Reversing engines

[Purno]

[EDIT]Split from Shunting topic. It can be considered as a different issue.[/EDIT]

Eh... you could also see shunting as somehow else;

I mean, shuntig could be like a train reversing, which means in these cases;
- Engine + Coaches: Engine needs to decouple the coaches and drive to the other side of the train.
- Steam engine + Coaches: Engine needs to be turned on a turntable too.
- Engine + Steering Cab or MU: Nothing, the train can just drive backwards, tho the driver has got to get to the other side of the train.

Which would answer your questions this way;

OK, so shunting would be a special order in the order list. Then I assume you need to tell it what to shunt:

• - which train needs shunting

The train which got the order of shunting c.q. reversing.

- which wagons in the train need shunting

None, only the engine.

- where are decoupled wagons stored

Right where they arrived, they aren't really stored actually.

[/list]
Especially the latter is important because you need a free track at all times to allow shunting. If you don't have a free track the station will be blocked in no time.

End-of-line-stations could have a turntable and free track built in. These kind of stations could be a seperate station class, or could be a part of a station which can be attached to a station, just like (O)TTD(P) got several station parts of which a station can be built up (like a station building, for example).

IMO, this is the most interesting part of shunting, which doesn't make the game too complicated, both code-wise as gameplay-wise. Plus, it's a lot better (more realistic) than a train just inverting itself like in TTD. Besides, since it takes time to reverse a train, people probably would prefer ro-ro-stations and MUs. Let's say it gives them an extra characteristic which determines the players choice of which train to buy.



Shunting itself, as really storing coaches on some sort of trainyard, sounds too complicated for me. Both code-wise as gameplay-wise. I don't think we really should do such a thing.

[Purno]

Some IRC discussion about both shunting and reversing. It contains some interesting ideas/facts/comments:

