Transport Tycoon Forums

To me, it looks like the end "overruns" the next tile (like the modular depots do), rather than the next tile being an eyecandy tile with signals (look at both images, the first one has a signal on both sides of the platform, while the second only has a signal on the "inbound" tile.

To me, this seems like a smarter idea (not sure about implementation or graphical issues) because it will allow for the look of "signals on stations", and the functionality of working signals.

and a suggestion from me: (:))
if you plan to add people to the platforms, why not use variable 61 (when cargo was last picked up) instead of number of waiting pax? I mean, a busy station with lots of trains back and forth should look more busy then one with 1 train a month and lots waiting, or do you completely disagree?

jvassie wrote: 2 track terminus station with central platform and canopy.

It´s always a pleasure to meet my small people in places where I didn´t expect them.


With reference to the project:

This idea had been proposed many times before. I think, the main reason why it didn´t get acceptance so far are graphical "deficits" associated with these kind of stations. "Island" stations in town areas may look weird because of the induced "empty" space in the surrounding property, and "edge" stations may look weird because of TTD´s exceptionally wide track separation distance.

O/c, there are workarounds, e.g., "edge" stations could be enhanced by "fake" track, and there could be similar approaches to island stations (I´ve run experiments in both cases).

Another problem is that the decision what particular tile to built for what type of layout cannot be done automatically. But having the user do it manually will result in a very large menu list, apart from possibly existing limitations in the number of usable menu entries.

Just my 2cc.

regards
Michael

Hi Michael,

Not sure if thats a subtle way of saying I have piked some graphics All sprites I have worked with are either completely my own creation, or have been taken from mph's sprites (in the case of platforms with 'tiny people' on).

As for building automatically, I'm not 100% sure what you mean. The sort of ideas I have are already in existance in other sets, for exampel platform ends which automatically point the correct direction, likewise with buffers. Other sort of ideas are similar to the overall roof in your own newstations grf, depending upon the width selected, it automatically creates the right size(s) of roof.

In terms of the visual problems of 'Edge' and 'Island' I can definitely see what you mean, but at the end of the day I guess, it allows people the choice of what they do, and in my own opinion, it looks more realistic to use 'Edge' platforms with a large central gap, than to use platform on both sides of each track, but thats of course just my opinion, and the set is designed so that people can still use the original format if they desire

Thank you for feedback!

James

i must say i like the idea of some fake inbetween tracks in the case of the edge platforms... Even if they cant be used, but i guess there would be a problem with different railtypes (fakes ones might not match the real ones).

DJ Nekkid wrote:if you plan to add people to the platforms, why not use variable 61 (when cargo was last picked up) instead of number of waiting pax? I mean, a busy station with lots of trains back and forth should look more busy then one with 1 train a month and lots waiting, or do you completely disagree?

Hmmm... I'd rather see how many passengers are actually waiting at the station; a busy station means "add more trains" without having to consult the station window first.

hmm ... that is also a way to look at it

Scautura wrote:To me, it looks like the end "overruns" the next tile (like the modular depots do), rather than the next tile being an eyecandy tile with signals (look at both images, the first one has a signal on both sides of the platform, while the second only has a signal on the "inbound" tile.

Well as I made the mockups I'm fairly certain I know what exists in the set and what doesn't

Fantastic work, I'm looking forward to using these someday.

As for the spaces created by "edge" and "island" stations they're no bigger than what we currently have between or either side of the normal track so I don't find the gaps displeasing, and they're a closer match to British rationalised stations than having two platforms for every track.

Incidentally a trip to London last weekend prompted a yearning for some British station buildings, which means I'm currently trying to draw Waterloo's Victory arch.

What i often miss (and already suggested to MB) is a 3-tile wide round roof over 2 tracks and an enlarged (non-track) middle platform.

Eddi, I'd consider that option to be too infrequently used to make it a pressing demand. This set would make many combinations possible that currently are beyond the reach of many station sets. You can't get everything you want in TTD but you can get damned close.

I'm not quite sure if this has already been requested - but where the station goes over the top of the tracks, with the potential for more than 2 platforms, what's the possibility for making no-platform versions? ie for through tracks. The two middle tracks at Lancaster are an ideal example of this, where the overpass passes over the middle tracks - Ameecher once made a mockup, but the platform section kinda ruins the effect.

Thats a good idea with the overpass...although I would have to remember the waypoints to make sure that the stopping services went into the correct platforms...I've made that mistake lots of times before!

Speaking of waypoints...
Maybe implement the non-track overpass as waypoint?

Then stopping trains don't think it's a station where they can load/unload and through trains can be routed via the waypoint (or just don't have a station penalty on their route).

I was just reading through the first post where it says..

One simple example is shown below, a simple two platform station with overall roof, but guess what? The track has been lifted!

I was thinking, for the disused station thing.. what would it look like if it was all overgrown, derilict and the like.. instead of just being the same but with no track. If I could draw then I'd show you what I meant but, unfortunatly, I cant

audigex wrote:I'm not quite sure if this has already been requested - but where the station goes over the top of the tracks, with the potential for more than 2 platforms, what's the possibility for making no-platform versions? ie for through tracks. The two middle tracks at Lancaster are an ideal example of this, where the overpass passes over the middle tracks - Ameecher once made a mockup, but the platform section kinda ruins the effect.

Already planned for inclusion

The overpass (not footbridge or station concourse yet) have already been drawn to accomodate central tracks with no platform.

SamMacca wrote:I was just reading through the first post where it says..

One simple example is shown below, a simple two platform station with overall roof, but guess what? The track has been lifted!

I was thinking, for the disused station thing.. what would it look like if it was all overgrown, derilict and the like.. instead of just being the same but with no track. If I could draw then I'd show you what I meant but, unfortunatly, I cant

I understand what you mean, but it would probably be a huge amount of work to draw different 'vegetative' states for the multitude of different station tile types, so sorry, but I find it unlikely that this will happen.

Emohawk wrote: As for the spaces created by "edge" and "island" stations they're no bigger than what we currently have between or either side of the normal track so I don't find the gaps displeasing,

Sorry? Are you going to try to dispute those "gaps" away? In this case, taking a look on this picture could help:
In fact, "what we currently have" is NO gaps. I.e., available space serviceably used by station infrastructure, not wasted.

Emohawk wrote: and they're a closer match to British rationalised stations than having two platforms for every track.

Sorry? I was under the impression that Chris Sawyer and Simon Foster are British citizens?

O/c, the "TTD style" of stations is unknown not only in Britain, but everywhere else. In fact, you´re not alone with your concern. OTOH, TTD is a game, and therefore is equipped with a lot of shortcomings (i.e. discrepancies to "real life") which may either be improved upon or lived with. As we cannot really improve on the basic TTD station layout, we have to live with it.

To remind you that I´ve been aware of this problem (and not talking nonsense) already years ago, let me add two screenshots from 2006:





Original post

regards
Michael

any news on progress Gents?

michael blunck wrote:

Emohawk wrote: As for the spaces created by "edge" and "island" stations they're no bigger than what we currently have between or either side of the normal track so I don't find the gaps displeasing,

Sorry? Are you going to try to dispute those "gaps" away? In this case, taking a look on this picture could help:

edge and island.png

In fact, "what we currently have" is NO gaps. I.e., available space serviceably used by station infrastructure, not wasted.

I think he meant compared to the gaps between normal track without platforms.
But either way, the island platform in your screenshot looks really good. Having nothing at the sides isn't disturbing.
The gap that results with the edge platforms is rather large; it needs something in between IMO. A dummy track can work wonders, as that makes it look much better indeed.