Station ratings

[L. Spooner Inc]

The variables used for station ratings remain static no matter what year or map you're using. The net result is that certain scenarios, conditions, or starting years have a huge impact on your ability to maintain decent ratings. For instance, if you're playing in an arctic map with low resources, you start with really slow trains and long distances to transport goods. Station ratings are low as a result, and there's absolutely nothing you can do to fix it. Eventually you'll have enough money to buy statues, but by that time you'll have slightly faster trains anyway and it's not as big a problem.

It's particularly infuriating if you're playing certain scenarios. For instance, trying to do a vehicles-only scenario in a sub-tropical map with really long transport distances means station ratings are so low it's nearly impossible to keep primary resources active. They dry up and die with absolutely nothing you can do about it.

Leaving aside game mechanics, it makes absolutely no sense for a station to be rated poorly because of the slowness of the trains when you literally have only one single (very slow) train model available.

[Eddi]

while speed of a train has an impact on station rating, by far the most important factor is how long ago the last train left. so instead of few long trains, try to have many shorter trains, and use "full load" orders, ideally so that by the time one train is full, the next one is already arriving.

if you keep that in mind, even the slowest trains can maintain a good (ca. 66%) rating.

[L. Spooner Inc]

if you keep that in mind, even the slowest trains can maintain a good (ca. 66%) rating.

Good rating won't keep a resource alive, especially when you're dealing with something starting low, like gold or diamonds. Just a couple of "bad rolls" in a row is enough to shut it down. Either the probability of production dropping needs to be lower or there has to be some way to increase ratings. I routinely ensure that I have enough trains (or trucks) running that everything is 100% picked up, but that alone isn't enough to keep resources alive. Again, it's fine when you're starting a standard game in a standard map, but with low resources in a harder map, the balance is off. There needs to be some dynamic station rating rather than just static numbers.

[_dp_]

How is any of that a problem? You chose this "harder" setting yourself and now are trying to change the game to make it "easier"? Besides, if you micro enough you get 80% rating even with snails as a transport (51+16+13) which is already enough to maximize production chances. And statues are dirt cheap, with them you don't even have to renew your vehicles. But even with 100% rating there is always a chance for an industry to drop production and close, you can't save every single one that's already on its last legs.

[kaaremai001]

I agree with OP. I think generally the station rating calculations are wrong.

I know that many hate when comparing openttd to reality, but I'll do it anyway. In real life it makes sense to have long trains instead of several small trains for cargo. The situation is different with passengers of course.

I think that ratings should be based on a moving average of how large a part of the monthly production has been transported. It shouldn't really matter much if you move it from a to b a lot of times in small chunks or fewer times but in large chunks. Again, compared to reality, it makes more sense economically to transport more, but fewer times.

[LaChupacabra]

There are add-ons like FIRS 1 or Fixes that change the impact of the station idle time on its rating. You can probably change also the impact of vehicle speed by newGRF. I don't see the need to make changes to the game itself. You "just" need to create the right add-on.