Transport Tycoon Forums

Hello everyone, I wanted to share some results of my testing the train speeds. It is meant for huge maps so one could easier estimate the distances and time they take for different speeds. Don't know if this is common knowledge, but I bet someone might find this info useful. On biggest maps, 2000x2000, you must think carefully about how long the train will take to get to its destination and back to keep it in black numbers. Following should simplify it significantly:

The basic train with maximum speed 80 km/h takes exactly ONE MONTH to travel few over 80 squares of the map. Such a train takes two years to travel whole 2kx2k map from one corner to other (not diagonally) and 4 years to travel there and back rendering it useless for such long trips. As you can see, one square of the map is considered to be 1 km, so the speed of the train tells almost precisely, how many squares the train can go in one month at full speed.

Keeping this in mind and using basic math you can count how long the train can go per year to stay profitable. For our basic 80km/h train this means going some 1000 squares/kms (12*80=960) per year max. If the train does not need to wait long for getting loaded, which should definitely be the case on mainlines and long distances, then such a train can go in distance of roughly 450kms and back in one year, which is his effective maximum.

For very huge maps this means, that trains of speed around 80 km/h can go at most 1/4 of map to be effective. Trains of speed 160 km/h can go half map to maintain efficiency. Trains going over 200 are suitable for 2/3 to 3/4 of the map size. And only trains with speed of 320 and more can go whole map there and back in one year and thus remain efficient.

Hopefully I did not discover Americas with this and some of you will find it useful Happy and easier building!

EDIT: So the speed of the trains should be translated into SQUARES PER MONTH imho.

Why not let a train do its four year trip and bring a huge profit then? Sure ti will show messages about being lossy and the numbers will be red, but...who cares?

This applies even more for ships. Their extremely slow speeds and long loading times would render them almost useless with your philosophy (which especially with the multiplicator is not true).

It is translated to squares per month... just swap "km/h" for "sq/m"... job done.

I don't know, red numbers simply don't feel right to me. Having the train, which has profit once per 4 year is wierd. If the train lives for 12 years, it will generate income three times in its life. And frankly the income is not that huge as you may think. I have tried regular 80kmh train carrying some 300 tons of coal in distance of about 3/4 the biggest map (1700 squares). It took year and a half to get there and income was 150 000 euro...

But the biggest drawback is the service you provide. Having the industry being served once in 4 years means either it will get shut down soon or having tens of trains for doing the job. None of it being a very good option.

The philosophy behind this is choosing the right train for the right job. World-transport is definitely not the job for 80kmh train and even 300+ kmh trains would need to be employed in huge numbers to do the job properly.

What is the implication of this is maybe using transfer stations. Slow trains carrying the cargo to these at relatively low distances and from these the fast trains going the large distances. Also if you don't have fast trains available, the series of these transfer station could deliver the cargo over the large map while maintaining good profits and positive rating everywhere while employing moderate number of trains. But it might prove also not very profitable...

I simply don't like ignoring certain aspects of the game just because it's not suitable for me (negative profit). I like to build in a way which satisfy all, the huge distance delivery, positive profit, good service rating and my feel for doing the good job :d. Wasn't this the exact reason for including the transfer order?

And as for the ships it's truth, but I don't use ships unless I have, which I usually don't

2audigex: Exactly. Does it mean it is the common knowledge? I feel a bit ashamed I noticed it after so long time spent playing (Open)TTD

It'd be cool if the game didn't tell you about yearly profits but the average rate of profit in the long run.

So you start a service, it tells you about its yearly profit. But the next year in it takes into account the previous years profits and losses and divides by two, in the third year by three etc.

(Sum of (R1+R2+R3...Rn) - C*n)/n

Where R is Revenue and C is cost (cost is uniform isn't it) and n is the current year of operation.

or something

Better for larger maps, you could display both in the list so average rate of profit first and then right next to it yearly profit or however suits the user.

It would also be useful to get warnings to come up saying "train 72 hasn't been profitable for four years" which is more meaningful than telling me every second year that my train had negative profit when I expect it to.

It appears you are not aware that freight rates diminish with travel time. (The graphs button on openttd's toolbar has a graph for this).

Payoff = distance * freight rate

Hence, longer travel time can actually decrease revenue because for high travel times, the decrease in freight rate will have a larger effect than the increase in distance. Delivery times for maximum revenue vary by cargo type. For ores, it is about 5 months (between pickup and dropoff). For grain, livestock and passengers it is about 2 months. For other cargo types, it is in between.

From a financial point of view, it is therefore nonsense to have trains that take more than half a year to reach their destination.

Source: The attached spreadsheet, which uses the freight rate formula from the wiki.

Something's wrong with that graphical display. I just use the "cargo payment rates" from the game and this is way too different looking.

According to that the longer I take to deliver livestock the more I'll get/unit delivered

Also why am I paid zero dollars for very fast deliveries...?

Also you're not taking into account that I get more money for distance. So yeah its taking me longer but I'm delivering longer distances too.

Put this into your calculations. For example put in one distance unit/day

See what happens.

You'll see it can make a lot of financial sense to deliver long distances

I know there is a balance point between track length and train speed where you get the most profit. I've never bothered to calculate the distance, but I've experienced it.

Ever,

In fact, I do consider distance. You misinterpret the graph, which shows income per delivery, not per square. (It assumes delivery distance = delivery time, i.e. a constant travel speed of 80km/h.)

That's why it looks different, and that's why it starts at 0, because 0 delivery time means 0 distance, which means 0 income.



No, I don't.

Ok what if my train goes two squares for every unit of time?

Then will you see?

even at double speed, 0 time passed means 0 tiles travelled and thus 0 payment. the peak of profit moves, though.

I wasn't referring to the zero payment, I understood that as soon as he said he took distance into account.

I was thinking at a certain speed the distance multiplier will increase faster than the late penalty and you'll get more and more money the further and further something is.

What's not good about using multiple trains to service a route? If anything, needing only one is not good - if I was getting a train to London, and just missed it, I wouldn't want to wait nearly 9 hours (!) for it to get there and come back so I could get on.

Why don't you just add some transfer stations.
That way the trains get a steady income as soon as the first load arrives.

Then you were thinking wrong.

Speed is a mere multiplier to income, and hence does not change the delivery time for maximum income. (It does increase the distance for maximum income, of course).