Topic: Content and looks of the new "cheap in-game help"

61 — 70 of 100 Posts « previous 1 2 … 5 6 7 8 9 10 next »

Astuur Topic Opener Joined: 2009-02-28, 10:08 Posts: 733 One Elder of Players Location: Frankfurt / Germany	Posted at: 2012-02-29, 07:58 Wonderful, folks! Thank you so much. I'll post my files on launchpad then, but keep any discussion to this thread? I'd wish someone could really enable uploading stuff to this site; Sirver is not opposing this idea - there simply is no one to do it atm. @Chuck -- The quotation marks and decimal delimiters were supposed to change automatically with the language --- it's clear, they didn't. I'll keep an eye on this, and hope you won't have to correct that anymore .... something I cannot guarantee for the commas - that's a point I'll really have to re-learn later. I've been talking English mostly in the last years, not writing, and if at all, nobody cared much about commata. (now I wonder how many comma mistakes I made in this sentence ) @Venatrix: Sorry, I forgot about changing backslashes to slashes; will do so next time. Yes, I think we need to concentrate on the short version for now (though I'd rather have both in the end). In the light of a recent bugreport status change, I have started to think about a "manual". The "in depth" versions are closer to a manual, but still miles away from what I'd call a proper manual. I simply discovered, that the content I'm trying to sell there gets close to what you'd expect in a manual. But the point is that it's much easier for me to do "short" and "long" simultaniously. So I'll keep on doing both, though the long version will not make it into a release now. Also, I'd like others to see the content from the long version and catch any necessary facts I may have omitted and factual mistakes. So if you're willing to care about the formatting, just ignore the "long" side for now, if you want. back to work Being no programmer, I apologize for all my suggestions that imply undue workload and for other misjudgements due to lack of expertise or relevant skills. I am on Win32, have no means to compile, and rely on prefabricated distributions (Thanks to Tino). Top Quote

Venatrix Joined: 2010-10-05, 20:31 Posts: 447 Tribe Member Location: Germany	Posted at: 2012-02-29, 09:14 chuckw wrote: By "system...", are you referring to Launchpad? If so, there is a link at the very bottom of the Bug Report page under the "Add Comment" box that allows you to "Add attachment or patch". Clicking on that opens a dialogue where you can browse to the file on your PC that you wish to upload. Yeah, I know But the last time I tried to attach a plain text file it was written in the comment instead of attached as an extra file. But I can try again. *Edit:* Right, did it. Maybe you just need a text in the comment field? Edited: 2012-02-29, 09:32 Two is the oddest prime. Top Quote

Venatrix Joined: 2010-10-05, 20:31 Posts: 447 Tribe Member Location: Germany	Posted at: 2012-02-29, 09:31 Astuur wrote: @Venatrix: Sorry, I forgot about changing backslashes to slashes; will do so next time. Yes, saw it. Its no problem, though. My text editor can replace them. But you can do without the /widelands/-part of the paths, its not necessary. The first version of the deep coal mine help is on Launchpad available. Note that you need the new version of the format_help.lua, too. Two is the oddest prime. Top Quote

Astuur Topic Opener Joined: 2009-02-28, 10:08 Posts: 733 One Elder of Players Location: Frankfurt / Germany	Posted at: 2012-02-29, 10:40 Hey Venatrix, that's actually a lot nicer than I thought Fine work! Good to have something like that at last. One addition, I'd suggest for the uttermost clarity: In the section workers/crew required: One chief miner or better One miner or better Being no programmer, I apologize for all my suggestions that imply undue workload and for other misjudgements due to lack of expertise or relevant skills. I am on Win32, have no means to compile, and rely on prefabricated distributions (Thanks to Tino). Top Quote

alocritani Joined: 2011-11-24, 13:03 Posts: 55 Likes to be here Location: Trento, Italy	Posted at: 2012-02-29, 13:34 Hi, I'm watching the pdf attached on launchpad: it's really nice but I have a suggestion and a request. Suggestion, first: I suggest adding "on average" in the sentences like "In a coal mine one coal is produced in 32.5 seconds". That's because you will obtain 2 coals every 65 seconds, and not 1 coal every 32.5 (how the sentence suggests). request now: how is the "efficiency ratio" (coal per food) you talk about in the "In depth - production" section calculated? Do you consider 1 meal = 2 snacks = 2 x 2 rations or do you use a more complex calculation? Another point: Do you know that some mines (like deeper coal mine) produce more coals than the number they remove from the mountains (like 5 coals removing only 4 coals)? (see here) Do you think this should be pointed out? Edited: 2012-02-29, 13:44 Top Quote

