Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Change: make crash chance at short runway independent of plane crash … #7302

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Mar 3, 2019

Conversation

Eddi-z
Copy link
Contributor

@Eddi-z Eddi-z commented Feb 28, 2019

…rate setting (there's a cheat for this)

@SamuXarick
Copy link
Contributor

@SamuXarick SamuXarick commented Mar 1, 2019

plane crash | large aircraft | small airport | cheat enabled | probability
------------+----------------+---------------+---------------+------------------------
          0 |             no |            no |            no | (return)
          0 |             no |            no |           yes | (return)
          0 |             no |           yes |            no | (return)
          0 |             no |           yes |           yes | (return)
          0 |            yes |            no |            no | (return)
          0 |            yes |            no |           yes | (return)
          0 |            yes |           yes |            no | 3276
          0 |            yes |           yes |           yes | (return)
------------+----------------+---------------+---------------+------------------------
          1 |             no |            no |            no | 0x4000 << 1 / 1500 = 21
          1 |             no |            no |           yes | 0x4000 << 1 / 1500 = 21
          1 |             no |           yes |            no | 0x4000 << 1 / 1500 = 21
          1 |             no |           yes |           yes | 0x4000 << 1 / 1500 = 21
          1 |            yes |            no |            no | 0x4000 << 1 / 1500 = 21
          1 |            yes |            no |           yes | 0x4000 << 1 / 1500 = 21
          1 |            yes |           yes |            no | 3276
          1 |            yes |           yes |           yes | 0x4000 << 1 / 1500 = 21
------------+----------------+---------------+---------------+------------------------
          2 |             no |            no |            no | 0x4000 << 2 / 1500 = 43
          2 |             no |            no |           yes | 0x4000 << 2 / 1500 = 43
          2 |             no |           yes |            no | 0x4000 << 2 / 1500 = 43
          2 |             no |           yes |           yes | 0x4000 << 2 / 1500 = 43
          2 |            yes |            no |            no | 0x4000 << 2 / 1500 = 43
          2 |            yes |            no |           yes | 0x4000 << 2 / 1500 = 43
          2 |            yes |           yes |            no | 3276
          2 |            yes |           yes |           yes | 0x4000 << 2 / 1500 = 43

@Eddi-z
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Eddi-z Eddi-z commented Mar 1, 2019

Note: this is meant as an alternate approach to #7293

@Eddi-z
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Eddi-z Eddi-z commented Mar 1, 2019

A quick rundown of how planecrash chances work:
since da3ff51 the plane crash chance is rerolled every tick that the plane is on the runway, and its speed is larger than the taxiing speed
since fa01b25 the plane crash chance is affected by a setting to reduce (halve) or eliminate the crash chance

thus the chance for a plane crash on landing is (value of above table) * (time to decelerate from approach speed to taxiing speed) / 2^22 (giving a slight bonus to slow planes)

@Eddi-z
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Eddi-z Eddi-z commented Mar 1, 2019

comparison between crash chances

set-|  airport  |      crash chance 
ting|  size     | master | #7293 | #7302
----+-----------+--------+-------+-------
  0 | ok        |      0 |     0 |     0
    | too small |      0 |     0 |  3276
    | cheated   |      0 |     0 |     0
----+-----------+--------+-------+-------
  * | ok        |      - |     0 |     -
    | too small |      - |  1638 |     -
    | cheated   |      - |     0 |     -
----+-----------+--------+-------+-------
  1 | ok        |     21 |    21 |    21
    | too small |   1638 |  1638 |  3276
    | cheated   |     21 |    21 |    21
----+-----------+--------+-------+-------
  2 | ok        |     43 |    43 |    43
    | too small |   3276 |  3276 |  3276
    | cheated   |     43 |    43 |    43

@SamuXarick
Copy link
Contributor

@SamuXarick SamuXarick commented Mar 1, 2019

The cheated value is 21, not 0

@TrueBrain
Copy link
Member

@TrueBrain TrueBrain commented Mar 3, 2019

I very much like this approach above adding "yet another setting". We have a cheat to prevent it, and it is fully what I expected the game already does. So yeah, lets do this one! :)

@SamuXarick
Copy link
Contributor

@SamuXarick SamuXarick commented Mar 3, 2019

This feels wrong.
You expect crashes when you set plane crashes to "none"? Even if you rename this better, it's still going to feel as if an option is missing. None means none!

