Idea: Let trains use any available platform at stations

[[FP] Bengley]

At large, busy stations in real life, trains don't necessarily stick to using the platform assigned to their 'line' - they will be routed into any available platform which will cause the least delay to that train and others. Having an 8 platform station in TF is largely useless as trains will sit outside waiting for the previous train to depart rather than just using another platform. This would be a useful feature to make the game more realistic and allow more efficient railway systems.

[neldot]

引用自 CashonWheels：

引用自 neldot：

Sorry, but this is a bit of a nonsense in my opinion. You can already optimize spaces with the actual mechanics, and have 2 routes share the same platform if they're not too busy. And if they're busy, having the game assigning a different platform will not help sparing space, it would only create a huge mess of trains going anywhere instead of a smooth and uncluttered flow of trains.

I left out 'player' in my last post.

Quick example, lets say a station has 4 platforms. line 1 is assigned to p1, additionally the player chooses p2 & p3 as line 1's secondary platforms. The player did not include p4 because the track leading to p4 veers off in a different direction. If a line 1 train tried to enter p4 it would need to out of the way to the next (unassigned) station turn around, then enter p4. Thus creating a mess.

So where do you spare the space in your example? If you have 3 platforms assigned to just 1 line I don't see any gain. If you are thinking to share those three platform between 5 or 6 lines, with a system of primary and secondary platforms, you will have such an inextricable clogging in the enter/exit tracks of the station, that your lines will go in the red very fast.

You can already spare space in a more efficient way with the current system. If you don't want to build bigger stations, just share one platform betweeen two lines (of course not very busy lines), timing the trains to not clog each other. It works.

[鳴玉丶]

You can use a single platform to build a double line to implement two trains on the platform of two stations, and set the signal lights at the intersection of the double lines.

[CashonWheels]

引用自 neldot：

引用自 CashonWheels：

I left out 'player' in my last post.

Quick example, lets say a station has 4 platforms. line 1 is assigned to p1, additionally the player chooses p2 & p3 as line 1's secondary platforms. The player did not include p4 because the track leading to p4 veers off in a different direction. If a line 1 train tried to enter p4 it would need to out of the way to the next (unassigned) station turn around, then enter p4. Thus creating a mess.

So where do you spare the space in your example? If you have 3 platforms assigned to just 1 line I don't see any gain. If you are thinking to share those three platform between 5 or 6 lines, with a system of primary and secondary platforms, you will have such an inextricable clogging in the enter/exit tracks of the station, that your lines will go in the red very fast.

You can already spare space in a more efficient way with the current system. If you don't want to build bigger stations, just share one platform betweeen two lines (of course not very busy lines), timing the trains to not clog each other. It works.

Because line 2 is assigned to p2 only and line 3 only is assigned to p3 only. Lines 4 & 5 use p4. Line 1 is multiple train high frequency line. Some of those lines could come from a very long ways away, So there frequency is not very high. Thus the platforms are not be utilized. There is a checkbox in Roller Coaster Tycoon that made coaster trains leave if another train arrives at the station. This is just an example

I've had very little trouble with the current system, the only trouble I rarely have is when I have high freq line, with a short distance with multiple short trains. With no dynamic platform selection the trains will foul the main for some time. Overtime this will lead to train gridlock.

Dynamic platform selection is a feature many want.

[Edge]

引用自 ViiK：

Have you tried playing Simutrans Extended?

引用自 ViiK：

My typical relationship with TF series is to play it for an evening, when new cool mods or content appears and then go back playing Simutrans Extended.

Thank you!
I didn't know about Simutrans Extended.

Playing TF2 made me want to play OpenTTD. And playing OpenTTD always makes me want to play Simutrans instead.

[gGeorg]

引用自 genemead：

The whole idea of having "dynamic platforms" is to reduce (or eliminate) waiting times of a bunch of arriving trains.
People who think "dynamic platforms" will solve their problems and make life easier for them.... are in for a big surprise.

Dynamic platform is a solution for higher train station utilization.
or from the estetic point of view
Nice busy stations.

Current stations are boring, feels deserted. Compare to nicely done OTTD station.

Train fever need alternate system for platforms assign supported by higher train station maintenenace.

Second pain of TpF2 is eliminated cargo hubs. Due to unfortunated changes of cargo, their usage is very limited.

