US Set Development Thread

Raichase · Post by **Raichase** » 14 Mar 2005 05:07

Oz wrote:Speaking of dirt roads, what's become of the pre-1921 idea? I would love to start drawing old mining town buildings. And some of the San Francisco Victorians would be awsome to do.

I know that it is possible to have a really old generation of buildings, that appears on the mpa at the start of the game, but will never be built during the course of a game.

I.E. You would start a game in 1921, and some of these pre-1921 buildings would be around, but they would get built over by newer versions of buildings, and never re-built.

If you had a specific class of building, you could make it like Zimmlocks Cathedral/Hospital, never built over naturally, and only possible by player-destruction (which is VERY expensive).

I dunno, thats just what I have picked up from reading Csabokas posts (he's the man behind the new-houses genius!)

krtaylor · Post by **krtaylor** » 14 Mar 2005 15:03

Certainly we should have old Victorian houses.

As far as dirt sidewalks drawn into the house's square, that doesn't really work, because sidewalks (or lack thereof) are on the road square and generated automatically.

uzurpator · Post by **uzurpator** » 14 Mar 2005 18:17

The bigges shay EVER was just ~75000lb/334 kN. Average shay would be about 250-280 kN.

And once again. AEM7 is powerful, not strong.

Also - to achieve real values of power (at rail ratings) all diesels would have to go about 15% down. For example sd40 is 3000 hp prime mover. That is 2550 hp at rail... or - 2550 hp moves the train.

In which climates we have BigBlow?

krtaylor · Post by **krtaylor** » 14 Mar 2005 18:33

uzurpator wrote:The bigges shay EVER was just ~75000lb/334 kN. Average shay would be about 250-280 kN.

OK then 334kN it is. That should be plenty anyway.

uzurpator wrote:In which climates we have BigBlow?

Just Tropics I think. That's really the only place they were ever used. Arctic would be OK, but not Temperate.

DanMacK · Post by **DanMacK** » 14 Mar 2005 19:39

For locomotive HP, I say keep it at what it is. An SD40-2 generated 3000HP, so we should have it generate 3000HP. We can apply the Continuous Tractive Effort for all diesel and electric locos as opposed to the Max TE. Although trying to find all of one or the other is a definite PITA. One thing that does need to be rectified however is the TE on the RF16 needs to be raised higher than the F7.

krtaylor · Post by **krtaylor** » 14 Mar 2005 19:46

I would say we should use the continuous HP, but the Max TE. In the TTD physics model, the TE is most important for starting up or climbing (short) hills, which is when you'd expect the Max TE to be relevant. To determine the maximum cruising speed with a given load, the HP is used, so Continuous HP rather than Max HP would be more appropriate.

If we cannot find the correct one, we should use what we find, and if playtesting determines that the balance is off (as with the Sharknose), then we can make a guesstimate and adjust things as we see fit.

DanMacK · Post by **DanMacK** » 15 Mar 2005 11:16

I've been working on the Big Boy sprites, because the original didn't seem to fit in with the rest of the set. Below is the result. The tender sprites can be used with the Challenger as well.

uzurpator · Post by **uzurpator** » 15 Mar 2005 13:39

Looks splendid

DanMacK · Post by **DanMacK** » 15 Mar 2005 18:05

Basic info for 2-8-0 Consolidation

2-8-0 Consolidation - Generic
====================
Weight: 92T Loco Only, 140T w/Tender
TE: 176Kn
HP: 2,200HP
Top Speed: 65MPH
Introduced: 1910
Available: 1921-1945
Lifespan: 28 years

krtaylor · Post by **krtaylor** » 15 Mar 2005 18:41

You should do a Southern-livery Consolidation for the Temperate climate.

DanMacK · Post by **DanMacK** » 15 Mar 2005 18:57

The UP Challenger looks out of place alongside the other "Eastern" locomotives, so... here's an in-progress of a Delaware & Hudson Challenger for Temperate. Western Maryland and Clinchfield also had some, but the most popular eastern Challengers were the D&H 1500's. Just use the same specs as the UP challenger (when I get this one done)

As far as an SR green consol... not sure if that's a modern thing/Bachmann thing or if they actually had them. I know they had green Mountains and Pacifics... That reminds me... I still need to finish those SR E8's I started.

DanMacK · Post by **DanMacK** » 15 Mar 2005 21:10

Was working on some streamlined stuff and realized that the Santa Fe Super Chirf didn't have a Budd "Big Dome". Needing this car for another livery, here it is in its original stainless glory.

This is intended as a random livery on the stainless cars (Tropic only) much like the normal dome.

cornelius · Post by **cornelius** » 16 Mar 2005 00:50

Here's my proof-of-concept for a large Mission-style station. I hope the positioning of the wall along the front of the raised area will successfully fudge the fact that it's not high enough off the ground for trains to actually run underneath, I did it like this because I want the higher level to line up with adjacent build-on-slopes roads.

I think this solution works better than my original idea of 'stealing' a track tile for a large building parallel to the tracks. Also it should work okay as a terminal or through station with the tracks coming in from either end.

Any comments before I go any further?

Raichase · Post by **Raichase** » 16 Mar 2005 01:03

Wow, that looks really good - however, will you have issues with trains passing out of site under the station? Ie, clipping, or other such things?

Also, is the station a through station, or a terminus? If so, you may have problems with trains bumping the "wall" at the end of the platform.

However, that looks really good, especially as an early design!

krtaylor · Post by **krtaylor** » 16 Mar 2005 01:18

That's a great use of forced perspective! You might find it works easier if you put a barrier of some kind along the outside edges of the platforms (to keep people from falling off the edge that isn't there), and used sloped abutments to support the station building (it forces the perspective better.)

Oz · Post by Oz » 16 Mar 2005 01:19

Oh my!

The US Set is going to look awsome if we keep this up! I can't wait to see one of those Big Boys steaming into one of the new hotness stations. Just more inspiration to get my butt in gear. After St. Patty's Day (er, um, weekend), of course.

Cheers!

krtaylor · Post by **krtaylor** » 16 Mar 2005 01:22

Perhaps immediately after your celebration, would be an appropriate time to work on 70s-era buildings, defaced with psychedelic graffiti.

cornelius · Post by **cornelius** » 16 Mar 2005 08:01

Raichase wrote:Wow, that looks really good - however, will you have issues with trains passing out of site under the station? Ie, clipping, or other such things?

I hope that if anything meant to be above the trains is used as the 'roof' sprites it won't clip. Perhaps I should try and code it myself to find out!

Raichase wrote:However, that looks really good, especially as an early design!

Cheers

Thanks for your comments everyone, I'll get on with it now.

Aegir · Post by **Aegir** » 16 Mar 2005 08:54

Looks good Cornelius, I dont see anything wrong with it from a coding perspective. I do feel sorry for Oracle though...

The Irish · Post by **The Irish** » 16 Mar 2005 09:19

@Cornelius,

This looks f*****g brilliant, mate.

Sorry, didn't know how else to express myself

Keep it up. Can't wait for next release of the splendid USSet.

Merci.

Transport Tycoon Forums

US Set Development Thread

Who is online