Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
The big thing that strikes me is how differently you have approached the game from the way I do. (Neither of us is wrong, or maybe I am wrong ;) You've found a nice way to generate good money very late in the game, while I focus on going after the goals ASAP and rarely get that far into the calendar ... so your objectives are very different from my usual set.
One detail point, you mention fuel costs as part of payback on buying the industry. That is perfectly sound, but it may or may not be a marginal cost. If you were going to transport the goods anyway while not owning the industry, you would still incur that cost. Since the game generally upgrades industry slower than a player might, you could incur some added cost due to the increased production, and that will come with added profit if you keep the industry busy - or possible with reduced profit if you don't keep the industry busy! I know this is tangent to your investigation, just exploring the space :)
I mostly played 20 year scenarios, but I think most economics scale to 100 year scenarios. The payback on buying industries is generally along the lines of what you have discussed for 20 years, too, but maybe 5X faster on the game calendar (of course - everything time related gets scaled approximately.) That payback really pales in comparison to pushing maximum transportation.
Tried and true:
1. Have enough money to expand track.
2. Expand track, adding trains to approximately meet all connected demand.
3. Goto 1.
That generates money very very fast. Company value will increase about 4X in a year for 20 year scenarios. By the time you are hitting the break-even point on early bought industries, you could have made more than enough money using 123 to buy the industry later - buying it free and clear - and have money left over. On a pure medium term basis, the opportunity cost of buying most industries early on is high and you're better off getting an absurdly large network and picking up the industries later - they will be more expensive, but you won't care because money will be coming in so fast.
On colocating industries where one feeds the other - you DO give up the potential profit of transport, but you can usually keep stations busy moving other things so you just get the profit from something else while making the production more efficient. In early/mid game transporting for some easy money may be the right call, but not always.
Some caveats:
Sometimes you need to control an industry to meet a goal - the game will upgrade independent and AI owned industries, but a player can push that faster. Sometimes you need to buy the industries to meet goals.
Playing in Trainiac vs. Full Pause can change best tactics/strategy quite a bit.
Playing for end of scenario state is very different from playing to finish goals ASAP.
Many others.
I also have some biases. I play full pause with The Engineer by default. He can expand very fast making that payoff even better (heavy discount on new Engines, free maintenance sheds.)
Again, very nice post - I've learned some new ways of thinking about the game - thank you!
Looking forward to more discussion here :)
In the 20 year length scenarios, the time scaling is different. Assuming that you're running at 100% utilization, virtually every industry will pay itself off in 100 weeks or less, regardless of the upgrade level. In *most* scenarios, the fastest payoff is logging at 62.5 weeks and it's high demand as well.
I have extracted *all* of the goods and factory data from the game itself so I can save you from doing all the manual logging you seem to be doing and just give the data to you.
I haven't had a chance to read this whole post in detail yet but I definitely will when I get the time.
I have been digging along these same lines and discussing it here -
https://steamcommunity.com/app/503940/discussions/0/4158467629236887487/
Edit: Oh, the numbers I stated above, 100 weeks and 62.5 weeks, ignore bonuses and penalties for the various characters and assumes you paid the game's base cost for the production site.
In the 100 year games, the month is the basic time unit for production, consumptions and MOVEMENT of TRAINS. So what you did before in a week, now takes a month to do.
First, your numbers are wrong. In a century long game, a "month" is not actually a month. Every industry pays up every 4 days and this happens exactly 7 times per "month" so a "month" is actually 28 days. This means there is 13.04 "months" per year in in a century long game in railway empire land. Just for reference, in a 20 year game, industries pay up daily and a week is always 7 days.
That being said, assuming that a century long game is actually a century long (I haven't checked!) and a 20 year game is actually 20 years long (I haven't checked that either!), yes, there is 25% more total payouts in a century long game.
The big question though isn't - "Are there more total pay periods in a century long game?"
It's really - "Is the frequency of business payouts scaled in the same way that train movement speed is scaled and if not, then does this favor industry or transportation payouts?"
So what do I mean by that? Let's take two different hypothetical situations -
Let's imagine that if we run the game at normal speed with no pauses and that both the century game and the 20 year game take the same amount of IRL time to finish. In this situation, the game's calendar is sped up by a factor of 5 in a century long game. Lets us also imagine that train mechanics operate at the same speed in both game modes. In this situation, your industries would be paying out 25% more frequently, in IRL time, but freight would still be paying out at exactly the same rate.
Now let's imagine that in a century long game, the calendar is instead sped up by a factor of 4. The century long game would then last 25% longer than a 20 year game in IRL time. If the train mechanics operate at the same speed in both games, both trains an industries would pay out at the same rate in both games.
I haven't checked the time scaling in the century long game as compared to the 20 year game but I honestly, wouldn't be surprised if it actually is sped up by a factor of 4 as in the second hypothetical. The main reason being math is cleaner and it would be easier to code. It may well be that the time scaling is completely different though.