FIRS Industry Replacement Set - Development

[GuilhermeJK]

Extreme is the only mode I play. I dream one day of all the industries from other modes to be available in Extreme... (I am aware of the limitations, but I still can dream, right).

P.S. Please don't kill Extreme (as in remove it from the face of Earth)

[NekoMaster]

I hope extreme doesnt die because thats what i use when playing a serious game. I find the "basic" industries a bit too basic for my tastes, I'm always wanting something more from the other economies and its too late to change stuff once you have a game running for a while.

[PeteB]

Extreme is the only mode I play. I dream one day of all the industries from other modes to be available in Extreme... (I am aware of the limitations, but I still can dream, right).

P.S. Please don't kill Extreme (as in remove it from the face of Earth)

I'm with you here, the more industries the better!

Pete

[acs121]

Extreme Must Die

So the FIRS Extreme economy will get reworked in the next year or so.

I played only 3 games in Extreme (and never with other economies) as the FIRS industries don't look very good with ISR stations, and CHIPS has only a limited choice of tiles, may they be track or non-track.

What do you like about it?

1 : There are a lot of industries, and i really like it. At least, you haven't made all industry chains in 15-20 years unlike default industries, or ECS.
2 : The tertiary industries are numberous, and so it's a lot of fun creating secondary lines to them.

What don't you like about it?

I don't like it because you don't have the Steeltown industries. I really miss them, i'd love having them in Extreme.

[Emperor Jake]

I almost always play Extreme, I like because it has a wide variety of industries and doesn't focus on a specific chain too much, which allows the player to focus on building up one chain, or have the option to diversify into all of them. I don't mind the generic cargos like "supplies" because it frees up precious cargo slots for other things.

What I don't like about Extreme is the mechanic where you can magically import and export stuff like bauxite through the docks. IMO Extreme should be a completely self-sufficient economy like in the older versions, so you can simulate a whole world economy. However the import/export docks do work well for the other economies because they focus on a specific region, and are used on maps that represent smaller regions that interact with an invisible world beyond the map edges.

[leifbk]

Extreme Must Die

So the FIRS Extreme economy will get reworked in the next year or so.

Please, please don't mess around too much with it. IMO, it's the only economy worth playing.

What do you like about it?

I like the open-endedness of it; there are lots of cargos where you have multiple choices for what you want to do with them. Like wood, which you can take to a paper mill, or you can take it to a sawmill and then take the lumber to a lumber yard or a furniture factory. I appreciate that kind of freedom a lot.

What don't you like about it?

Like Emperor Jake, I don't like the ports and the bulk terminals. The Extreme should be self-sufficient. And I don't like that MFSP/Packaging has been taken away from several industries.

And personally, I would very much like to see the option to have an output level similar to Firs 1. More than 100 units per month is too much for land transport before 1860. I'll rather crank up production with supplies when i've got the means to haul it.

[kamnet]

Much like most who have responded, I like Extreme because of the wide variety of cargo to connect, it's complex but not complicated.

And, much like many who have responded, I don't like the ports... at least, I didn't until I sat and thought about it for a bit just now. I've changed my mind on this, and I see the merit in having a place to exchange items you may be able to easily overproduce with items that are more difficult to produce. Personally, I'd like to see them reworked as "trading post" in Extreme and have it so that they can be placed anywhere, and maybe just a small 2x2 tile.

Over the last few years, I've grown to not care about the building supplies chain. It just feels like a place to dump stuff and create easy money, and it just seems like it's in my way more than anything. OTOH, is that any different than the power plant, which I'm glad is finally in FIRS and have long advocated for? I think maybe this would be better if the Builder's Yard disappeared, because you have the Hardware Store which accepts the same supplies. Or maybe get rid of Hardware Store and have Builder's Yard just appear both inside and outside of towns (I don't remember how it behaves now, honestly)

If, by chance, you were looking to add a new cargo, I think eliminating Alcohol and substituting Food for the Brewery output would be fine.

[Wahazar]

I think maybe this would be better if the Builder's Yard disappeared, because you have the Hardware Store which accepts the same supplies. Or maybe get rid of Hardware Store and have Builder's Yard just appear both inside and outside of towns

I must disagree. Having alternative industry is handy in case of "one industry per town" setting, and such setting is useful to keep industry density low.

[piratescooby]

I think with all the comments Extreme has to stay , I love Extreme apart from the Bulk terminal , Extreme should be self contained , my suggestion would be to Import produce from say Steel town/Tropics,Arctic ,Export produce that would be accepted would be the produce that say the Arctic would accept ,for example import fur , this would be accepted by the in theory clothing industry producing goods [ I would dump the furniture factory ] , export food ,this could be wheat,grains flour ,meat and so on .
My wish list with Firs [ probably 10 years on ] would be to have 2 other Extremes , Arctic and Tropic . I love the Arctic but its missing a bit of this and a bit of that .
Enough said , look forward to future updates , no matter how long it takes , Keep up the good work and remember the family comes first , computers second .All the best .

