Let's think about route statistics and control. ...
There already exist 2 tools for easier orders management
- Shared orders (with list of vehicles, that share the same shared orders, available from vehicles "Orders" form) and
- Vehicle groups.
But there is not the "Routes list" by now.
"Routes list" is list (collection) of any orders. Any orders may be objects of this list. Even empty orders, f.e. like mexicoshanty
show in routes_concept.png
This suggestion is natural, and such thing is presented in real life too. Because it is very usefull.
Here is an example, that makes perfectly clear, how usefull can be list of orders as objects, separate from vehicles:
We know, that planes in openttd crush sometimes.
Imagine, one of your aircrafts have some unique orders (route). Perhaps it's crushed and is deleted by system automatically over 2 weeks or 1 month. And you was not catching it to buy a new aircraft and copy them orders from crushed one. So result is: this orders (route) is lost. Now, if you deside to place a new aircraft onto this route (orders), you have to redefine all orders of this route again, one more time. If you can remember this at all. Else this route will be lost.
But, imagine, that routes (orders) are not childs of vehicles or aircrafts, but almost independent objects, assembled to the list. Then after crush of an aircraft, connected to route #1, you don't need to redefine orders of this route #1, but you simply assign a new aircraft (or any transport the same) to route #1 similar to copying orders or share them.
Any route can be orders or shared orders for 0 or 1, or more transport units
(any route is shared orders, but there can be 0 or 1, or more transport units, connected with it).
In fact, shared orders already are routes in this mining. But in openttd they are hiding under transport units, i.e. access to shared orders exist through transport unit's "Orders" menu, and there is no list of routes (shared orders) separately.
Here are some interesting options (especially, for airplane-based company), that could be possible with routes (shared orders), if they would be seperate objects, organized to list (or sequence with priorities):
1. Routes (orders|shared orders) could not be lost even if sometimes there is no transport units, that follow them.
2. Routes could keep instructions, what number of (how many) transport units have to share each route. For example, once some aircraft is crushed, system will replace it automatically with new one (if will have such instructions). If there are not enough transport units, then execute by sequence with priorities.
3. System could create routes automatically (if player ask it). For example, company have 10 airports in 10 cities (1 airport in each city). This is much more easy for player, if system automatically creates 45 routes to connect these airports each with all other (all combinations), instead of player have to do it manually.
// Combining 1, 2 & 3: system creates 45 empty routes and place on them aircrafts with order of descending potential of probable (expecting) future profit.