<Purno> why does everyone seem to ignore my suggestion for shunting?
<Hyronymus> it's impractible, like the entire idea
<Purno> whatcha mean?
<Purno> impractible?
<Hyronymus> "onhandig"
<Hyronymus> or "bewerkelijk"
<Purno> why would it be onhandig?
<Purno> it's more handig than the other ideas of shuntig
<Purno> since my idea doesn't need special orders or special shunting engines
<Purno> besides, it doesn't need a trainyard to store carraiges
<Hyronymus> no, instead you have to build your stations with shunting in the back of your head
<Hyronymus> and how are shunting engines supposed to deal with signals
<Hyronymus> :s
<Purno> eh... just like any other train?
<Hyronymus> I'm afraid they'll trap themselves
<Purno> whatcha mean?
<Hyronymus> but... the solution might be in what you suggested: a special station class
<Hyronymus> maybe you can make "shunting stations" that always come with 1 track dedicated for shunting
<Purno> all you need is a spare track (which is just like a platform but then without a platform (bare track tiles in TTD)) and a turntable which can be handled like a depot.
<Hyronymus> realisticly, turntables are placed outside stations
<Purno> I mean, you don't need a shunting track, you could just wait until one of the other platforms gets available...
<Purno> Hyronymus , so are depots...
<Purno> jsut outside a station.
<Purno> and only steam engines need to be reversed...
<Hyronymus> plus: changing direction of a steamer takes more
<Purno> like?
<Hyronymus> switches on station track
<Purno> you mean "wissels"?
<Hyronymus> yes
<Hyronymus> to move away from "behind" the train
<Purno> since when do we need to worry about the direction of a switch...
<Hyronymus> well, the engine can only use the switch if the other track is clear
<Purno> thats like any other train...
<Hyronymus> yes, but it means your train needs time
<Hyronymus> maybe a lot of time
<Purno> whatcha mean?
<Purno> perhaps it's easier to talk dutch...
<Hyronymus> no
<Hyronymus> assume you have 2 trains entering a 2-track station
<Purno> yeah
<Hyronymus> and both need to change direction
<Purno> bad planning
<Hyronymus> you then have a deadlock
<Purno> yep
<Purno> but isn't there always a risk of a deadlock?
<Hyronymus> no assume you have 1 train servicing a route
<Hyronymus> you then always need a doubletrack station + turntable
<XeryusTC> Purno: with more trains than platforms, yes
<Hyronymus> for steamers
<Purno> Hyronymus , only for end stations
<XeryusTC> same amount of trains as platforms, small
<Hyronymus> *now assume
<Hyronymus> how do people connect industries in (O)TTD, Purno
<Hyronymus> always end stations
<Purno> ro-ro sometimes
<Hyronymus> how realistic is that
<Purno> dunno
<Purno> but it adds another gameplay choice...
<Hyronymus> ro-ro is a work around the ill economic model and even iller signals
<Purno> one can use terminal stations, but it requires shunting, in any form
<Purno> I mean, if you want shunting, my idea is the most simple model for it...
<Purno> the other ideas only make it worse...
<XeryusTC> hmm
<XeryusTC> i dont see how turning trains around can be called shunting
<Hyronymus> another issue: decoupling trains
<Purno> XeryusTC , well, they need to reverse, they need to drive to the other side of the train
<Hyronymus> you decouple 1 entity of which the engine has the orders
<Hyronymus> then you recouple
<Purno> that's what I see as a good replacement of that shunting idea
<Hyronymus> how do you make sure coaches + engine form 1 entity again
<Purno> and as a good solution to make a train turn around realstically
<XeryusTC> shunting = putting different wagons after an engine than it had previously
<Hyronymus> driving to the other side of the train isn't enough for steamers
<Purno> XeryusTC , then you get a RRT model
<Hyronymus> and XeryusTC is right
<Purno> but where do the wagons stay?
<Hyronymus> thát is shunting
<Purno> ok, Hyronymus , could you split of my idea in a seperate topic instead?
* XeryusTC doesn't know if Purno gets the concept of shunting
<Purno> probably not
<Purno> but shunting sucks
<XeryusTC> trains turning around would be deliver some nice eye candy
<Purno> I mean, if you would have a train carrying coal from A to B and ore from B to A...
<Purno> that's what you want, isn'it?
<XeryusTC> Purno: actually it doesn't, you can make a train that picks up cargo A from station A, move it to station B, get different cariages there, take cargo B and take it to station A and change back to other wagons too
<Hyronymus> http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?t=28331
* XeryusTC is writing an essay on smart signals vs smart trains
<Purno> XeryusTC , wait hang on...
<XeryusTC> it feels like that anyway
<Hyronymus> but where do the wagons stay then, XeryusTC
<XeryusTC> Hyronymus: they get teleported to the other station again by asgard technology...
<Purno> if a train has type 1 wagons from A to B, and type 2 wagons from B to A. Then station A gets full of type 2 wagons, and station B gets full of type 1 wagons.
<Hyronymus> we voted against that
<XeryusTC> you could have a train which shunts wagons between different stations
<Hyronymus> and not clogging your network?
<Purno> XeryusTC , and that is better than TTDs model?
<XeryusTC> so it can automaticly balance wagons need between x stations
<Purno> shunters don't transport carraiges, they only shunt
<Purno> shunters are slow, they only drive on the trainyard
<Hyronymus> surely that's realistic but we're making a game
<Purno> not at the whole network
<Purno> indeed
<XeryusTC> true
<Purno> that whole shunting idea is too much, IMO.
<Hyronymus> that's why I'm against shunting
* XeryusTC gets caught up in the train simulator stuff
<XeryusTC> heh
<Hyronymus> reversing trains can be done
<XeryusTC> i voted against shunting btw
<XeryusTC> but i made the discussion interesting anyway
<Purno> Hyronymus , thanks for the split
<Hyronymus> might need to modify the message a bit, Purno
<Purno> wrote an edit on top of the message, making clear it's a split

[aarona]

Okay, so Passengers have destinations.
Does cargo?
If we dont go with shunting we are left with two options (that I can see)

1. An abtract transfer method.
2. Magic.

Abstract:
Mail is easy, they can be sorted in a mail distribution centre.
Goods are easy, there are forklifts and cranes.
Livestock can be mustered.
etc etc

Are there any other options?

Also, getting a train to get to the front of a train is called "running around" the train. Steam engines require turntables or some track which looks like the greek omega symbol (two parallel tracks and a circle to connect them).

[Purno]

Okay, so Passengers have destinations.
Does cargo?
If we dont go with shunting we are left with two options (that I can see)

1. An abtract transfer method.
2. Magic.

Abstract:
Mail is easy, they can be sorted in a mail distribution centre.
Goods are easy, there are forklifts and cranes.
Livestock can be mustered.
etc etc

Are there any other options?

Eh... what does this got to do with reversing a train?

Also, getting a train to get to the front of a train is called "running around" the train. Steam engines require turntables or some track which looks like the greek omega symbol (two parallel tracks and a circle to connect them).

True, but that'd require a lot of space, I imagine.

[aarona]

Eh... what does this got to do with reversing a train?

It's about realism. So in one case we turn the train around using spare track and turntable and in the other we just do it in a magical way. I know its not a simulation per se, but we can do better than magic.

True, but that'd require a lot of space, I imagine.

Yes it does. They do it IRL.

Locked until the DD discussion arrives at this issue.