Venatrix Joined: 2010-10-05, 20:31 Posts: 447 Tribe Member Location: Germany	Posted at: 2012-02-29, 15:12 Astuur wrote: In the section workers/crew required: One chief miner or better and One miner or better Hmm Not sure, if it really is necessary. But I think, digits are better then words. alocritani wrote: Suggestion, first: I suggest adding "on average" in the sentences like "In a coal mine one coal is produced in 32.5 seconds". That's because you will obtain 2 coals every 65 seconds, and not 1 coal every 32.5 (how the sentence suggests). In that case I think its better to write down the real output. Thats less confusing, I think. Another advantage would be that we wouldnt have the problem if its 32.5 or 32,5. Another point: Do you know that some mines (like deeper coal mine) produce more coals than the number they remove from the mountains (like 5 coals removing only 4 coals)? (see here) Do you think this should be pointed out? I dont think so. IMO thats a detail that belongs to the long version (when we come to it) not to the short. Edited: 2012-02-29, 15:18 Two is the oddest prime. Top Quote

chuckw Joined: 2010-03-15, 16:23 Posts: 945 One Elder of Players Location: New York - USA	Posted at: 2012-02-29, 15:15 Venatrix wrote: Yeah, I know But the last time I tried to attach a plain text file it was written in the comment instead of attached as an extra file. But I can try again. Edit: Right, did it. Maybe you just need a text in the comment field? Possibly. Being wordy by nature, I've always put something in. Cheers! I see little people. Top Quote

Astuur Topic Opener Joined: 2009-02-28, 10:08 Posts: 733 One Elder of Players Location: Frankfurt / Germany	Posted at: 2012-02-29, 17:36 So, somebody is interested out there You're right Alocritani, first: I suggest adding "on average" in the sentences like "In a coal mine one coal is produced in 32.5 seconds". That's because you will obtain 2 coals every 65 seconds, and not 1 coal every 32.5 (how the sentence suggests). You shall have your "on average" :). The reasoning behind this is of course that I wanted a common basis for comparison. I plan to do this sort of "calculation" for every ware in the game, and 1 unit seemed the best for that. That is also, why I am not so fond of saying 2 coals in 65 seconds. request now: how is the "efficiency ratio" (coal per food) you talk about in the "In depth - production" section calculated? Well Calculation is a big word, it's more like an estimate. That is why I am not giving any numbers here. It is simple comparison. I had a feeling comparing apples to pears (i.e. pitta bread with meat or fish) was not really good, but wanted to give some relative measurement. The general idea is: a mine needs one item (fish, meat or bread) to produce 2 coals. (2/1=2) A deep mine needs three items (fish/meat plus bread plus beer) to produce 4 coals. (4/3=1,333...) A deeper mine needs three items (fish/meat plus bread plus strongbeer) to produce 5 coal. (5/3=1,666...) Since strong beer and beer are made of the same ingredients, I see them as equal quantity. Another point: Do you know that some mines (like deeper coal mine) produce more coals than the number they remove from the mountains (like 5 coals removing only 4 coals)? (see here) I guess you are relating to this conf file section: [work] sleep=40000 consume=meal animate=working 16000 mine=coal 2 100 10 produce=coal:2 animate=working 16000 mine=coal 2 100 10 produce=coal:3 I have seen that, but I am unsure, whether this really can be interpreted in this way. I cannot find any good documentation about the first mine= parameter. The mining section in the wiki is above my head mathematically. Do you think this should be pointed out? If your interpretation is correct, I'd have to explain, why a mine actually produces coal out of nothing. Not an easy job On the other hand I feel that withholding the info, that deeper mines will ultimately bring you more coal than any other type from not-so-techy players, is unfair. But yes, once somebody explains to me how to interpret this, I could well be a part of the "in depth" side. Being no programmer, I apologize for all my suggestions that imply undue workload and for other misjudgements due to lack of expertise or relevant skills. I am on Win32, have no means to compile, and rely on prefabricated distributions (Thanks to Tino). Top Quote

Astuur Topic Opener Joined: 2009-02-28, 10:08 Posts: 733 One Elder of Players Location: Frankfurt / Germany	Posted at: 2012-02-29, 18:06 @Venatrix: Astuur wrote: In the section workers/crew required: One chief miner or better and One miner or better Hmm Not sure, if it really is necessary. But I think, digits are better then words. Hehe, probably a matter of taste In German there is a rule of thumb to spell out numbers <12, if you're not acually doing maths with them but I have no idea about English. This work you have so boldy taken upon you is at least as much yours as it is mine, so - do what you like best. But I do admit, that I am indeed trying to keep that help file system a little away from numbers, equations and so forth, even when the vast majority of devs here would like it terse, exact and somewhat formal. My attitude is one of a story-teller, not a engineer, even though I have already lost that battle with the "at a glance" version Being no programmer, I apologize for all my suggestions that imply undue workload and for other misjudgements due to lack of expertise or relevant skills. I am on Win32, have no means to compile, and rely on prefabricated distributions (Thanks to Tino). Top Quote

alocritani Joined: 2011-11-24, 13:03 Posts: 55 Likes to be here Location: Trento, Italy	Posted at: 2012-02-29, 18:35 Astuur wrote: mine=coal 2 100 10 produce=coal:3 I have seen that, but I am unsure, whether this really can be interpreted in this way. I cannot find any good documentation about the first mine= parameter. If your interpretation is correct, I'd have to explain, why a mine actually produces coal out of nothing. Not an easy job I've found information about mine command here and yes, it seems that obtaining 3 coals while removing 2 from mountains has been done by purpose (see here) Edited: 2012-02-29, 18:47 Top Quote

61 — 70 of 100 Posts « previous 1 2 … 5 6 7 8 9 10 next »