New suggestions for the patch (no new suggestions here!)

SHADOW-XIII · Post by **SHADOW-XIII** » 01 May 2003 20:44

yep ... it's legal CHEATING

...
... it'lle be the same as PAUSE , and if you don't want crashes just DON'T MAKE THEM !! ... for me crashes hapen once every 20th game !!

Sokko · Post by **Sokko** » 01 May 2003 21:05

Really. What's the problem with crashes anyway when they only happen if your rail network is badly constructed and untested? I can't possibly think of any situation in which you would want to stop/start all vehicles at once; and if your planes are flying, which they most likely are, you would get a ton of error messages all at once saying "Can't stop/start plane; plane is in flight." If anyone can actually come up with a situation in which this would not only be mildly convenient, but necessary, I'll eat my shoe. There is no excuse for crashes except bad planning and inattentiveness, except for plane crashes, and you can't tell when those are going to happen anyway, and even if you could you're powerless to stop it. In short, it wouldn't be a very useful feature.

SHADOW-XIII · Post by **SHADOW-XIII** » 01 May 2003 21:07

I'd sya ... avoiding crashing by Pausing or Stopping Train is CHEATING

Sokko · Post by **Sokko** » 01 May 2003 22:59

If you think using Pause is cheating, then you're a strange little man. And if you do consider Pause to be cheating, then using these key shortcuts would definitely be considered a higher form of cheating. It's definitely not "cheating" if you actually notice it and stop it in time, even with the aid of pause. It's called "Debugging your rail network". I've never even come close to a crash in any situation, unless it was created on purpose for my own amusement. If you design your rail network correctly and test it thoroughly, there should never be something even close to a crash.

Centennial_Tycoon · Post by **Centennial_Tycoon** » 02 May 2003 13:01

[EDIT]DOES ANYBODY READ THIS POST THERE IS SOMETHING IMP. TO DISCUSS[\b]

1.Since industries like refineries do not wholly accept oil, (i.e. only the Burning towers, or some other part check it yourself using query tool, accept oil), Patchman are you going to change this so all of the refinery accepts oil.

-End of really imp. stuff

2.Is it possible to have the rvs wait for their turn only till 3 are stacked up- and the others just turn around and circle like they used to.
3. At a certain angled bridged u cannot see the pylon too clearly on the ramp - if anyone is good at graphics- please check it out and change it!!

[Edit] Besides, to add my point to the ongoing discussion - using pause is not cheating, because, if u want to get up and u pause the game and in doing so "accidently" foresee some crash, it would be your moral obligation to save the endangered lives. Imagine the agony the bereaved would have to go through!!!

Hyronymus · Post by **Hyronymus** » 02 May 2003 15:42

Something not in line with the previous but still interesting. Have a look at the picture below. You see one tunnel exit with normal track directly next to it. You also see that I used a bridge to span the necessairy hole in the soil for the normal track. I don't like this solution. It works perfectly well but wouldn't it be nice to have a different solution. Something like the masonry underneath the marked house. Big question: can it be done?

eis_os · Post by **eis_os** » 02 May 2003 16:17

Hyronymus wrote:Something not in line with the previous but still interesting. Have a look at the picture below. You see one tunnel exit with normal track directly next to it. You also see that I used a bridge to span the necessairy hole in the soil for the normal track. I don't like this solution. It works perfectly well but wouldn't it be nice to have a different solution. Something like the masonry underneath the marked house. Big question: can it be done?

Sorry, no way, it's only a graphic feature.
You can test it yourself:
Look on the highlight while you move with the dynamit tool on the house.

"5.How can u find out the coverage area of a dock - theres no option to see it?"

Simply, the function for this doesn't work with docks I already tested it.

Dinges · Post by **Dinges** » 02 May 2003 16:53

If the game knows that it can build houses on hills, why can't we "tell" TTD to build rails on that to.

Patchman · Post by **Patchman** » 02 May 2003 16:57

Because the class 08 handler does not support that. You'd have to make it support that, which is a lot of work. Seriously.

Centennial_Tycoon · Post by **Centennial_Tycoon** » 03 May 2003 08:04

I just realized that doubleheaded engines(TGV, Asiastar, ICE,etc..) lose their usefulness with multiheaded engines on.

I mean shouldnt the TGV (maybe four of them) go faster than 4 single headed engines with multiheaded engines on....

And 1 question to top it off...
Shouldnt there be some slower bu more powerful engines like in Railroad Tycoon 2, which, well, dont go fast but have better accelaration and have greater HP??

