Realistic Signalling? (Aspects)

[crakinshot]

A lot of good work has already gone into the signalling problems of the original game. But, I never really liked the combo mechanism and I think its completely obsolete now we have PBS, and LR-PBS. Saying that, I still think a few things are lacking.

I think with LR-PBS you can essentially have a completely realistic signalling system, that is very easy to use AND uses the correct graphics, i.e. set the PBS signals to how they should be in UK signals. Specifically, the main thing lacking at the moment is aspect signalling. i.e.: 2-aspect, 3-aspect and 4-aspect signalling. (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_railway_signalling).

There is a very real need for something along these lines as OTTD, as it stands, is incredibility unrealistic in how trains slow-down. Essentially, if a train hits a red-light it stops almost instantly. What would be far more realistic is to have aspect-signalling so that trains would begin to slow down after passing 2-yellow and slow-down even more after 1-yellow. Once they hit a Green (or 2-yellow) they would speed back up again.

There are two reasons for doing this: A) it looks realistic, and B) it lets very fast trains not have to stop when behind a slow train.

Plus for junctions you could have feathers, maybe flashing yellows and shunting signals? Overkill...

[crakinshot]

You know it would be awesome. Purely aesthetic, appart from placing speed limits on trains while in the (caution) block.

[Gremnon]

Perhaps you'd care to explain what exactly I'm seeing,and what you're suggesting? Because it isn't clear to me.
If you want speed limits set by signals, I believe there's a patch somewhere in the Development forum, though it's probably outdated. I also believe there's another patch which gives the yellow 'caution' state, also outdated.

[crakinshot]

Basically mimicking how real (at least UK, although US and German have something simular) signals work. Basically, caution signals (1-yellow, 2-yellow, flashing yellows), in real life tells the driver to slow down. The feathers (while purely for looks in a game) indicate the route off the mainline to be taken. But generally, if a train approaches a junction it'll be given a caution first (flashing) so it can slow down. I've just never liked the fact that 200 mph trains stop near-instantly. What would be far more interesting would be to have proper breaking and a proper aspect signal system. So that if you set up the line incorrectly, trains can't slowdown soon enough, pass through dangers and crash.

Aye, I've seen a few bits here and there. But would be nice to combine everything properly and have a system where the signals represent information on chosen track ahead, if only for looks.

[2007Alain2007]

have not we got in trunk all redy some thing that speeds up and slows trains down can we add to that

and also just add 1 or 2 new signles states to signles

I think that should be an easy work around to this

but i am not a patcher myself

[Rubidium]

[quote="2007Alain2007"]I think that should be an easy work around to this/quote]In that case shut your mouth about any estimates how hard/much work it is going to be.

Adding a few signal states isn't as trivial as you think and you'd need to review all pathfinders and the code that updates the signalling before you can actually add the changed behaviour which means even more work. Not to mention that you'd need to make trains reserve a path ahead if you want signals to be green/yellow, which gives you a whole slurry of other problems *and* will slow down trains near busy junctions because they cannot reserve a path over the junction.

[belugas]

There are two reasons for doing this: A) it looks realistic, and B) it lets very fast trains not have to stop when behind a slow train.

1) That is really really really not an argument. TTD never was realistic, never was created with realism as a goal and hopefully never will. The unrealism of it gives a kind of gameplay that makes it stands out of the crowd. Adding realism jest makes it heavily boring
2) A good constructed network can easily prevent that. New signals are not really required. unless you want to aim at simplifying one of the only hard parts of the game...

My opinion. Which I'm entitled to share

[crakinshot]

hehe, that last comment made me laugh. I guess you lot get a lot of trolling on here?

Its true its a game, at the same time a lot of the work carried out (as I see it) has been to add more 'realistic' behaviours. PBS for example is far more closer to real life signalling (a block is locked). The fact is real life has had 100 years of trying to find the best solutions for railways...

What if you only have space for 2 lines? but its a busy line. Then you need the caution signals to allow trains to slow down and travel closer together, without stopping, and ultimately slowing the whole line down. Ultimately its a far more elegant (and easier) solution, rather than having 4-8 tracks. Don't you think?

Personally, I don't see the 'difficulty' argument is valid either. PBS makes the game far 'easier' as you don't need to use the combo's. Yet that was done, accepted and favoured. In fact with an aspect system you could actually add in difficulty. Make it so that trains don't stop instantly... i.e. if you don't set up signals properly, so trains have enough time to slow down; they will run through reds and crash. In this case making this more realistic, makes the game more harder to get it right.

