If I were to replace it, I loose the revenue for its current load which is usually full and I loose that vehicle production for almost a year if it’s on a cargo route.  It would take 5 years to make up the savings of one single truck replacement.

Is there another cost associated with running old vehicles like loss in speed or capacity?  otherwise It doesnt make mathematical sense to replace unless upgrading.

Take note in the second paragraph by “Instructions on how to replace fleet”

Hope it works!

As well speed. People want to travel on fast things. If you have old slow buses in the city a lot of people will opt to drive instead. Creating road traffic and reducing your passenger count.

You need to use the fastest buses available to encourage people to use their cars less. As far as cargo goes, increased cargo space and speed are the factors. If your old trucks are keeping the route going just fine, keep using them. but if you are setting up new, longer routes or high capacity routes, you need the new trucks.

As far as that guide goes, it has nothing to do with what is being asked in this thread, however as an aside it really doesn’t help that much as a solution to the problem of replacing vehicles.

When you use that method you lose all your passengers on the line right now, and you lose all your well spaced vehicles when using that. Replacing vehicles in this game is just mind bogglingly stupid.

Regarding to the guide, I told to read the second paragraph under the title “Instructions on…” to show why the vehicles must be replaced. This is the only image I could find where it says the maintenance accumulated over the years in a percentage form.

Replacing vehicles in this game is poorly done, and combined with poorly thought out economics, it makes it even worse.

@crossmr maybe you should play a different game 🙂  – I’m joking there is room for improvement but overall it’s a good game I feel. Personally I wouldn’t have included depots in the game – it’s silly micromanagement that exists only because it did in TTD. I’ve been guilty of same when writing software i.e. just implementing something without asking myself why and is it the best way. A perfect example is opening a vehicle window when you buy it – TTD did this so you had to assign a route, in this game you set the line from the depot and then have to close all the uselessly opened vehicle windows one by one (annoying for 10 stagecoaches) or delete close everything you’re working on.

What makes up this game?

1. Economics – balance is completely off and as repeatedly shown it’s much easier to run this game as truck or tram fever than it is train fever.

2. cargo – useless and poorly thought out. Cities only accept one good which makes modding fairly pointless, all you can do is make some massive chain rather than multiple chains. the randomness of resources and factories only leads to the silliness. not to mention the entire situation of having these lone solitary factories in the middle of nowhere.

3. passengers – The multiple bugs surrounding these just make them a chore as well.

4. Roads – inexplicable “collisions” when you try to upgrade, lack of signals, inability to lay road or upgrade over rails.

5. tracks – inexplicable “collisions” when trying to twin tracks, or the 9000 bridge pillars you need to make a bridge go about 200 meters. no X intersections, no double fork, no 90 degree intersection.

6. The absolute cluster mess that is upgrading any roads or track. Not only do vehicles teleport for miles around, but any passengers or cargo are also disappeared. Time to upgrade electric on that station? you just lost 100 passengers.

7. Speaking of upgrading stations, how about actually upgrading stations? Delete a station try to put another in its place? 9 times out of 10 it fails for “collisions”. Even if you try to put back in the exact same station you just deleted.

8. back to cities: How about city growth? A random jumble of a mess. Zero planning, the only planning by you costs you money and upkeep despite all those houses using it. Makes no sense. If I’m going to build roads and people are going to build on them, I expect some kind of income from that, property tax, something.

I could keep going, but please, tell us what this games gets so right that it is, on balance, a good game?

It could be a good game, but it is not a good game.

Well that’s subjective – I think it’s a great game purely by the fact that I play it pretty much every day and enjoy it; as I’m sure 1000s of others do and don’t feel the need to keep complaining about it – look at the German forum. Maybe this isn’t the game for you, no one is forcing you to play it and there are a million other titles out there, or maybe you could write your own perfect one and make a fortune.

The patches have been very regular especially for a team of two or three – I won’t go into how long software takes to write and test.

I will say one thing on collisions – I have never seen an inexplicable one. When you look at what it’s trying to adjust you can always find what’s preventing it and it always makes sense. Like a river embankment or trying to adjust the height of adjacent roads with houses on after snapping or bridge too low for track below or crossing too close to the street snap etc.

Your response to that is “I play it and like it, therefore it is good”. That is subjective.

Your lying if you say you haven’t seen inexplicable collisions. Have you never upgraded streets? A station? anything? While the cause of the collision is sometimes evident, the fact that it’s evident doesn’t excuse it, it often reveals further design flaws. You should be able to twin a track at an angle on a riverbank. One track might have the bridge start slightly earlier, or cause the bridge on the other track to expand, etc, but you should be able to do it. I had a situation where I could twin on one side, or the other side of a middle track, but the moment I tried to make it a triple line (a line on each side of the middle track) it would fail. I could delete both, pick one side and the other second one would fail because of “collisions” delete the first one, try the other side suddenly it can be made.

I don’t find it remotely believable that you’ve played the game as much as you claimed and never once ran into a collision that made no sense or that the “reason” for it was utterly ridiculous.