Quast65's TramTrackSet (v002 released on BaNaNas 30-05-2023)

[Quast65]

It wouldn't, why would it?

Because none of them are Very Light Rail vehicles, I dont have any purely MAA3 vehicles in that set.
Also, if these vehicles are used with a trackset that does fully comply with the standard-scheme, then all of the vehicles in the current set should be allowed to drive on Heavy Rail.
If I make them MAA3, then they dont.

I hadn't but I don't understand what MAB3 is doing there

Because MAB3 is used by vehicle-sets (at the moment, only by my set, but there may be others in the future).

[Brickblock1]

Because none of them are Very Light Rail vehicles, I dont have any purely MAA3 vehicles in that set.
Also, if these vehicles are used with a trackset that does fully comply with the standard-scheme, then all of the vehicles in the current set should be allowed to drive on Heavy Rail.
If I make them MAA3, then they dont.

MAA3 isn't for light vehicles it is for vehicles which shouldn't travel on MAC3.

[Quast65]

MAA3 isn't for light vehicles it is for vehicles which shouldn't travel on MAC3.

Then I ask you this, if you look at the screenhot of the vehicles in my set:
viewtopic.php?t=90802
Would they, according to you, all be allowed on MAC3-tracks?

[Brickblock1]

Then I ask you this, if you look at the screenhot of the vehicles in my set:
viewtopic.php?t=90802
Would they, according to you, all be allowed on MAC3-tracks?

Yes but MAA3 would have to be drawn so that it doesn't look out of place alternativly it could be hidden.

[Quast65]

Yes but MAA3 would have to be drawn so that it doesn't look out of place alternativly it could be hidden.

Ok, so I am not touching the vehicleset.

I have made these changes to the trackset:
- Added MAA3 as a hidden tracktype

Code: Select all

item(FEAT_TRAMTYPES, item_MAA3, 00) {
	property {
		label:	"MAA3";
		powered_tramtype_list: ["MAA3", "MTR0", "MTR1", "MTR2", "MTR4", "MTR5", "MTR6"];
		alternative_tramtype_list: ["MAB3"];
		tramtype_flags: bitmask(TRAMTYPE_FLAG_HIDDEN);

}
}

- Removed MAB3 from the alternative_tramtype_list's of all of the other Metro-tracktypes
- Added MAA3 to the powered_tramtype_list of all Metro-tracktypes, except MTR3 (the highspeed track)
And all seems to be fine.

Too bad that I have to use a precious road/track-slot for a hidden type, but I guess that is the price that I have to pay for my stubbornness


Unrelated to the recent discussion, but worth mentioning, I also added EABN and EACN to the alt-list of the invisible tracks.

[Kruemelchen]

Honestly, I wouldn't meddle with MAA3 remapping or any other hacky solution, and simply define the high-speed-rail as dedicated high-speed-rail only allowing MAC3

I don't see, where that would confuse players.

This set does not provide a MAA3 track, so why should it have a general MAC3 track?

To provide only a dedicated MAC3 track is totally fine in my eyes, and for that nothing needs to be remapped.

[Quast65]

This set does not provide a MAA3 track

Not entirely true, according to the Scheme, MTR0, MTR1, MTR2, MTR4, MTR5 and MTR6 should allow MAA3 vehicles on it's tracks. And I am fine with that.
So, I do have to include MAA3 somewhere/somehow, to make sure my trackset is compatible with those vehicles that may possibly be made in the future.

However the thing that I want for my set, is that MAB3 vehicles do NOT go on the highspeedtrack (which they should be able to do according to the scheme).
The way I used, to get that, is by remapping MAB3 also to MAA3.

But are you saying then, that I should just add MAA3 (together with MAB3) in an alt-list to allow them on MTR0, MTR1, MTR2, MTR4, MTR5 and MTR6?
And MAC3 only on MTR3, and also on MTR4, MTR5 and MTR6 (with MAA3 and MAB3)?

