Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
And you’ve obviously never seen a horde of German children trying to fight their way into a school bus and get a seat. 😀
Train Feverese people can’t be German, either. If they were, they would complain much more about the horrible public transport when now and then, a train is five minutes late. 😀
As for the clichés:
I think North Korean is a safe bet.
Train Fever is a fantastic prototype of a game. I wouldn’t exactly call it “finished”, or even close to that. I find that more often than necessary, I don’t play the game but fight against the game’s various odd design decisions, missing features, and general quirks. There is a lot to be done yet. Granted, the basic stuff is there and works – with the exception of the industry part, which could be fleshed out a lot more. But in most areas, the game stops at laying the groundwork, and misses the refinement.
That may sound more negative than needs be, but that talk about a TF2 has me worried quite a bit. The team behind the game is tiny, so I doubt that working on two titles at once will be possible. I’m quite willing to forgive the current unfinished state of the game if I can expect that it will be worked on and improved substantially during the next months.
Now, stating that “we’re considering a sequel” and actually starting working on one, are two entirely different things. Let’s see what the plans are.
Did you check (by “manage lines”) that the lines are really going as you think they are? To me, it seems that the game assigned both lines to track 3.
One-way and two way signals: There are one-way signals further down to the right, making these tracks one-line as well. I usually don’t bother changing all signals on a track to one-way, when there’s one set of them already in place.
Yes, the signals just behind the switches are inefficient. But they should in no way affect how the line is drawn over the tracks. Especially, they should not cause the line switching tracks (and they don’t). So they’re not relevant for this issue.
My point, however, is:
As I said in my post, placing the one-way signals within the switch area should not be necessary. The lines should not change tracks, regardless of whether I place those signals, or don’t. There is no reason to change from the lower to the upper tracks here, and the lines should run on separate tracks even without those signals. If I need to place those signals, TF’s pathfinding is odd.
And the issue in douglas’ setting was not about signals. TF changes the tracks on which a line runs when you place switches. That’s the problem. In my example: TF for some reason chooses to run the line on the upper track. I have to force it to use both. And not just once, but every time there is a possibility of changing tracks, TF tries to do that.
In this case, that can be solved by placing signals (even though it shouldn’t be necessary). TF should create the line just like in your image, even without the inner signals.
But there are settings like the one douglas posted, where signals don’t suffice, and TF has to be told by waypoints where a line is supposed to go.
Except that the game builds those as well, when expanding cities.
And that I can build country roads which don’t have trees.
And I can’t distinguish them when they’re inside cities.
I think you slightly misunderstood the TS’ problem.
It’s not that traffic wouldn’t flow as expected.
It’s that TF assigns paths in a rather strange way. After your crossover switches, you completely separated your lines. The TS didn’t want to do this. He wanted to have them run partly on the same track. In that case, you basically are dependent on your luck whether TF assigns tracks to lines the way you want to, or doesn’t.
Basically, the issue boils down to this:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=312811460
Why does the game do it like that? That’s not only nonsense from a human point of view, but also is not even the fastest connection (because using the switches slows the train down). I could, in this rather simple example, solve the issue with a one-way signal, but the point is:
I shouldn’t need any signals forcing the line on their intended track, and it would be a bit of a hack. The TS can’t even do this in his setup, because signals don’t work for assigning lines to tracks.
This issue has very little to do with signaling, and very much with pathfinding for lines, which often is quite a PIA.
Also, in accordance with the general design philosophy of the game, it would probably open up a pop-up with little information but a detailed view of one of the vehicles, just to slow your computer down and eat up memory. 😉
I usually use the “Visible only” option in the main line management window, which reduces clutter a bit (though not enough).
But I completely agree with all that’s been said.
It would also be helpful to have a “go to depot and sell” order for individual vehicles, not just for the whole line.
Copying the savegame over from desktop to laptop and vice versa should work, yes. Copy the file in the corresponding folder, and the game should load it. Maybe make sure that both versions of TF are the same if there has been a recent update.
Yes, that behaviour is “normal” in this game; every time you substantially edit part of a line (like, interrupting and then rebuilding it, or placing certain signals), it is re-drawn. The decision which one of the available platforms to use, is apparently more or less random. The only solution currently is to force the line to re-evaluate until you get the desired distribution at the station.
Das ist mMn einfach eine Frage der Nomenklatur, also der Bezeichnung.
Natürlich ist den Entwicklern klar, daß Städte im Industriezeitalter nicht nur 500 Einwohner haben. Städte sind größer – aber es wird nicht jeder Bewohner simuliert. Die “Bewohner” *sind* schon eine Abstraktion von “Verkehrsströmen” bzw. Personengruppen. Genauso wie die einzelnen Züge, Busse oder Autos eine Abstraktion größerer Einheiten sind (schließlich brauchen im RL die wenigsten Busse ein halbes Jahr, um eine Stadt zu durchfahren).
Beide Abstraktionen sind nicht ganz deckungsgleich – bei einem Faktor von 5 (ein “Sim” repräsentiert 5 echte Personen) kommen wir vielleicht auf realistischere Fahrgastzahlen, Städte sind aber immer noch winzig. Bei einem Faktor von 100 wird es noch viel deutlicher, daß wir keine einzelnen Kutschen und Züge bauen (schon mal einen Zweispänner für 500 Personen gesehen?), aber die Stadtgrößen wären passender.
Der simulierte Anteil der Stadtbevölkerung ist ziemlich repräsentativ – die Simulation des Stadtwachstums ist das Ausgereifteste an dem Spiel. Der Rest ist darauf abgestimmt, daß es irgendwie schöner wirkt, wenn man sich sagt “ich baue eine Re 6/6 mit fünf Waggons und schicke sie von A nach B” als “wir statten diese Linie mit Zug-Äquivalenten im Wert von X aus”, oder ähnlich abstrakte Angaben.
Mit ein bißchen kreativer Umbenennung und Zahlenspielereien (alle Stadt-Einwohnerzahlen werden mit 100 multipliziert; alle Passagiere sind Viererpacks) ließe sich das stärker verschleiern, aber im Grunde kann man sich’s auch denken.
I see this a lot in the early stages of the game (not with millions of $, of course). Trains usually run for months, and it can make a huge difference if they arrive three or four times a year. Trains are, in my experience, rarely spaced out evenly, so one train on a line might arrive just after another one at the station, so there’s not enough people to fill it, but it may be better next time. Industries seem to produce things in batches, so if a train arrives at an unfortunate time, it may not fully load. And similar things – when running a lot of lines (or, in the beginning, only a few), these effects can add up quickly.
The disappearing passengers are a known issue, which means that it’s maybe getting fixed some day.
As for the train not fully loading: It is moving out again. Did those passengers already wait at the station while the train loaded? Passengers sometimes seem to come in groups; if the train has finished loading and a bunch of people arrive, they may have to wait for the next one.
At least that’s the only explanation I can think of; I never noticed happening that there were 88 people waiting when the train arrived, and it took only 73 of them and left the rest.
