > rule would allow track lays against all edges of the Q row hexes if
> > 
> > Unit2/R3 are absent.
> > 
> > > > > However, if both Unit2 and Kit R3 are present, hex Q11 (Wolverton)
> > > > > would be only reachable from the SE, and hex Q21 (The Wash, i.e.
> > > > > sea)
> > > 
> > > not
> > > 
> > > > at all.
> > > > 
> > > > > And that is how I had implemented it also for the case that
> > > > > Unit2/R3 are absent (I only vaguely remember that we might have
> > > > > had some discussion about this issue).
> > > > > 
> > > > > My current preference is to use a half-tile on hex Q11 (to which
> > > > > therefore track can be laid from both the SW and SE directions),
> > > > > and to omit it on hex Q21 (which therefore cannot be laid any
> > > > > track against).  To replicate the current behaviour, I would have
> > > > > to omit the half-tile from Q11, and keep using the existing 'open'
> > > > > attribute instead, so that Q11 can only be laid track against from
> 
> the SE.
> 
> > > > > Any opinions?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Erik.
> > > 
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > -----
> > > --- Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry
> > > PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports
> > > Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover
> > > just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Rails-devel mailing list
> > > Rai...@li...
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> - --
> 
> > Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in
> > minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for
> > the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it
> 
> is!
> 
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rails-devel mailing list
> > Rai...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --- Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in
> minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for
> the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it
> is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel

Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles

[Dr. M. B. <Dr....@t-...>]

Hi all,

Maybe a dumb suggestion, but cant we fix it with different submaps for the respective variants and the half tiles ?

Currently you cant define complete maps for variants might that be a way to solve that problem ?

Von meinem iPad gesendet

Am 29.10.2011 um 16:11 schrieb Stefan Frey <ste...@we...>:

> Erik:
> from my point of view it is clear, however I have not checked the rules again. 
> Especially as the 1825 rules are ambiguous in many respect anyway and then the 
> 1825 Unit 1 some rules are different (at least in wording) to those of unit 2 
> and 3.
> 
> So I would not allow running to Q11 and Q21 even if unit 2 and/or R3 are not 
> present: My main reasoning here is that there are visual clues for both the 
> brown edge without track for Q11/SW and the blue/green sea for Q21.
> 
> Thus I suggest to add both Q11 and make the edge impassable. I would even 
> consider adding Q21 and make both edges impassable if this looks better on a 
> whole.
> 
> Stefan
> 
> 
> On Saturday, October 29, 2011 03:45:37 pm Erik Vos wrote:
>> Ah yes, of course we could use that.
>> But the question if we *should* do it has not yet been answered.
>> 
>> Erik.
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...]
>>> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 2:14 PM
>>> To: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game
>>> Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles
>>> 
>>> I was under the impression that the "impassable" attribute actually does
>>> exactly that. Or is it not possible to use it in the scenario below for a
>> 
>> different
>> 
>>> reason?
>>> Stefan
>>> 
>>> On Saturday, October 29, 2011 02:07:00 pm Erik Vos wrote:
>>>> The "existing mechanism" only allows opening hex edges that would
>>>> otherwise be closed, not the other way around.