Whats the point in making the Cargo vectors? make the game more interesting? just coincidental its closer to reality than the original game was?

[CommanderZ]

hehe, that last comment made me laugh. I guess you lot get a lot of trolling on here?

Its true its a game, at the same time a lot of the work carried out (as I see it) has been to add more 'realistic' behaviours. PBS for example is far more closer to real life signalling (a block is locked). The fact is real life has had 100 years of trying to find the best solutions for railways...

What if you only have space for 2 lines? but its a busy line. Then you need the caution signals to allow trains to slow down and travel closer together, without stopping, and ultimately slowing the whole line down. Ultimately its a far more elegant (and easier) solution, rather than having 4-8 tracks. Don't you think?

Personally, I don't see the 'difficulty' argument is valid either. PBS makes the game far 'easier' as you don't need to use the combo's. Yet that was done, accepted and favoured. In fact with an aspect system you could actually add in difficulty. Make it so that trains don't stop instantly... i.e. if you don't set up signals properly, so trains have enough time to slow down; they will run through reds and crash. In this case making this more realistic, makes the game more harder to get it right.

Whats the point in making the Cargo vectors? make the game more interesting? just coincidental its closer to reality than the original game was?

The only difficulty PBS removed was tediousness of signal construction - I use 3 - 5x less signals (or even less) than without PBS. Otherwise, planning correct PBS setups is often quite challenging task - but fun! Your feature would add unnecessary complexity that only a few would enjoy.

And that argument about ECS is pathethic - it is fan made modification, not an official release. And it is too hardcore for many players around here (which is where many experienced players meet), including me.

[Gremnon]

Perhaps slightly off-topic, but the ECS Vectors CAN be toned down, by only loading certain vectors. I don't always use them, but when I do, I leave out Vehicle and Agricultural Vectors, which makes a considerable difference.

On-topic again - something to consider crackinshot - it's not too hard (Believe me, I and many others have done it) to learn some C++ enough to start working with the OpenTTD Source code. What you might want to do is try that, and try writing a patch to do what you like. It'll take time, and patience, but if you want to see it in-game, and no one else is willing to, put out the effort, and who knows - maybe people will find it more useful when they can use it themselves, rather than read about it?

[crakinshot]

'Pathethic'? Really? Rather impolite.

"it is fan made modification, not an official release" - semantics, it changes the gameplay. It changes the gameplay from something that was unrealistic and simple to realistic and hard. Specifically, I was countering the argument that realism = easier, which, granted, can be the case, but most of the time not so.

"And it is too hardcore for many players around here (which is where many experienced players meet), including me." - and yet someone made it and some play it (at least parts of it). What are you saying, then, don't do something if the majority don't want it? I'm sure a lot of features where added and only after the fact did people enjoy them.

Anyhow, I do think realism plays a role in this game. How many people actually play in the toyland world? Personally, I tried it once 10 years ago and never since. I think its safe to say that its a valid point for most people (it says so in the wiki). But why so? There is no difference in the game-play (as far as I'm aware) only the visual look, which with toy land, is completely unrealistic. So, case and point, realism does play a role. Of course, there are varying degrees of realism and I agree, a game as real as life, is not fun.

Gremnon - Yeah, I am a C/C++ programmer; I've grabbed the trunk and I'm currently looking through the code in the evenings to see what does what, where and when. I mean I didn't post this to 'ask' for it, I'll do it myself. Just see if anyone else was interested/had done something similar or was working on it. I'm aware of the advance signals stuff, so I'll take a gander at that code and the LR-PBS.

[61653]

i'd be interested, leads onto another suggestion a was gonna make, about priority of trains at major junctions/stations... if express trains could be given a [class 1] "headcode", and local stopping services a [class 2], to allow priority of entry to the signalled section of a junction; this would prevent fast trains getting stuck behind slower ones:

National Transport, 30th Jun 2945#1.png

(263.74 KiB) Downloaded 1 time

[lawton27]

i'd be interested, leads onto another suggestion a was gonna make, about priority of trains at major junctions/stations... if express trains could be given a [class 1] "headcode", and local stopping services a [class 2], to allow priority of entry to the signalled section of a junction; this would prevent fast trains getting stuck behind slower ones:

National Transport, 30th Jun 2945#1.png

Do you mean like this:


Trains enter (one way track)>----->----------->---------class one trains onely signal------->----------->------------
__________________________________________\----class two trains onely signal------->----------->------------