That way, I do provide tracks for all vehicles, but I only dont comply with the Scheme by only allowing MAC3 vehicles on the highspeed metrotrack and i dont have to use a hidden tracktype?

[Kruemelchen]

Personally, I don't think a standard should imply a need to remap vehicles to another type, just to avoid using a certain road/track

What happens in effect is that vehicles have the wrong type and things work not as intended, when combined with other tracksets (if it would work otherwise*).

* for different tracksets to work together, both must use standardised labels for their tracktypes

Not entirely true,

What I meant, was, that by track stability standards, your tracks would fit into the MAB3 category, plus the high speed track being in the MAC3 category.

And I don't see, how dedicating your high speed track only to those MAC3 vehicles violate the standard scheme.

I think, it is best to think of an extended ABC-compatibility like this:

Code: Select all

 A | Very slow/light | A
 A | Slow/light | AB
 B | Medium| ABC
 C | Fast/heavy | BC
 C | Very fast/heavy | C

[Quast65]

I think, it is best to think of an extended ABC-compatibility like this:

I like that, it gives a bit more playingroom to road/tramtype developers.
possibly go for this:

Code: Select all

  A | Very slow/light | A
 A | Slow/light | AB
 B | Medium| (A)B(C)
 C | Fast/heavy | BC
 C | Very fast/heavy | C
 

That way there is also the choice to make sure that A-vehicles and C-vehicles never meet on the same track.

EDIT:
Looking at how you guys used the brackets, could it work like this then:

Code: Select all

 A | Slow/light | A(B)
 B | Medium| (A)B(C)
 C | Fast/heavy | (B)C
 

[Kruemelchen]

That way there is also the choice to make sure that A-vehicles and C-vehicles never meet on the same track.

EDIT:
Looking at how you guys used the brackets, could it work like this then:

Code: Select all

 A | Slow/light | A(B)
 B | Medium| (A)B(C)
 C | Fast/heavy | (B)C
 

What would be the use-case of them not meeting on the same track?

But nevertheless, I think this scheme looks good with the brackets!

[Argus]

The basic tram line is limited to fifty kilometers per hour, but most sets have trams that are much faster. Would it be possible to add a high-speed tram?

[Quast65]

The basic tram line is limited to fifty kilometers per hour, but most sets have trams that are much faster. Would it be possible to add a high-speed tram?

I have made a suggestionlist on the first post and added this suggestion.
It frankly depends on some other idea's I have for tramtracks and roads and the amount of slots they use of the 64 limit...
But I can see the point of them, if my sets become too large to be combined with another tramtrackset then I will certainly include them.

EDIT:
I will firstly change the sort-orders. So that the metro-tracks (and the invisible track) are still grouped when used together with another set (like Uratt).

[Argus]

Additionally, it would be nice to be able to turn off your regular tram lines as well. Uratt has its own trams and no metro lines. On the contrary, for example Rattroad or JF Road only have basic trams and these are overridden by yours with a limit of fifty kilometers. If I then use trams with a speed of up to 80 kilometers, it is simply bad.
On the other hand, when you have a road set as well, there will be no need to use these tram and subway tracks with another set.
Of course, your rig can now be conveniently used with URatt as well, but then there are two unnecessary tram slots as the tracks from Uratt have higher limits.

[Quast65]

.

I did not give them a parameter, as the roofed metro-tracks are in their powered_tramtype_list.
If they are turned off, the roofed metro-tracks dont get trams anymore.

It should maybe be possible though to switch them via parameter to hidden tramtype...
Will test that out.

EDIT2:
Another solution could be a parameter to disable the speed of RAIL and ELRL...
This may be a much simpeler solution and no extra highspeed tramtrack is needed.