Centennial_Tycoon · Post by **Centennial_Tycoon** » 03 May 2003 08:28

With the tunnel cross mod on, u can send 2 trains to cross each other without crashing, isnt something wrong here,

If this is not changed it would fundamentally change track design: crossings, since u could then have trains literally cross each other within tunnels to make much more efficient layouts

SHADOW-XIII · Post by **SHADOW-XIII** » 03 May 2003 09:37

Centennial_Tycoon wrote:I just realized that doubleheaded engines(TGV, Asiastar, ICE,etc..) lose their usefulness with multiheaded engines on.

I don't get it your conclusion ... default multiheading not changing anything at all... and 1 part of TGV is slow but buy 2 part, or even more ...
always if you want it be faster use "multihead 100"

With the tunnel cross mod on, u can send 2 trains to cross each other without crashing, isnt something wrong here,

If this is not changed it would fundamentally change track design: crossings, since u could then have trains literally cross each other within tunnels to make much more efficient layouts

can't you test it yourself ? they can't crash and there is nothing anyone can do .... even in clean TTD if you send 2 trains in one tunnel they will not crash

Centennial_Tycoon · Post by **Centennial_Tycoon** » 03 May 2003 11:34

Let me clarify: The most number of additional heads which make a difference to the speed are 3. Even with the Thalys - you buy the 1st part first, the second part next to acheive normal speed.

Fine but you buy 2 more parts and thats it.. It doesnt get any faster than that, but if you buy 3 additional single headed endines, it would greatly increase your speed, this is why the Thalys and other double faced engines are useless with multiheaded engines on even with default settings (of 30)

And secondly what i meant was to replace normal 90degree (i.e. 1 north-south track and 1 East-West track) crossings on tracks with tunnels so that there is no need for climbing bridges or wait at a signal....
This helps increase overall speed since the trains do not stop or climb. Thus track desgin can be bettered.

Sokko · Post by **Sokko** » 03 May 2003 12:33

So? That only means that tunnels just got a lot more useful.

Plus, I don't know if signals would behave oddly at tunnel crossings or not; they would probably work OK. What's the problem? I don't think there's any way to make trains crash in tunnels, since I don't think the train sprite actually exists when it's in a tunnel, since why should the engine display something that can't be seen? If the train sprite doesn't exist, it can't collide with another one; while the train is in a tunnel, it exists only as a location in memory. Am I right here? Any way you put it, it would be really hard to have crashes in tunnels... I think.

Flavius · Post by **Flavius** » 03 May 2003 12:43

Sharing Terminals and tracking rights?

Buying 75% of shares in another Railroad now gives me optional managing controls. I think this is a great change to the game, and now Shared Terminals and tracking rights? Is it possible?

This would further add to the attraction of investing in other railroads, and in addition flexibility and resources sharing.
_________________
In interesting Aussie rail link: http://www.prr.org.au/

Matt · Post by **Matt** » 03 May 2003 14:50

Is it possible to have a speed limit for vehicles in a town? It would be then much more realistic and you'd have plan your routes more carefully.

Thanks in advance!

SHADOW-XIII · Post by **SHADOW-XIII** » 03 May 2003 15:21

Matt wrote:Is it possible to have a speed limit for vehicles in a town? It would be then much more realistic and you'd have plan your routes more carefully.

Thanks in advance!

probably no .. there is no way to check if vehicle is in town or not

eis_os · Post by **eis_os** » 03 May 2003 18:14

Topic: Rail on sloped land

Patchman wrote:Because the class 08 handler does not support that. You'd have to make it support that, which is a lot of work. Seriously.

Hmm, I tested and patched around, we would need a very improved build handler, a complete new graphic handler and new vehicle movment handler, because vehicles move 4 pixels to low.
A lot new graphics.
Some very large sanity checks while building.
And sure a new byte per tile to store the slope things in Savegame.

No, I don't do this... it's overkill.

-edit-
And No, I don't make a screenshot of it, don't ask

Madmick · Post by **Madmick** » 04 May 2003 01:56

I seem to recal that Railroad Tycoon had a feature were the consist could be changed at stations etc so you could for instance tell a train to Pickup Iron Ore from A, take it to steel mill at B, then change consist to steel trucks and take it Factory at C then change consist to goods and take it back to the town at A. Each time the consist changed it would cost an arbitary figure.
This changing consist makes sense as you don't have trains running half their life without making money.

Anyway to implement this?

SHADOW-XIII · Post by **SHADOW-XIII** » 04 May 2003 02:04

Transport Tycoon Forums

New suggestions for the patch (no new suggestions here!)

Repeated suggestions- [b]WELL, SO YOU SEE THE AGAIN[/b]

A little screw up.....

Tunnel crosses

Re: A little screw up.....

Multihead and more

Sharing Terminals etc

Who is online