[andythenorth]

Thanks for responses so far.

Comments:

1. Lack of theme/concept
My primary objection to Extreme is that it lacks a clear theme/concept. It grew organically, with no idea beyond 'add lots of interesting industries and cargos'. That can be a fine way to do things in general, but specifically I don't like some of the results for FIRS Extreme.

2. Imbalance in cargos
Some cargos are super-generic, for example Chemicals and Goods. This is probably fine, but others are far too specific, for example Wool and Sugar Beet. http://bundles.openttdcoop.org/firs/rel ... ml#extreme

3. Engineering Supplies too dominant
In my games, most of the network is dedicated to producing Engineering Supplies, which are used to boost primary output...to get more Engineering Supplies. That's maybe fine, but it's not an intentional goal.

4. Cowardice about time-based industry changes
An original goal of FIRS was "Industries change over time. Some types of industries will close and disappear from the map at certain points in history, others will become available."

This just doesn't work in OpenTTD. Industries can't be reliably closed and opened in a way that produces satisfying gameplay.

• There is insufficient control over industry closure and opening at the newgrf level
• I no longer support this as a gameplay goal

FIRS still has residual open-date limits for some industries, and these are more common in Extreme. Problems with these:

• It's a flawed idea that can cause chains to be missing from the map (depending on start date)
• Dates aren't realistic enough for players who seek more realism
• Dates are irritating for players who seek less realism (or none)

I haven't tackled the open dates because someone's going to complain, and I'll have to read it eh

So FIRS Extreme.

[leifbk]

My primary objection to Extreme is that it lacks a clear theme/concept.

I think that's exactly what makes Extreme interesting. It's a lot like RL, actually

I'd rather ease up some of the constraints on the other themes, to give the user more choices.

Industries can't be reliably closed and opened in a way that produces satisfying gameplay.

That ought to be a request to the OTTD devs, then. It's already in the game, sort of, as the default Oil wells close in the 60s. I believe that is hard-coded, but should perhaps be replaced with a generalised hook available to NewGRF coders.

[andythenorth]

believe that is hard-coded, but should perhaps be replaced with a generalised hook available to NewGRF coders.

There is full control over closure per-industry, but it doesn't get the result you might expect. The typical outcome of the simplest solution is that all industries of a certain type close together on the trigger month.

Alternative approaches like randomised time offsets don't tend to work in the way expected (because when people say 'random' they tend to not mean mathematically random, but rather, one-at-a-time-in-random-order). Nor does considering other factors like production or service quality help much, as that runs into very subjective choices about what the desired pattern is.

A lot of time has been expended on this, with no decent result

The current thought is that GameScript would be the better solution, but GameScript can't close industries, nor can it easily understand a specific newgrf.

[Wahazar]

There is full control over closure per-industry, but it doesn't get the result you might expect. The typical outcome of the simplest solution is that all industries of a certain type close together on the trigger month.

Why force to close obsolete industries?
There is already closure mechanism in openttd - if certain industry is not served, it would be closed (only one survivor will persist).
FIRS issue with obsolete industries was, that once given industry is served, player is not interested with stopping such service.
My proposal is: make "old" industries production ineffective, for example 1 t of product from 10t of input.
As an result, player are free to choice - keep resources flow to an old industry, or abandon it and redirect to the new one.
Additionally, such approach would fix issues with early age vehicles, which cannot handle large amounts of modern industries.

If speaking about primary industry productivity - it can be tuned during game progress by using two kind of boosters - simply booster (slightly increased productivity) and advanced booster (together with simply booster: high productivity), but advanced booster is available when appropriate industry becomes available.

A attached chart with my vision, how Extreme FIRS should look like, to illustrate idea with two boosters.
For example, sand pit have very low idle production, if TOOL booster is delivered, production will be higher, but very high production requires both TOOL and VEHI to be delivered. Whereas TOOL can be always obtained from Smithy Forge (or more effectively from Foundry), VEHI are not available before XIX century.

By the way, some cargoes are too much general and therefore ambiguous - both for players or vehicle grf makers.
What are FMSP? Tractors produced in lime kiln or fertiliser from Smithy Forge?
What are RFPR? Organic chemistry produced from oil and used in aluminium plant?
What are ENSP? Horseshoes made from petrol or vehicles made from impregnated wood?
ECS cargoes are better defined in my opinion.

[kamnet]

1. Lack of theme/concept
My primary objection to Extreme is that it lacks a clear theme/concept. It grew organically, with no idea beyond 'add lots of interesting industries and cargos'. That can be a fine way to do things in general, but specifically I don't like some of the results for FIRS Extreme.

