[OpenTTD] NuTracks - Dev Thread

[DJ Nekkid]

A question for devs...
After year 2000 the metro tracks would increase their max speed to, I don't know, let's say 140 km/h. No "upgrade/convert rail" would be needed but the tracks would get faster automatically. Would that be possible to implement and, above all, would that be interesting to implement?

From my pow, yes indeed. But it would need something similar to Callback 36 to do this. But sure, if something like this pops up, i'll be happy to up the speedlimits, say 20ish kmh in y2k.
Or they get upped by 1kmh every 5th year starting in, say 1950. Or something like that...

[Voyager One]

First one is better. What's the point in increasing speed 1 by 1... And there's definitely no need for that.

[DJ Nekkid]

First one is better. What's the point in increasing speed 1 by 1... And there's definitely no need for that.

Technological steps forward?

[Ameecher]

First one is better. What's the point in increasing speed 1 by 1... And there's definitely no need for that.

Technological steps forward?

Maybe so but when there are speed upgrades in real life they are usually (always?) done in block periods as upgrades. If somewhere has rolling stock capable of going faster than line speed is currently then they'll probably either not upgrade at all or upgrade it by a large increase, a steady increase just wouldn't be economical.

[Voyager One]

I have meant to say what's the point of having 120 km/h track, then 121 km/h tracks, then 122... IMO, it could be something like the regular track advancement, as Ameecher has said, in "blocks" of time.

Even three "blocks" would be enough - until 1950 - 80 km/h, 1950-2000 - 120 km/h, after 2000 - 140 km/h. Notice the slower advancement - first upgrade by 40 km/h, second upgrade by only 20 km/h.

There's one other related thing that is somewhat confusing. An early "regular" track is slower than the metro track. Why wouldn't you just run ALL your trains on 3rd rail? I know it's not about absolute reality but IMO this is unreal too much...

[DJ Nekkid]

First one is better. What's the point in increasing speed 1 by 1... And there's definitely no need for that.

Technological steps forward?

Maybe so but when there are speed upgrades in real life they are usually (always?) done in block periods as upgrades. If somewhere has rolling stock capable of going faster than line speed is currently then they'll probably either not upgrade at all or upgrade it by a large increase, a steady increase just wouldn't be economical.

This is also why the set have different track speed limits, just because as you say, a line is upgraded in blocks. "The 50km line from A to C via B is upgraded to meet the need for higher speed trains" I.e. 120kmh -> 160kmh.

And atleast, with the 2cc set the different tracktypes come out when the first proper train come out (i.e. the 120kmh tracks come when the first train that has max speed > 80kmh).

But this set probably needs some love either way, as its in a psuedo-finished state atm.

There's one other related thing that is somewhat confusing. An early "regular" track is slower than the metro track. Why wouldn't you just run ALL your trains on 3rd rail? I know it's not about absolute reality but IMO this is unreal too much...

But look at the cost. iirc does a 80kmh unelectrified tile cost aprox 32£, 120kmh unelectrified tile cost 100£, and 120kmh 3rd rail cost 200£, and the catenary fed 120kmh line cost 300£. All of theese on the normal/medium construction cost difficulty level, as well as the default costs on the grf-settings.

[Voyager One]

But this set probably needs some love either way, as its in a psuedo-finished state atm.

What can I do to help? Draw anything? Just give me some assignments and guidelines as you did with 2cc.

As for the costs thing, you're right there 100%. I forgot about that. Now, the question is back, what about higher speed 3rd rail? Interesting? Could be done? What does it need? ... <more questions of this type> ...

Personaly, I think the graphics part should be much different. You could use the same graphics and just change the color of the 3rd rail, nothing else. I mean, that is not important. Heck, just tell me where are the sprites and I'll recolor them myself.

[DJ Nekkid]

You know where they are mate

devzone, nutracks, repo, sprites, pcx



When it comes to more 3rd rail stuff that is also in the pipeline, as i've posted a few pages back, i've planned to have more then one set within the set. I.e. you can select "Default, 3rd rail, ng rails" or something similar, where the "unneccesary" stuff is removed, and whatever you select turns in instead

[Voyager One]

I've taken the 3rd rail sprites from the devzone and I'll recolor them somehow to look more "futuristic" for that "faster" 3rd rail if you wish to include it one day...

BTW, are you enjoying CIV?

What about us simple mortals...

[Melfice]

As the following screenshot may show you, it is wise to either play without AI opponents, or to disable their ability to use trains.

Ouch.

[Kogut]

As the following screenshot may show you, it is wise to either play without AI opponents, or to disable their ability to use trains.

Ouch.

I think that it may be good idea to report it on ai forum: http://www.tt-forums.net/viewforum.php?f=65

[Melfice]

As the following screenshot may show you, it is wise to either play without AI opponents, or to disable their ability to use trains.

Ouch.

I think that it may be good idea to report it on ai forum: http://www.tt-forums.net/viewforum.php?f=65

Perhaps... I'll let DJ Nekkid decide on that though.
If have no idea in how far NuTracks is supposed to be compatible with AI's, of if this is something the AI designers need to work on.

Regardless, this was more of a "Oh, haha! That's funny!" post, rather than a bugreport.

[Voyager One]

After seeing this, are we still supposed to fear AIs like in the "Terminator"?!?

[Dwight_K._Schrute]

I have a small question about level crossings and depots. So sorry if this has been asked before!!

I only have level crossings with 80 km/h (with catenary) tracks. So whats the reason for that... Is it not possible to use the same graphics for all kind of tracks?

I use the Bigger Depot GRF and always thougt it is not working before I realized that the new graphic is only available for 80 km/h (caatenary) track...

by the way... great set

[DJ Nekkid]

because only 80kmh tracks have the original gfx. The rest have "new" gfx submitted. But it seems like people want "big depot" gfx instead of the original gfx? If so, that can be done quite easily.

[ChillCore]

I use YARRS to replace the original rail graphics, also in combination with NuTracks.

Will that still be possible afterwards?
Or would it only be replacing all depots for all rail types if one is selected in the grf preset?

[Dwight_K._Schrute]

Depots are ok for me... but level crossing for all track types would be great

[Kogut]

As the following screenshot may show you, it is wise to either play without AI opponents, or to disable their ability to use trains.

Ouch.

I think that it may be good idea to report it on ai forum: http://www.tt-forums.net/viewforum.php?f=65

Perhaps... I'll let DJ Nekkid decide on that though.
If have no idea in how far NuTracks is supposed to be compatible with AI's, of if this is something the AI designers need to work on.

Regardless, this was more of a "Oh, haha! That's funny!" post, rather than a bugreport.

But anyway that problem is fixed in AIAI. But rails upgrading still is one big TODO.

[Kogut]

Is it possible to use graphics from Swedish Rails Set for 120 km/h tracks?

[oberhümer]

And going further: YARRS tracks (if you can get permission) for 160 km/h tracks. I'm currently working on some High Speed and Very High Speed sprites - don't expect absolute perfection though.

Still more suggestions: remove the "track planning" track type and reintroduce monorail tracks, and I'm also for using the "bigger depot" graphics.