The International Simutrans Forum

 

Author Topic: Pak128.Britain balancing - the plan  (Read 11980 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline neroden

  • Devotees (Inactive)
  • *
  • Posts: 831
  • Nathanael Nerode
Re: Pak128.Britain balancing - the plan
« Reply #35 on: November 01, 2009, 09:17:55 AM »
Thanks.  Not sure I understand 100%, but I think I'm about 90% there ;)

Firstly it looks really comprehensive, and fingers crossed it if we can iron out any niggles it's a big step in the right direction.

Now I think I can address some of your queries:
1/ Production rates - these can all be found in the industry dats (productivity=xxx) if you want to root around in the SVN.  However this may not be the best way forwards.  Especially for passengers and mail.  a)I think that pax and mail trains should be generally expected to be moving most of the time - i.e. if you have to wait for profitable loads, there's not enough demand to justify that choice of vehicle so you should get scuppered by maintenance.
Yeah.  The pax and mail formula should cause the production rate to affect the *load* of the train rather than assuming waiting trains...  I can do that, but I was trying to get the freight right first.

Quote
b)For goods, this may make more sense, but then again what about mixed traffic main line railways?  Goods travelling between lots of combinations of factories sharing track with various passenger routes, and all sharing the maintenance costs.
Doesn't happen until the late game.  :-P  The rules for factory placement ensure that you almost always need a custom line for **** near every freight run until you have a *very* comprehensive network set up, and the freight lines are also not very useful for passenger traffic.   Hence my conclusion that this was a reasonable approximation for balancing purposes.

My ideal was that you should be able to run a bunch of entirely independent lines and make very small profits (a tad above zero profit, enough to pay for a depot if you have several lines), but if you could use lines for multiple routes, then you could actually start making real profits.  :-)

Quote
So generally speaking about this, I think most vehicles should be running most of the time.  Excessive waiting for full loads should be discouraged, to make people optimise their vehicle choice to the situations they face.
Oh, I can do that (the formulas are... different), but for slow freight wait-for-full is the logical thing to do, period -- you don't run half-empty coal trains.

Quote
If you still want though, I can do a bit more digging on this.  Note that industry productions may need to be re-balanced too.
It *definitely* does, at least relative to vehicle capacities (which I think are better left as-is).  The "ideal [number of] convois" is just not coming out right, being likely too high for some and too low for others.

Quote
EDIT1: Thinking about ideal convoys more (which from what I can tell is why production rates are required) it may be better to start with the ideal number of convoys a route should support for each convoy in the spreadsheet (e.g. rural branch line train = 1, intercity express route = 4+), and then back-calculate the production rate (this also allows for ballpark industry rebalancing).  1 or 2 convoys should be OK with mostly single track, 3+ should require double.  Thoughts?
Ooh, this is a reasonable idea.... except that the ideal number is also dependent on the route length (for obvious reasons).  Perhaps start with an ideal number *per km* for an appropriate type of train/lorry....

I can do something with that idea....

Offline The Hood

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 2889
  • pak128.Britain developer
Re: Pak128.Britain balancing - the plan
« Reply #36 on: November 01, 2009, 11:21:27 AM »
The rules for factory placement ensure that you almost always need a custom line for **** near every freight run until you have a *very* comprehensive network set up, and the freight lines are also not very useful for passenger traffic.   Hence my conclusion that this was a reasonable approximation for balancing purposes. 
My ideal was that you should be able to run a bunch of entirely independent lines and make very small profits (a tad above zero profit, enough to pay for a depot if you have several lines), but if you could use lines for multiple routes, then you could actually start making real profits.  :-)

Sounds reasonable enough to me.

Quote
for slow freight wait-for-full is the logical thing to do, period -- you don't run half-empty coal trains.
Agree - but I think there is a difference between wait for a Jinty with 4 cars to be full and wait for a Garrat with 20 cars to be full.  That was the distinction I was trying to make.

Quote
Ooh, this is a reasonable idea.... except that the ideal number is also dependent on the route length (for obvious reasons).  Perhaps start with an ideal number *per km* for an appropriate type of train/lorry....  I can do something with that idea....
Do you need me to give you any more info then?  E.g. whether I think a given convoy is for a heavily-trafficked route or for a branch route?