I can see this. Perhaps, then, think of Extreme as being a theme of "anything goes", and continue your focus on expanding your other themes? Let Extreme be your playground to try new things, and then use that to build or expand the others?

2. Imbalance in cargos
Some cargos are super-generic, for example Chemicals and Goods. This is probably fine, but others are far too specific, for example Wool and Sugar Beet. http://bundles.openttdcoop.org/firs/rel ... ml#extreme

I don't think I'd be upset if you made some things less specific in Extreme, and then make things more specific in the other themes. I think you did a particularly masterful job of creating a super-specific theme in Steeltown.

3. Engineering Supplies too dominant
In my games, most of the network is dedicated to producing Engineering Supplies, which are used to boost primary output...to get more Engineering Supplies. That's maybe fine, but it's not an intentional goal.

I think this is more of an issue with individual game play styles. Initially I will focus on creating that loop, but once I get a couple of industry chains up and running and I've got profit flowing, I tend to not try to boost engineering supply production. I might only touch it if I have some very remote industries that just happen to be close to an untapped engineering supply source. With that said, I think cutting down on the reliance of engineering supplies wouldn't be a bad thing.

4. Cowardice about time-based industry changes
An original goal of FIRS was "Industries change over time. Some types of industries will close and disappear from the map at certain points in history, others will become available." This just doesn't work in OpenTTD. Industries can't be reliably closed and opened in a way that produces satisfying gameplay.

I'm okay with the unpredictability and irreliability of industry closures. I agree with McZapkie that the best solution is if somebody wants an industry to close, stop serving it or don't serve it.

Here's a question - can you have it so that a particular industry (say, smithy forge) is no longer automatically built past a particular time, but can be funded by players at anytime?

[andythenorth]

Here's a question - can you have it so that a particular industry (say, smithy forge) is no longer automatically built past a particular time, but can be funded by players at anytime?

Yes. Some of the location restrictions work this way already. It's on my roadmap for FIRS.

There are a couple of approaches that could be taken:

• Disable all date restrictions on a parameter, for both player and OpenTTD
• Always allow player funding, regardless of date restriction

Also, instead of hard yes/no date limits, industry construction probability can be adjusted by date, so rather than preventing industries before/after certain dates, they could be made more or less likely to be constructed; this could apply to any of map-gen time, in-game random generation, and/or player funding.

However probability is relative for all industries in an economy (changing the probability of one type affects the probability for all other types). Probabilities that change over time are prone to unintended consequences and it's pretty much impossible to test for (far too many variables) Doesn't rule them out, but they might make a mess eh.

[acs121]

Actually, that Engineering Supplies loop also exists in ECS with Vehicles. Still, we should make Steeltown integrated to Extreme, to me.
But there's things that don't make any sense : why would oil wells need ENSP ? That's one stupid thing in FIRS Extreme.

[Alberth]

There is already closure mechanism in openttd - if certain industry is not served, it would be closed (only one survivor will persist).

Only for default industries. NewGRF industries are fully controlled by the NewGRF after opening them. In other words, the NewGRF initiates the closure.

Unfortunately, there is no mechanism to let the NewGRF know from OpenTTD that it should close some old industries.[/quote]

[andythenorth]

Actually, that Engineering Supplies loop also exists in ECS with Vehicles. Still, we should make Steeltown integrated to Extreme, to me.

You're welcome to make a proposal about how that could be achieved. http://bundles.openttdcoop.org/firs/rel ... ml#extreme
http://bundles.openttdcoop.org/firs/rel ... #steeltown

But there's things that don't make any sense : why would oil wells need ENSP ? That's one stupid thing in FIRS Extreme.

Pipe, machine parts, frac sand, drilling mud, fuel, trucks, pipeline inspection machinery, welding gear, tools, roughnecks. Rig supply can be a substantial business, even on land.

[Wahazar]

There is already closure mechanism in openttd - if certain industry is not served, it would be closed (only one survivor will persist).

Only for default industries. NewGRF industries are fully controlled by the NewGRF after opening them. In other words, the NewGRF initiates the closure.

You are right. I should wrote "There is already closure mechanism in FIRS..." (check_secondary_closure.pnml :)

[leifbk]

There is already closure mechanism in openttd - if certain industry is not served, it would be closed (only one survivor will persist).

Only for default industries. NewGRF industries are fully controlled by the NewGRF after opening them. In other words, the NewGRF initiates the closure.

You are right. I should wrote "There is already closure mechanism in FIRS..." (check_secondary_closure.pnml

I don't see quite why the same mechanism that is used for closure of unserved secondary industries, can't be used for obsolete primary and secondary industries.