>>>> Of course we can extend (or replace) that mechanism.  I'm just trying
>>>> to find out if this very minor issue (as JDG correctly points out) is
>>>> really worth it to create an exception for, also in the light of the
>>>> uncertainty about what the rules (as cited) really say.
>>>> 
>>>> BTW: Q11 is Crewe, not Wolverton.
>>>> 
>>>> Erik.
>>>> 
>>>>> From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...]
>>>>> 
>>>>> Could you not lay the half tile on Q11 and block the SW side of hex
>>>>> tile
>>>> 
>>>> Q11
>>>> 
>>>>> using the existing mechanism?
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Friday, October 28, 2011 10:22:45 pm Erik Vos wrote:
>>>>>> I'm including these half-tiles into 1825 Unit 1, and it basically
>>>>>> works. As expected, it turns out, that adding these half-tiles
>>>>>> makes the existing "open" attributes redundant. This attribute
>>>>>> achieves the same thing: that track can be laid towards the board
>> 
>> edge.
>> 
>>>>>> However, the question arises how to interpret the rule that "Tiles
>>>>>> may be placed so that a railway terminates against the edge of the
>>>>>> board or against the side of an incomplete hexag"  in some
>>>>>> specific cases where laying track would not be allowed if the
>>>>>> adjacent board was actually present.  For Unit 1, this refers to
>>>>>> the Q row hexes, of which only the southernmost corner is just
>>>>>> visible on the Unit1 game board.  If taken literally, the cited
>>>>>> rule would allow track lays against all edges of the Q row hexes if
>>> 
>>> Unit2/R3 are absent.
>>> 
>>>>>> However, if both Unit2 and Kit R3 are present, hex Q11 (Wolverton)
>>>>>> would be only reachable from the SE, and hex Q21 (The Wash, i.e.
>>>>>> sea)
>>>> 
>>>> not
>>>> 
>>>>> at all.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> And that is how I had implemented it also for the case that
>>>>>> Unit2/R3 are absent (I only vaguely remember that we might have
>>>>>> had some discussion about this issue).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> My current preference is to use a half-tile on hex Q11 (to which
>>>>>> therefore track can be laid from both the SW and SE directions),
>>>>>> and to omit it on hex Q21 (which therefore cannot be laid any
>>>>>> track against).  To replicate the current behaviour, I would have
>>>>>> to omit the half-tile from Q11, and keep using the existing 'open'
>>>>>> attribute instead, so that Q11 can only be laid track against from
>> 
>> the SE.
>> 
>>>>>> Any opinions?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Erik.
>>>> 
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> -----
>>>> --- Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry
>>>> PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World&#153; now supports
>>>> Android&#153; Apps for the BlackBerry&reg; PlayBook&#153;. Discover
>>>> just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Rails-devel mailing list
>>>> Rai...@li...
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> - --
>> 
>>> Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in
>>> minutes. BlackBerry App World&#153; now supports Android&#153; Apps for
>>> the BlackBerry&reg; PlayBook&#153;. Discover just how easy and simple it
>> 
>> is!
>> 
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Rails-devel mailing list
>>> Rai...@li...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --- Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in
>> minutes. BlackBerry App World&#153; now supports Android&#153; Apps for
>> the BlackBerry&reg; PlayBook&#153;. Discover just how easy and simple it
>> is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rails-devel mailing list
>> Rai...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook 
> in minutes. BlackBerry App World&#153; now supports Android&#153; Apps 
> for the BlackBerry&reg; PlayBook&#153;. Discover just how easy and simple 
> it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel

Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles

[Erik V. <eri...@xs...>]

Martin,

Your remark is about *how* the map variations are configured; I don't see a
major problem with how that is done currently.

But the issue is *what* we need to configure (i.e. how do we interpret the
rules).

Erik.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dr. Martin Brumm [mailto:Dr....@t-...]
> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 4:28 PM
> To: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game
> Cc: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game
> Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Maybe a dumb suggestion, but cant we fix it with different submaps for the
> respective variants and the half tiles ?
> 
> Currently you cant define complete maps for variants might that be a way
to
> solve that problem ?
> 
> Von meinem iPad gesendet
> 
> Am 29.10.2011 um 16:11 schrieb Stefan Frey <ste...@we...>:
> 
> > Erik:
> > from my point of view it is clear, however I have not checked the rules
> again.
> > Especially as the 1825 rules are ambiguous in many respect anyway and
> > then the
> > 1825 Unit 1 some rules are different (at least in wording) to those of
> > unit 2 and 3.
> >
> > So I would not allow running to Q11 and Q21 even if unit 2 and/or R3
> > are not
> > present: My main reasoning here is that there are visual clues for
> > both the brown edge without track for Q11/SW and the blue/green sea for
> Q21.
> >
> > Thus I suggest to add both Q11 and make the edge impassable. I would
> > even consider adding Q21 and make both edges impassable if this looks
> > better on a whole.
> >
> > Stefan
> >
> >
> > On Saturday, October 29, 2011 03:45:37 pm Erik Vos wrote:
> >> Ah yes, of course we could use that.
> >> But the question if we *should* do it has not yet been answered.
> >>
> >> Erik.
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...]
> >>> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 2:14 PM
> >>> To: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game
> >>> Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles
> >>>
> >>> I was under the impression that the "impassable" attribute actually
> >>> does exactly that. Or is it not possible to use it in the scenario
> >>> below for a
> >>
> >> different
> >>
> >>> reason?
> >>> Stefan
> >>>
> >>> On Saturday, October 29, 2011 02:07:00 pm Erik Vos wrote:
> >>>> The "existing mechanism" only allows opening hex edges that would
> >>>> otherwise be closed, not the other way around.
> >>>> Of course we can extend (or replace) that mechanism.  I'm just
> >>>> trying to find out if this very minor issue (as JDG correctly
> >>>> points out) is really worth it to create an exception for, also in
> >>>> the light of the uncertainty about what the rules (as cited) really
say.
> >>>>
> >>>> BTW: Q11 is Crewe, not Wolverton.
> >>>>
> >>>> Erik.
> >>>>
> >>>>> From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...]
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Could you not lay the half tile on Q11 and block the SW side of
> >>>>> hex tile
> >>>>
> >>>> Q11
> >>>>
> >>>>> using the existing mechanism?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Friday, October 28, 2011 10:22:45 pm Erik Vos wrote:
> >>>>>> I'm including these half-tiles into 1825 Unit 1, and it basically
> >>>>>> works. As expected, it turns out, that adding these half-tiles
> >>>>>> makes the existing "open" attributes redundant. This attribute
> >>>>>> achieves the same thing: that track can be laid towards the board
> >>
> >> edge.
> >>
> >>>>>> However, the question arises how to interpret the rule that
> >>>>>> "Tiles may be placed so that a railway terminates against the
> >>>>>> edge of the board or against the side of an incomplete hexag"  in
> >>>>>> some specific cases where laying track would not be allowed if
> >>>>>> the adjacent board was actually present.  For Unit 1, this refers
> >>>>>> to the Q row hexes, of which only the southernmost corner is just
> >>>>>> visible on the Unit1 game board.  If taken literally, the cited
> >>>>>> rule would allow track lays against all edges of the Q row hexes
> >>>>>> if
> >>>
> >>> Unit2/R3 are absent.
> >>>
> >>>>>> However, if both Unit2 and Kit R3 are present, hex Q11
> >>>>>> (Wolverton) would be only reachable from the SE, and hex Q21 (The
> Wash, i.e.
> >>>>>> sea)
> >>>>
> >>>> not
> >>>>
> >>>>> at all.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> And that is how I had implemented it also for the case that
> >>>>>> Unit2/R3 are absent (I only vaguely remember that we might have
> >>>>>> had some discussion about this issue).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> My current preference is to use a half-tile on hex Q11 (to which
> >>>>>> therefore track can be laid from both the SW and SE directions),
> >>>>>> and to omit it on hex Q21 (which therefore cannot be laid any
> >>>>>> track against).  To replicate the current behaviour, I would have
> >>>>>> to omit the half-tile from Q11, and keep using the existing 'open'
> >>>>>> attribute instead, so that Q11 can only be laid track against
> >>>>>> from
> >>
> >> the SE.
> >>
> >>>>>> Any opinions?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Erik.
> >>>>
> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> ---
> >>>> -----
> >>>> --- Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry
> >>>> PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World&#153; now supports
> >>>> Android&#153; Apps for the BlackBerry&reg; PlayBook&#153;. Discover
> >>>> just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Rails-devel mailing list
> >>>> Rai...@li...
> >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> ------
> >> - --
> >>
> >>> Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook
> >>> in minutes. BlackBerry App World&#153; now supports Android&#153;
> >>> Apps for the BlackBerry&reg; PlayBook&#153;. Discover just how easy
> >>> and simple it
> >>
> >> is!
> >>
> >>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Rails-devel mailing list
> >>> Rai...@li...
> >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> ------
> >> --- Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry
> >> PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World&#153; now supports
> >> Android&#153; Apps for the BlackBerry&reg; PlayBook&#153;. Discover
> >> just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Rails-devel mailing list
> >> Rai...@li...
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -------- Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry
> > PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World&#153; now supports
> > Android&#153; Apps for the BlackBerry&reg; PlayBook&#153;. Discover
> > just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rails-devel mailing list
> > Rai...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> 
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in
> minutes. BlackBerry App World&#153; now supports Android&#153; Apps for
> the BlackBerry&reg; PlayBook&#153;. Discover just how easy and simple it
is!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel

Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles

[Erik V. <eri...@xs...>]

I think leaving in Q11 (with an impassibility) and leaving out Q21 is good
enough. 
Sharp-eyed players can indeed detect what access the Unit 2 Q row hexes
would allow.  Whether or not that is relevant, that's the question.
But I have no problem with your view, which amounts to retaining the
existing behaviour, without the 'open' attributes.

Where it really will start looking ugly is on the left-hand side, adjacent
to the R1 and  R2 kits.  Wait and see...

