Improved breakdown mechanics

[Ben1338]

Hi.

So I recently got back into Transport Tycoon Deluxe, but something has always been bugging me and they are the breakdown mechanics, and honestly, from the way I see it, the mechanics just... Aren't fun, so I did some research;

Attached is a save file featuring the Manley moral DMU in 3 different situations, train 1 is uncapped, train 2 is a speed capped at 1.1 tiles/ second and train 3 is stuck at the same station for 1,771 seconds (basically idling).

The result is that all three vehicles have identical reliability decline from the max of 57% at a steady rate regardless of whether a train is going fast, going slow or just waiting...

So what we have is:

• All vehicle's maximum reliability is capped when the world generates - There's nothing the user can do to change this or improve these base stats. Therefore you're actively discouraged from taking certain vehicles because of the cap.
• The reliability is on a flat clock, regardless of what the train is doing including how hard the train is working... So if your train has been waiting at the station for a while, the train will breakdown upon departure due to a low reliability figure.

So what I did was searched the forum for ideas from others.

1. viewtopic.php?p=386169&hilit=Breakdown#p386169
   Proposes graceful degradation (reduced power, seek depot) instead of a full stop, especially for multi-loco consists - 2005
2. viewtopic.php?p=680300&hilit=Breakdown#p680300
   Proposes tying running cost and breakdown risk to chosen speed, so slower running earns a reliability/cost benefit - 2008

And honestly, I get why people would be going for "realistic breakdowns", but my gripe isn't about the way they break down, it's the actual lack of levers the player as in order to avoid trains breaking down and blocking the line the train's currently operating on;

• Buy a different engine and avoid it like it has the literal plague (not always possible in all cases).
• Increase the service interval and hope & pray it won't break down constantly...

What I imagine is, instead of realistic breakdowns like #1, I wouldn't mind something simpler, like Formula 1-style reliability where every vehicle purchased has a maximum reliability of 100% for its entire intended lifespan.

The reliability of the vehicle should decline in proportion to how hard the vehicle is being worked between a minimum wear rate and a maximum wear rate.
A vehicle that's being worked as hard as possible will reduce the reliability quicker than a vehicle that's being gently worked and a train that's active but loading continues to negatively impact reliability.

Only once a vehicle is pushed beyond its intended service life should the maximum itself start to fall - every service does return the condition of the train back to the maximum permitted, but the maximum itself will not return to 100% beyond the lifespan of the vehicle.

The only exception is a vehicle that's genuinely stopped, either stopped in a depot or manually stopped by the player rather than idling while in service.
A stopped vehicle isn't running, incurs no running costs, its reliability shouldn't decline at all and the age of the vehicle itself shouldn't increment while it stays that way.

For the advanced breakdown mechanics in #1, I think we should have artistic licence to not be absolutely realistic (reduced power, seek depot), but instead, have breakdowns actually fun and more involved within the core gameplay loop - mechanics that encourage strategic placement of depots. (because they absolutely kill speed, but you could argue an unpredictable breakdown is worse due to its randomness, without being unfair towards the players or the included content — you can account for one but not the other.)

I don't object the way trains currently break down (I don't mind the full stop breakdowns), it's just the levers that the player has access to aren't that accessible making the mechanic itself not only arbitrary but also feature-light too.

[odisseus]

I like the idea of rewarding strategic placement of depots, but I have yet to see any concrete suggestions how to implement this, and what would the "strategic placement" look like. For what it's worth, there are certain best practices in depot placement even with the current breakdown system.

However, most players just turn off breakdowns entirely, so neither the problem nor the solution would have any effect on them.

By the way, if you want a more realistic system, you should consider this:

• Keeping a train (or any machine) stopped without power doesn't prevent it from breaking. In fact, some types of damage (corrosion, leaks, vandalism) become more likely.
• A stopped train still does incur running costs in the crew working hours, if nothing else. Moreover, I've heard that some railroads keep backup engines that run idle for days, because a cold start is a lengthy process, and the substitution in case of a breakdown needs to happen quickly.
• When a train loses power due to a serious breakdown, a replacement engine must be sent from the nearest depot. Very rarely can the original engine be repaired in place and resume work.
• Breakdowns can happen not only in the engine, but also in the cars. Sometimes it is possible to detach or replace broken cars at the nearest station and let the train continue on its way.

[2TallTyler]

Thinking about strategic use of depots, I'm not sure placement is the interesting constraint, at least without some form of multi-tile depots where the train must fit inside like a station, only one train per track. Depots are cheap in OpenTTD, and servicing is instant. Servicing that takes time to complete (per reliability percentage point) would be interesting, but again only if tile space were constrained, otherwise the player could just buy more trains with their effectively-infinite money. (As a tradeoff for servicing taking time, I would balance that by also making reliability degrade proportional to the amount of time to service).

[Ben1338]

I like the idea of rewarding strategic placement of depots, but I have yet to see any concrete suggestions how to implement this, and what would the "strategic placement" look like. For what it's worth, there are certain best practices in depot placement even with the current breakdown system.

Honestly, I wouldn't really diverge from those "best practices in depot placement even with the current breakdown system" explicitly as they'd largely stay the same.

What changes is why the depot matters in the first place.

Like you said

However, most players just turn off breakdowns entirely, so neither the problem nor the solution would have any effect on them.

This tells me that players are not engaging with the breakdown mechanic as it stands and I do not believe that 'more realism' is the answer in this specific case.

What I think would actually change things is tying reliability to genuine use rather than a flat clock to add more factors that the player's able to change to make for better gameplay.

Keeping a train (or any machine) stopped without power doesn't prevent it from breaking. In fact, some types of damage (corrosion, leaks, vandalism) become more likely.

I think I largely agree with you, I feel like the contention that I have is distinguishing between that's something genuinely abandoned and something that's preserved, but awaiting restoration.

Not only that, but perhaps the age of a stopped vehicle shouldn't increase whilst it is stopped... (Taken from the preservation perspective.)

But having said that, perhaps if a vehicle is left out in the elements, the reliability should decrease at the same rate the 'stationary' locomotive waiting to be loaded would.

The exception would be if it was stopped in a depot where neither would decrease.

A stopped train still does incur running costs in the crew working hours, if nothing else. Moreover, I've heard that some railroads keep backup engines that run idle for days, because a cold start is a lengthy process, and the substitution in case of a breakdown needs to happen quickly.

No objections here.

When a train loses power due to a serious breakdown, a replacement engine must be sent from the nearest depot. Very rarely can the original engine be repaired in place and resume work.

Breakdowns can happen not only in the engine, but also in the cars. Sometimes it is possible to detach or replace broken cars at the nearest station and let the train continue on its way.

I recognise this mechanic from Electric trains (a game on itch.io), but as far as I know, the shunting patch viewtopic.php?t=83374 hasn't actually been implemented yet in any meaningful way. It feels a little premature to suggest it before the underlying mechanics these two specific aspects would depend on (locomotive and wagon swaps) are implemented and working.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm not sure placement is the interesting constraint, at least without some form of multi-tile depots where the train must fit inside like a station, only one train per track.

Sooo... How would this affect other vehicles?
One ship per depot? (Dry Docks only hold one ship at a time)
One plane per hangar? (Generally a single hangar for a single large plane, same with aircraft holding spots.)
2 road vehicles per depot tile? (Generally with all bus and lorry stations holds 2 vehicles at a time)

Servicing is instant. Servicing that takes time to complete (per reliability percentage point) would be interesting, but again only if tile space were constrained, otherwise the player could just buy more trains with their effectively-infinite money. (As a tradeoff for servicing taking time, I would balance that by also making reliability degrade proportional to the amount of time to service).

Again, how does this compare to other vehicles... Ships genuinely can take up to 3 months to complete...

Considering cargo is normally held in the cargo space during servicing of the vehicle, how does service time affect the cargo payment rates? Especially when taking into account the already tight payment rates for whatever's onboard.

If planes are already constrained to one-per-hangar and servicing takes real time, whilst a plane is being serviced, you genuinely can't buy aircraft, airports can't be expanded in the base game...

It would be absolute hell in terms of planes.