[Argus]

The basic trams in openttd are unlimited, but the nrt suite has limits.
Some road sets do not have trams defined, others do. Can the graphics kit tell the difference between the two? It would be perfectly fine if fifty kilometers of trams were shut down if another set of tram lines is present.
However, there is still the issue of tram sets before NRT, where players will wonder why their trams are slower than their speed. The JF Ratt and Ratt roads still have the old unlimited speed off a streetcars, the URatt also has unlimited speed a streetcars. Maybe it would be worth considering to put fast trams on the subway tracks if possible? Or loosen the limits of a regular tram line.

[Quast65]

Maybe it would be worth considering to put fast trams on the subway tracks if possible?

No, the subway tracks (without roof) are for 3rd rail vehicles only.

Or loosen the limits of a regular tram line.

That's what I said in my previous message, I will see if I can put a parameter to give the regular tramtracks no limits at all.
If another set is also loaded with different limits, it should get those then (it may depend on the order of where the GRFs are placed in the GRF-list though).

I have no plans to do anything with the regular tramtracks anyway, but I need to have them in my set to power tramvehicles onto my roofed metrotracks.
And for my personal games, I want them to have maxspeed of 50km (maxspeed for trams in The Netherlands), but I dont mind adding an option to disable that limit.

Will see if I can impliment that sunday, together with the changes regarding MAA3/MAB3/MAC3 and adding EABN & EACN to the powered_tramtype_list of INVI.

[Argus]

I wouldn't mind the limit in the city, but I also use trams outside the city, for example freight on shorter routes where it is not worth having a train.
And also intercity trams. Trucks sometimes have too little capacity.

[Quast65]

I wouldn't mind the limit in the city, but I also use trams outside the city, for example freight on shorter routes where it is not worth having a train.
And also intercity trams. Trucks sometimes have too little capacity.

If you want more diversity in tramtracks (so more than the 2 that I will offer), add another tramtrackset.
I would like to use the remaining road/tram-type slots (in my personal games) of the 64 max for something else.

What you could do by the way, is ask other (still active) road/tram-track-developers to also use parameters to disable certain roads/tramtracks.
That way mixing/combining various sets would be a lot easier within the 64 limit.
I, for example, really like Ufiby's tramtracks, but I dont want all of the roads (and also not all of the tramtracks, maybe just one or two).

Or (if the developer doesnt want to add parameters), make a tramtrackset of your own (with parameters).
I believe that most of the current sets are all GPL-licensed.

[Brickblock1]

I think, it is best to think of an extended ABC-compatibility like this:

I like that, it gives a bit more playingroom to road/tramtype developers.
possibly go for this:

Code: Select all

  A | Very slow/light | A
 A | Slow/light | AB
 B | Medium| (A)B(C)
 C | Fast/heavy | BC
 C | Very fast/heavy | C
 

That way there is also the choice to make sure that A-vehicles and C-vehicles never meet on the same track.

EDIT:
Looking at how you guys used the brackets, could it work like this then:

Code: Select all

 A | Slow/light | A(B)
 B | Medium| (A)B(C)
 C | Fast/heavy | (B)C
 

I would personally be against this as it would be confusing since you can't know what roads vehicles can run on. With that in mind I think it is better to have 5 different tiers of road but only have three of them usable by vehicle so that you can still chose to only implement one of them. This would prevent MAB3 vehicles from running on the lowest and highest tier which sould solve both of you problems.

Code: Select all

a | Very slow | None, not to be used by vehicles | optional
A | Slow      | aAB                              | Can be remaped to B
B | Medium    | ABC                              | Must exist
C | Fast      | BCc                              | Can be remaped to B
c | Very fast | None, not to be used by vehicles | optional

I would recommend you to implement this by Making MTR3 equivalent to MAc3. And adding a (for now) hidden type to behave like MAC3. MTR0-2 would need to have MAA3 added to their alternative list if you haven't alredy done that.

[Argus]

URatt also has a mini version, maybe that will be the solution. After all, maybe that's why he made the "less fat" version.
Anyway, your work brings more traffic variety, keep it up. Are you planning to add more vehicles to the invisible track? Sleds and snowmobiles for the subarctic climate would also be offered.