[Anachronita]

You are asking to change game mechanics. This will not happen. If you are looking for trains using any free platform of a station, you should have a look at OpenTTD instead.

[Bresslaw]

We tried this at Wimbledon so I caught the bus after 14 hours in the waiting room scraping off the ensuing debris

[genemead]

If "dynamic platforms" are so special, why don't most train games in the last 20 years have them?
Why is "dynamic platforms" the ONLY thing mentioned over and over when it comes to OTTD? It couldn't be because that's the ONLY feature it has going for it, could it?

[ajax_post]

引用自 genemead：

If "dynamic platforms" are so special, why don't most train games in the last 20 years have them?
Why is "dynamic platforms" the ONLY thing mentioned over and over when it comes to OTTD? It couldn't be because that's the ONLY feature it has going for it, could it?

To be fair, OTTD does have a couple of features that some players like:

Multiplayer, different types of signal, a nonsensical cargo supply & demand system, wonderfully dated 1990s graphics, a world you can only see from one direction, wholly unrealistic people-free towns. There are maybe a couple of other 'benefits' but it's so long since I played TTD I can't be bothered to remember them. :)

[ViiK]

引用自 genemead：

If "dynamic platforms" are so special, why don't most train games in the last 20 years have them?
Why is "dynamic platforms" the ONLY thing mentioned over and over when it comes to OTTD? It couldn't be because that's the ONLY feature it has going for it, could it?

People complain that signaling in Macshinki and RailwayEmpires are complicated... so imagine them trying to figure out signals in OpenTTD or Simutrans. Yes, for many folks these things are difficult, so many tycoon games try to simplify this aspect as much as possible. TF is not an exception here.

[ViiK]

引用自 Edge：

引用自 ViiK：

Have you tried playing Simutrans Extended?

引用自 ViiK：

My typical relationship with TF series is to play it for an evening, when new cool mods or content appears and then go back playing Simutrans Extended.

Thank you!
I didn't know about Simutrans Extended.

Playing TF2 made me want to play OpenTTD. And playing OpenTTD always makes me want to play Simutrans instead.

It's brilliant. You can start all the way from 1750 and build your empire on stage coaches and barges/ships. Or you could start around 1830 when first Time Interval signals become available. So you can have couple of trains running on the same line at their full speed. With a bit of tutorials and experimentation + invention of telegraph, you can get a single track line working in both directions, which saves huge amount of money compared to double track.
Highly recommend going through this wiki:
https://simutrans-germany.com/wiki/wiki/en_extended_Index?page_ref_id=1767
there are many mechanics that are simple but in combination with everything else can create quite some problems. Like steam trains take a while to accelerate, so if it has to break too much before the hill, it might have a hard time getting on the hill and can be "hit" by another train going behind him. So in early years you have to design your rail in such a way that you don't have too many turns and if you have to have a ramp then there should be some good distance between multiple ramps.
This is a channel of the main developer, he has tutorials regarding how to use signals:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XLi1tNaG28
don't get discouraged if you don't get it from the start, you might have to re-watch them couple of times after trying them out in the game.

I'm now struggling with the issue where my starting design of pass-through stations is leading to the major problems of creating an express lines for trains that should get really fast between several major towns. Unlike in TF or OpenTTD, here you have all kind of passengers, some want to hop one station, some might take a 200+km ride as long as you can provide enough comfort for such a long trip. So in some cases even a much slower but more comfortable cruise ships can make more sense to passengers than a high speed train.
It's quite funny what happens when first air travel appears, at first you get Zeppelins and they are much slower than a top train of the same year (70km/h compared to 120+km/h) but as the can travel in a straight line and over the water, they can replace ships on some routes. Then you get first airplanes, which are almost as fast as trains. But it will take another 20+ years till you get airplanes that can really compete with a really fast express steam train. Before that, let's say you get a Hanley Page, it can carry 8 passengers and if you drop ticket price then there will be plenty of people willing to use it. But they can stay comfortable for only about 1.5 hours, so with a speed of 115 km/h that get's you to a 200 km range tops :D Which could be enough for some special connection to a larger rail station/port or for transporting mail, which doesn't care about comfort.

[ajax_post]

引用自 ViiK：

People complain that signaling in Macshinki and RailwayEmpires are complicated... so imagine them trying to figure out signals in OpenTTD or Simutrans. Yes, for many folks these things are difficult, so many tycoon games try to simplify this aspect as much as possible. TF is not an exception here.

Indeed.

Transport Fever is one game with a particular design concept for a particular set of players.

Likewise Railway Empire, and Railroad Corporation, and Mashinky, and Transports, are all designed to suit players who like whatever specific play styles the developers have decided to focus on.

And there's OpenTTD and Simutrans that have also been created and continue to be developed to offer specific gameplay features that really appeal to a certain player community.

However. They all miss something great that the other games possess. And this is a good thing!. Why, on Earth, would we want all the games to have the exact same set of features.

When I can't be arsed to faff around with config files, unpack dozens of add-ons and spend hours learning to use complex route mechanics I'll dive in and just play Transport Fever. When I want to spend time fiddling with intricate game systems just to get one train running perfectly rather than I'll play something else.


TL:DR Horses for courses, we all want different things from our games so developers create different games to satisfy the needs of different types of players.

[[FP] Bengley]

Clearly some people here commenting have never stood on a UK railway station for more than 5 minutes. It's commonplace to hear the automated announcement: "This is a platform alteration. The xx train originally due to depart from platform x will now depart from platform z"

The best way to utilise a station is to use all the platforms as dwell time is the bit which makes trains stationary for the longest. If that means making a last minute alteration because a train is a bit late, then that is what happens.

Also don't get me started on the other unrealistic part of the game. Say I have two lines.

One from B - F calling at C, D, E and F and another from A - G calling at C, D, E and G

passengers travelling from C-D or E (where both lines call at) will not just get on the first train which calls at their destination and will instead stand waiting for their preferred train just because the game said so. This is dumb.

[genemead]

引用自 ViiK：

People complain that signaling in Macshinki and RailwayEmpires are complicated... so imagine them trying to figure out signals in OpenTTD or Simutrans. Yes, for many folks these things are difficult, so many tycoon games try to simplify this aspect as much as possible.

RE is a perfect example of this. The developer "pre-made" special (expensive!) stations just for "dynamic platforms" with the complicated track, switches, and signals already done for the player. Note that these aren't "OTTD" stations like some people are thinking of. These (as would TPF stations) take up quite a bit more area, with all the track, switches, etc. at each end. Modern train games aren't "graphically compact" (read "simple") like OTTD is.

Side Note: a "busy" station isn't always a Good Thing. Sometimes it's just poor transportation flow management.

[CunkFeatures]

The 10 35 to London Bridge is on Platform 2.
The 10 55 to London Victoria is on Platform 4.
I hear this all the time.

As my argument for more advanced train control, thats apparently impossible, would allow this to happen. The departure board will tell passengers what regular platform to take, much like real life.
You just need to assign (or the game could) platform 1 and 2 to the East Coast Line. 3 and 4 to the Middlands line, and 5 and 6 to the West Coast Line. Branch 1 only to platform 7.
If 2 trains can pull in at the same time, rather than 1 at a time, you will have a more efficient station. But then you have the argument of " you need to setup your railway unlike anything in real life" or "put signals here and there and put line 3s signal 2 miles away" That works fine but looks rubbish and doesn't play nice. Thats Factorio.

Its kinda a shame as I tend to have 8 platforms with 12 lines leading out, thinning out down 3 throat lines.
Atm each train takes its regular path, double slips get blocked and the station lacks life. Wheres what I really want with these 8 platforms, 12 lines and 3 throats to be a constant operation. To work like a London station.
"this path is taken by train A so train B will go here while train C is arriving soon (10 seconds) so will cross where train A is so then hold train B so train D can leave crossing where train C was" etc etc. Dynamic routes.

Its not like we are asking for C&C AI to work out a route, its many pre determined routes with time and distance calculations. There are only a certain number of routes each train can make defined by your railway. Something even a model railway is able to do with a Raspberry Pi.

The only downside I can think of is people getting confused, or wanting to play the game like every other modern logistics sim. Aka very simple.

Either way I highly doubt anything dynamic will be added in game, and would require a large amount of thought to work well, but it is only A Level maths. One can dream though :)

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1984405248
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1984405225