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
Slightly off-topic, but still feel the balance of trains would overall be better if concrete cost of both tracks and repairs was at least halved. Trains in principle have a niche as high-volume long-distance transport, but for longer distances the track costs simply get insane. For example, tunnels already are not cheap (80 concrete) but for the distance a tunnel can cover, tracks need about 3 times the concrete (240ish). Unless you want to use up half the map's concrete depots for a single track, you have to keep stations quite close, which IMO severely limits their use as a true alternative to shuttles.