Erik.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...]
> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 4:12 PM
> To: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game
> Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles
> 
> Erik:
> from my point of view it is clear, however I have not checked the rules
again.
> Especially as the 1825 rules are ambiguous in many respect anyway and then
> the
> 1825 Unit 1 some rules are different (at least in wording) to those of
unit 2
> and 3.
> 
> So I would not allow running to Q11 and Q21 even if unit 2 and/or R3 are
not
> present: My main reasoning here is that there are visual clues for both
the
> brown edge without track for Q11/SW and the blue/green sea for Q21.
> 
> Thus I suggest to add both Q11 and make the edge impassable. I would even
> consider adding Q21 and make both edges impassable if this looks better on
> a whole.
> 
> Stefan
> 
> 
> On Saturday, October 29, 2011 03:45:37 pm Erik Vos wrote:
> > Ah yes, of course we could use that.
> > But the question if we *should* do it has not yet been answered.
> >
> > Erik.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...]
> > > Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 2:14 PM
> > > To: Development list for Rails: an 18xx game
> > > Subject: Re: [Rails-devel] 1825 half-tiles
> > >
> > > I was under the impression that the "impassable" attribute actually
> > > does exactly that. Or is it not possible to use it in the scenario
> > > below for a
> >
> > different
> >
> > > reason?
> > > Stefan
> > >
> > > On Saturday, October 29, 2011 02:07:00 pm Erik Vos wrote:
> > > > The "existing mechanism" only allows opening hex edges that would
> > > > otherwise be closed, not the other way around.
> > > > Of course we can extend (or replace) that mechanism.  I'm just
> > > > trying to find out if this very minor issue (as JDG correctly
> > > > points out) is really worth it to create an exception for, also in
> > > > the light of the uncertainty about what the rules (as cited) really
say.
> > > >
> > > > BTW: Q11 is Crewe, not Wolverton.
> > > >
> > > > Erik.
> > > >
> > > > > From: Stefan Frey [mailto:ste...@we...]
> > > > >
> > > > > Could you not lay the half tile on Q11 and block the SW side of
> > > > > hex tile
> > > >
> > > > Q11
> > > >
> > > > > using the existing mechanism?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Friday, October 28, 2011 10:22:45 pm Erik Vos wrote:
> > > > > > I'm including these half-tiles into 1825 Unit 1, and it
> > > > > > basically works. As expected, it turns out, that adding these
> > > > > > half-tiles makes the existing "open" attributes redundant.
> > > > > > This attribute achieves the same thing: that track can be laid
> > > > > > towards the board
> >
> > edge.
> >
> > > > > > However, the question arises how to interpret the rule that
> > > > > > "Tiles may be placed so that a railway terminates against the
> > > > > > edge of the board or against the side of an incomplete hexag"
> > > > > > in some specific cases where laying track would not be allowed
> > > > > > if the adjacent board was actually present.  For Unit 1, this
> > > > > > refers to the Q row hexes, of which only the southernmost
> > > > > > corner is just visible on the Unit1 game board.  If taken
> > > > > > literally, the cited rule would allow track lays against all
> > > > > > edges of the Q row hexes if
> > >
> > > Unit2/R3 are absent.
> > >
> > > > > > However, if both Unit2 and Kit R3 are present, hex Q11
> > > > > > (Wolverton) would be only reachable from the SE, and hex Q21
(The
> Wash, i.e.
> > > > > > sea)
> > > >
> > > > not
> > > >
> > > > > at all.
> > > > >
> > > > > > And that is how I had implemented it also for the case that
> > > > > > Unit2/R3 are absent (I only vaguely remember that we might
> > > > > > have had some discussion about this issue).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My current preference is to use a half-tile on hex Q11 (to
> > > > > > which therefore track can be laid from both the SW and SE
> > > > > > directions), and to omit it on hex Q21 (which therefore cannot
> > > > > > be laid any track against).  To replicate the current
> > > > > > behaviour, I would have to omit the half-tile from Q11, and keep
> using the existing 'open'
> > > > > > attribute instead, so that Q11 can only be laid track against
> > > > > > from
> >
> > the SE.
> >
> > > > > > Any opinions?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Erik.
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > ----
> > > > -----
> > > > --- Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry
> > > > PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports
> > > > Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™.
> > > > Discover just how easy and simple it is!
> > > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Rails-devel mailing list
> > > > Rai...@li...
> > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -----
> > - --
> >
> > > Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook
> > > in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™
> > > Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy
> > > and simple it
> >
> > is!
> >
> > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Rails-devel mailing list
> > > Rai...@li...
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -----
> > --- Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry
> > PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports
> > Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover
> > just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rails-devel mailing list
> > Rai...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> 
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in
> minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for
> the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it
is!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel