VitCons wrote:I mean closures problem.
New closure mechanism was introduced to make the situation better. We can also discuss the protection values. BTW, now you need only 70% rating, not 75% to make it grow. I may agree to make 67% as the grow border (at least 67% to start slow growing).
VitCons wrote:The situation is very simple: Why the industry should close if zillions of trains (trucks, whataver) are ready to serve the station near the industry and does it best, and the station has the Very Good level. Amazes me. Your suggestions were:
Let me remind you the simple idea to increase industry rating according to station rating (at least it works in TTDP and I hope it would work in OTTD). Split your station into two and send a half of the trains/lorries to the first station, and other half to the other stations. Both station would have almost the same rating, but the industry would have the higher rating than these stations.
If this schema would work - let me know. If not - I'll decrease the minimal grow level to 67%.
VitCons wrote:1. Make the ECS much 'side to the player face'.
It is. I'm always open for suggestions. As you can remember, advanced closure was designed by a player
http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=35603
VitCons wrote:2. Or use game year dependent calculation, for 1900 - 1950 use less stricted rules.
Possible
VitCons wrote:3. Or dependent on the game level difficulty.
Possible
VitCons wrote:3. Dont understand when to raw industry closing if have resources. How do you think if I found a gold, noone has transported it, the gold moved somewhere
The gold - no. But a gold mine - yes.
Sorry, but I do not want to change the concept. If the industry is not in service, it should close. Sooner or later, but it should. Otherwise the player does not need to spend money into prospecting new industries. That's too easy.
I may agree that the resource industries do not close unless they have been exhausted only in one case - when they have very small amount of resources and a player will exhaust them out in about 5 years (so the player will need to prospect new ones because the old ones are exhausted). In current terms they would have 10-20 times smaller capacity.
VitCons wrote:It is good to have a close/open balance.
It mean that a player does nothing and new industries appear just for his pleasure. Too easy. The closure chance should be higher, than prospecting chance, so the player should invest money into industries. The same way as you spend money into "fund new buildings" to make the city grow. BTW "fund new buildings" costs only 5 times lower than prospecting a new industry. That's not a big difference, but why do nobody say "it is so expensive to expand towns"?
VitCons wrote:If you play 2048x2048 map and after 20 years you have only 25 industries it is bored bucause then you have no reason to have such big map.
Belugas is working on creating a var to test map size. When it got implemented, I shall add protection age depending on map size. But that would not prevent industries from disappearing. It will only increase the time before it happens.
VitCons wrote:I don't like the proposed concept to build the industries myself. I can build some, but in big map case I should buid almost every
Every? Why every? a new industry appears almost every quarter!
BTW, may be the new industry generator (that creates new industries during gameplay) should take map size into account and create new industries according to the map size?
VitCons wrote:industry whis is on the map!! Does it statisfies you? Any challenge? The challenge is when you need to connect two industries located in the different corners of the 2048x2048 map

That is not a challenge, imho. A challenge is to make it effectively. With longer maps, higher distances and more smooth landscape it is much easier.
VitCons wrote:If you desagree but want to know the gamers opinion please make a vote and see.
I do not need a poll. I need suggestions that can be coded. "Make it better" is not a suggestion. Suggestions may look like "increase the protection period from 10 to 15 years", "decrease the growth level from 70% to 67%" and so on. Such suggestions are things to discuss. General whining about difficulty leads us nowhere.
Resume.
I'm always open for constructive suggestions. This topic proves it.
http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=35603