@PeterN
Copy link
Member

@PeterN PeterN commented Mar 3, 2019

Yeah, "plane crashes" are a disaster setting that the player has no control over. Sending a large plane to a small airport is a user error.

@SamuXarick
Copy link
Contributor

@SamuXarick SamuXarick commented Mar 3, 2019

Yeah, "plane crashes" are a disaster setting that the player has no control over. Sending a large plane to a small airport is a user error.

It is only a user error if this patch is applied, because it currently isn't on master. And I don't believe people see it as a bug. There are some AIs that check whether this setting is none to decide whether to buy large airplanes on short runways.
This sudden change of setting behaviour baffles me… From a moment to another you decide a feature that is working fine is a "bug" and then you "fix" it (break it, change its meaning, etc...).

@nielsmh
Copy link
Contributor

@nielsmh nielsmh commented Mar 3, 2019

It definitely feels exploit-y to allow large planes to land at small airports at any time.

@TrueBrain
Copy link
Member

@TrueBrain TrueBrain commented Mar 3, 2019

@SamuXarick : I suggest you take a few to cool off. You are being a bully at the moment, because you are not getting what you set out to get. This is not acceptable behavior (even more in combination how you react on IRC). Please cool down before replying. It really helps to keep conversations productive.

That said, we have said enough about this. Without new argumentation, this is final: we consider large planes on small airports user error, which results in a plane crash. This can be avoided with a cheat, just as you would expect based on the cheat description.

@Berbe
Copy link
Contributor

@Berbe Berbe commented Mar 3, 2019

@SamuXarick I suppose nothing has really ever been defined before, hence the confusion.
The thing is no normal user ever had a chance to understand how that feature really worked, without looking at the code.

Making the label on the setting explaining best what really happens could help finally putting everyone of the same page?

@@ -1257,7 +1257,7 @@ STR_CONFIG_SETTING_PLANE_SPEED :Plane speed fac
STR_CONFIG_SETTING_PLANE_SPEED_HELPTEXT :Set the relative speed of planes compared to other vehicle types, to reduce the amount of income of transport by aircraft
STR_CONFIG_SETTING_PLANE_SPEED_VALUE :1 / {COMMA}
STR_CONFIG_SETTING_PLANE_CRASHES :Number of plane crashes: {STRING2}
STR_CONFIG_SETTING_PLANE_CRASHES_HELPTEXT :Set the chance of an aircraft crash happening
STR_CONFIG_SETTING_PLANE_CRASHES_HELPTEXT :Set the chance of a random aircraft crash happening.{}Does not affect plane crashes due to too short runways.
Copy link
Member

@LordAro LordAro Mar 3, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

"to too", while correct, reads weirdly. Perhaps "Does not affect plane crashes on runways that are too short [for the plane]" ?

Copy link
Contributor

@Berbe Berbe Mar 3, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does not affect plane crashes on too short runways.

?

Copy link
Contributor

@nielsmh nielsmh Mar 3, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Large airplanes always have a risk of crashing when landing on small airports.

@LordAro
Copy link
Member

@LordAro LordAro commented Mar 3, 2019

For what it's worth, I do agree that "None" while still expecting crashes (even if it is users that screw up) is an issue - but that's a wording thing, rather than anything that needs changing functionally

@Eddi-z
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Eddi-z Eddi-z commented Mar 3, 2019

And I don't believe people see it as a bug.

You keep saying that, but i've never seen any of these hypothetical people. The overwhelming response (at least on this side of the bubble) has been: "Wait, i thought that is how it worked already"

@TrueBrain TrueBrain merged commit 3c94bdd into OpenTTD:master Mar 3, 2019
8 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

7 participants