Suggestion: plays as a real(ish) company

[m3henry]

this is an idea i have been brewing in my vat for some time now, and i think the yeast has fermented the idea to just the right alchohol percentage.
so now I draw the Idea from the barrels and into your long awaiting glasses. try it and see:

[:idea:]
I propose a feature that means when you start a game you can set a company based on real life situations, that affects the type of engines you recieve, the amount of starting money/loan you have the style of your buildings/stations, even give you an advantage of pre-running lines (may need a better ai intelligence).
this would mean that if you bought train 'zeus HHHH', another company couldn't buy that but they could buy a better 'metro-cammel QWERTY' but you would have better starting finances or pre-built and funtioning bus/rail services.
[/:idea:]

did you like it? I did, I think it would add a whole new dimension to the game, especially in multi-player.
All i think is needed is some new graphics
now you've tried it; BUGGER OUFT OUT MY BAR! yer barred!

[SM9T8]

Malty & Refreshing.

I like it, I've often thought that perhaps some engines and coaches should be unique to certain companies, as in real life companies had their own workshops.

[m3henry]

Malty & Refreshing.

yes, a good brew could follow!

[SkeedR]

I'm teetotal for a reason. Same disgusting taste all alchohol has.
And no, the idea made no sense.

[wallyweb]

Malty & Refreshing.

I like it, I've often thought that perhaps some engines and coaches should be unique to certain companies, as in real life companies had their own workshops.

Its not quite up to the suggestion's goal but take a look at the Canadian Set and the American Set where the liveries are definitely company specific. Add to this the fact that in North America, many of the railroads purchased similar equipment.

[m3henry]

Malty & Refreshing.

I like it, I've often thought that perhaps some engines and coaches should be unique to certain companies, as in real life companies had their own workshops.

Its not quite up to the suggestion's goal but take a look at the Canadian Set and the American Set where the liveries are definitely company specific. Add to this the fact that in North America, many of the railroads purchased similar equipment.

but then come back over to jolly old england, and in the steam era, almost no companies had the same trains.

[wallyweb]

Malty & Refreshing.

I like it, I've often thought that perhaps some engines and coaches should be unique to certain companies, as in real life companies had their own workshops.

Its not quite up to the suggestion's goal but take a look at the Canadian Set and the American Set where the liveries are definitely company specific. Add to this the fact that in North America, many of the railroads purchased similar equipment.

but then come back over to jolly old england, and in the steam era, almost no companies had the same trains.

This begs a curiosity question ... Did the British companies each have their own engine building facilities or did outside manufacturers do the job?
Adding to my original comment, even though NA companies often used similar equipment, each had its favourites resulting in the impression of unique service. DanMack's tracking tables provide a good description of this.

[SkeedR]

coming from a person who probably knows the least here, i'd say that they probably built the engines themselves very early on, liek with Steam engines. But nowadays it's 3rd party builders.

[m3henry]

coming from a person who probably knows the least here, i'd say that they probably built the engines themselves very early on, liek with Steam engines. But nowadays it's 3rd party builders.

but that surprisingly is excactly what happend, until a little while after WW2, the 4 major train companies (and all other minors) built their own engines, rolling stock and had their own style of building stations and platforms and [very] early on even signals were made in completely different variations to those a couple of miles away or so on a competitors route.

[Dave]

They didn't build them themselves. They contracted a company to do it.

[PikkaBird]

They didn't build them themselves. They contracted a company to do it.

They did both. In the early days, locomotives were built by specialist builders rather than by the railways; by the 20th century, the larger railways had their own workshops and own designs, but they often didn't have the capacity to build all the locomotives they needed so they contracted out.

Of course, while they all had their own locomotive designs, the Big Four did use similar locomotives for similar tasks. That is why the steam locomotives in the UKRS all have generic names; each TTD locomotive can represent multiple classes across all the different railways.

[Dave]

I take it this practice had faded out by the days of BR?

We had, for example, Brush Type 4s, and Sulzer Type 2s, etc.

Obviously of late all new machines aren't British. Bloody things. The Pendolino is the closest thing Britain's had to a British build for years and that was because of Washwood Heath.

Everything else is bloody GM or French. Or something.

[PikkaBird]

I take it this practice had faded out by the days of BR?

As far as steam goes, all the BR Standard classes were designed by a BR CME (R.A. Riddles). They were mostly produced in the now-nationalised workshops of the former Big Four, although some production was contracted to Vulcan Foundry and North British.

Post-steam, BR maintained an engineering department called BR Engineering Limited (BREL). They took over the LMS works at Derby and built coaching stock, DMUs and EMUs, Locomotive classes 08, 24/25, 44/45/46, and the APT, HST and Class 91.

[Ameecher]

What turbostars/electrostars and the voyagers/meridians/pioneers aren't british because they were built in Derby, actually I see your point now .

However, the fact remains that the europeans do tend to build better trains than we do far more efficiently we do, take Siemens for example.

[PikkaBird]

Ameecher; Bombardier's Derby Works used to be BREL, and before that was LMS. I added a few more classes to the list in my post above.

[Ameecher]

I was too slow in replying to Dave and now my post looks all weird, oh well.

Edit: I've also realised that my post doesn't make much sense... Poo.

[Pookey]

I think it's a good suggestion, however, the AI would need MASSIVE improvements before anyone would consider attempting it IMO.

[m3henry]

...or the multiplayer would have to be fixed.
that raises a question, why does ttd get out of sync?

[jonty-comp]

that raises a question, why does ttd get out of sync?

Because the netcode was written for something like DirectX2, to be played over a LAN at best, and today's technology completely screws everything over.

[SM9T8]

coming from a person who probably knows the least here, i'd say that they probably built the engines themselves very early on, liek with Steam engines. But nowadays it's 3rd party builders.

but that surprisingly is excactly what happend, until a little while after WW2, the 4 major train companies (and all other minors) built their own engines, rolling stock and had their own style of building stations and platforms and [very] early on even signals were made in completely different variations to those a couple of miles away or so on a competitors route.

Some engines were produced by independent companies even in the 19th Centuary but these were mainly smaller shunters. In fact the S&D only had one of its own locos, found nowhere else (apart from some midland trials), designed and built by an indepent company, the rest where bought from other companies mainly the Midland and the London and South Western Railway.
On the other hand have its own managerial style, destinctive Signaling and its own light coding which survived into BR days.

Edit:

Since most of the railways had strong relations to another, perhaps one way of playing a real company would be to start a new company but quickly 'ally' yourself to one of four or five larger companies, dictating the locos, sations and technologies open to you.

For instance if I was allied to the 'Southern' instead of A4s I'd have various Bullied Pacifics, and instead of overhead catenary I'd have third rail, severly limiting the future of express electrics but giving me an early electric system as opposed to anyone allied to the 'Western', who would have no electic. I'd have Warships, they'd have Westerns, I might persue the fantasies of Bullied with third rail freight engines, the leader class and one of the first diesels, whilst they started of with broad guage.

As the current start date with Pikkabirds excellent set is 1920 [ ], we could even have an option to start as one of the big four companies.