Reduction in the capacity of one block of stop/port/airport?

Got an idea for OpenTTD? Post it here!

Moderator: OpenTTD Developers

Post Reply
krohmalny
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 26
Joined: 05 Mar 2022 10:58
Contact:

Reduction in the capacity of one block of stop/port/airport?

Post by krohmalny »

Hi

Does anyone know if it’s possible to limit the capacity of a single cell for a bus stop, port, airport or train platform?

At the moment, I believe the limit is 4096 units or tonnes per cell of any type of product, and it would be interesting if this value were, say, around 100. That would necessitate expanding the platforms, even if only with decorative elements.

Kind regards :)
User avatar
odisseus
Chairman
Chairman
Posts: 828
Joined: 01 Nov 2017 21:19

Re: Reduction in the capacity of one block of stop/port/airport?

Post by odisseus »

The limit is actually 32768 items of cargo per station. This limit currently does not depend on the number of station tiles, but I like this idea.
krohmalny
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 26
Joined: 05 Mar 2022 10:58
Contact:

Re: Reduction in the capacity of one block of stop/port/airport?

Post by krohmalny »

odisseus wrote: 24 Apr 2026 17:11 The limit is actually 32768 items of cargo per station. This limit currently does not depend on the number of station tiles, but I like this idea.
I'm wondering if it's even doable. I use SPI 1.32 on JGRPP and there is a limit of a 4096-ish per tile. I don't know which of these GRFs do that, but if so, maybe it can be changed...
peter1138
OpenTTD Developer
OpenTTD Developer
Posts: 1874
Joined: 30 Mar 2005 09:43

Re: Reduction in the capacity of one block of stop/port/airport?

Post by peter1138 »

As odisseus wrote, the actual cargo capacity of a station is not affected by the number of tiles.

However, some NewGRF stations (a vanishingly small number) use the "numlittlesets"/"numlotssets" NewGRF feature to disable cargo waiting on a tile. The top range of that is capped at 4095. This only affects visualisation of the cargo at the station for that tile, and does not affect the capacity of the station itself.

Most NewGRF station sets using this feature will also set the station general flags that "distribute" the cargo over the size of the station, so each tile only only "sees" a smaller proportion of the waiting cargo.

But again, that's only for visuals, it does not affect capacity of the station.
He's like, some kind of OpenTTD developer.
krohmalny
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 26
Joined: 05 Mar 2022 10:58
Contact:

Re: Reduction in the capacity of one block of stop/port/airport?

Post by krohmalny »

peter1138 wrote: 25 Apr 2026 07:30 As odisseus wrote, the actual cargo capacity of a station is not affected by the number of tiles.

However, some NewGRF stations (a vanishingly small number) use the "numlittlesets"/"numlotssets" NewGRF feature to disable cargo waiting on a tile. The top range of that is capped at 4095. This only affects visualisation of the cargo at the station for that tile, and does not affect the capacity of the station itself.

Most NewGRF station sets using this feature will also set the station general flags that "distribute" the cargo over the size of the station, so each tile only only "sees" a smaller proportion of the waiting cargo.

But again, that's only for visuals, it does not affect capacity of the station.
JGRPP 0.70.2
SPI 1.32

I ran a little experiment. I set up a dozen or so oil fields and gave them time for the port to fill up with oil. The port has 2 slots, so the maximum loading capacity is about 8,200,000 liters of oil according to these GRFs (one of them). Once the port was full, I waited long enough for it to have the chance to overflow about six times.

The port filled up quickly, but when it started overflowing to around 12 000 000 litres, the amount of waiting cargo dropped to around 8 200 000 litres. This happened 6–7 times: 12M -> 8M, then again overflowing to 12M and instant reduction to 8M and so on.

Then I sent out 12 ships, each with a capacity of 2,160,000 liters. If the overflowing liters of oil were hidden in the background/not visible, all the ships should have been loaded, since the amount of invisible/hidden overflown oil would have been sufficient. However, if the oil actually disappears (and this limit isn’t just a visual/decorative element), about 4 ships should fill up.

The latter happened: 4 ships filled up, a bit of the fifth one, and the oil ran out. This means that the capacity limit actually works (it’s not just a visual effect in this case), but I have no idea which GRF it’s coded in, and I’m a lousy programmer (I can open a DVD drive tray with a .bat file, but I’m a fast learner).

I wonder if it’s possible to influence this parameter at all in this JGR or SPI, or if we can create a separate GRF for it. I will do my best to figure it out, I will also accept any help of people who actually knows how to make GRFs etc. :)

Link to my configuration: https://webdudez.com/ttd.rar

Image
krohmalny
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 26
Joined: 05 Mar 2022 10:58
Contact:

Re: Reduction in the capacity of one block of stop/port/airport?

Post by krohmalny »

I can see that JGRPP does that stuff
User avatar
>>EC<<
Engineer
Engineer
Posts: 14
Joined: 28 Dec 2025 15:17
Location: Germany

Re: Reduction in the capacity of one block of stop/port/airport?

Post by >>EC<< »

I don't find that idea bad tho. But be careful with the airport because it's not only the terminal. There are other details such as hangar, run- and taxiways, so it rather should depend on the terminal. By the way there could be an option to expand the terminal, but the runways would be very busy the more airplanes do the loading process. Otherwise, you can replace the large airports with the hub ones. I suggest to create the airports in modules, so you can add the details whatever you want. However, the capacity should depend on the size of the building overall. :wink: But I'm not sure if every airport have the same limit of items in general.
Post Reply

Return to “OpenTTD Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests