Join stops without making them public.

[gauthier]

Sometimes, you build big stations and they get nearer nearer from each other ...
Merging two stations should be great

[Václav]

I am sorry ... but I am not sure I understood it well.

You think that when two (or more) stations will touch each other, then they should merge into one.

[gauthier]

in fact I thought about a tool to merge stations, it would be useful also for complex stations that you can't build in one piece (or difficultly) and when you do a mistake too ...

[jonasbb]

you could make both stations public. Then they will get merged together.

[gauthier]

I don't want to make stations public, sorry ...

[jamespetts]

This is not a bad idea.

[AP]

having it automatically happen though is bad - sometimes there are key reasons for keeping stations seperate (it can create unplanned passenger interchanges for one thing).

[vilvoh]

I support it, but as AP said, not in the automagically way, but merge them manually.

[Václav]

I don't think so. I wrote that could happen only if they touch each other. For example, you may need to stick railway station to bus/truck station and you see that railway station shall connected original station with any other one and you cannot avoid that. Then both stations should be merged - else you have to do this: destroy one of two original bus/truck stations, build railway station and then rebuild destroyed bus/truck station.

But it is truth that manual merging before building of railway station could be used too.

[gauthier]

The best way to merge is creating a station merging tool, most of the people seem to agree with that.

[Fabio]

The best way to merge is creating a station merging tool, most of the people seem to agree with that.

And i support it too! 

For me, its best use would be when i build tram lines, with going and back directions on two parallel (but near!!!) roads...

[MoTw]

And i support it too! 

For me, its best use would be when i build tram lines, with going and back directions on two parallel (but near!!!) roads...

That's exactly what I think...
I support it, too. (Of course, only manually merging, automatically would cause lots of unwanted effects)

[geri]

The best way to merge is creating a station merging tool, most of the people seem to agree with that.

I also agree on such a tool.

(Of course, only manually merging, automatically would cause lots of unwanted effects)

+ 1 for me.

[Lord Vetinari]

As the title says. Of course, it should be possible only between stops of the same company.

[prissi]

Why not building them adjoined in the first place?

[Lord Vetinari]

It's usefull for long running games. I have a 100 years old game going on, it's hard to plan that much in advance. I had small neighbouring stops that a couple of decades later became massive adjoining hubs. I know that I can manually rebuild them, but a tool would be more usefull.
It's also helpfull in some cases, for example when there is a street or a track between two stops (as in the case when there are local stations with express tracks in the middle, or when you need to add another bay to a yard that is already surrounded by roads), so that you don't have to build additional useless parts.

[Fabio]

I would really like this tool.
Maybe, in order to avoid cheating but allowing this:

It's also helpfull in some cases, for example when there is a street or a track between two stops (as in the case when there are local stations with express tracks in the middle, or when you need to add another bay to a yard that is already surrounded by roads), so that you don't have to build additional useless parts.

hte two joining stops should be apart no more than 3-4 tiles...

[prissi]

He programming is easy. But imho joining should be only allowed for adjunkt stations. Increasing range by joining should carry the penalty by being expensive.

[Fabio]

Increasing range by joining should carry the penalty by being expensive.

This could be a nice compromise.
I propose this price for the use of the tool: the manhattan distance of the nearest tiles of the two stops * the cost of a new level 1 stop.
This way: joining adjacent stops is for free; joining distant stops costs as much as phisically joining them with (useless) stops, and it will be indeed quite expensive.

[skreyola]

There should be a dialog to choose which station keeps its name.

[Lord Vetinari]

Or maybe the order of the clicks: the first stop you select is the one that keeps the name.

[skreyola]

Just so it's user-controlled.

[Erik]

Sounds like a great plan.
I have often enough that stations growing together and I have to rebuild then to make one of it.

But I prefer that the second/last selected station would keep his name.
Like you drag the joining station to the other.

[skreyola]

I don't mind which way it is, just so the user knows which one will keep its name.

[Fabio]

He programming is easy.

I propose this price for the use of the tool: the manhattan distance of the nearest tiles of the two stops * the cost of a new level 1 stop.
This way: joining adjacent stops is for free; joining distant stops costs as much as phisically joining them with (useless) stops, and it will be indeed quite expensive.

There should be a dialog to choose which station keeps its name.

I would really like to see this extension implemented.
I summarize what it could be like:
- Joining station should cost the manhattan distance between two stations (the nearest tiles if possible) * the building cost of a level 1 station tile.
- The station with higher capacity should keep the name, if the capacity is the same, the one clicked first/last.

[Václav]

This had already been discussed here, in topic station merge but without clear result. It would be useful to merge both topics.

I, of course, am happy that it can be available - because I build ground CMT* stations with distance 4 tiles of road (sometime only 2 or 3 tiles if local conditions force it) and 2 tiles long - inside one line - but city roads built in circles are distant only 2 tiles.

And sometime (very often) I meet need of merging stations into one while I build underground CMT web - where all stations are long 4 tiles.

So those underground CMT stations very often touch two ground CMT stations. And is very incomfortable to destroy one ground station, build underground way with station and then destroyed ground station rebuild. And what is quite important, there is losing of people - for quite long time.

* city mass transit

Thanks for all - for bringing this idea back to life.

[Fabio]

Threads merged now, thank you for spotting, Vaclav!

I had noted this request in my favourites list, i bumped it for it not to be forgotten, specially as prissi said it's easy programwise. Now, let's hope someone is interested in making a patch...

[gauthier]

Lol I completely forgot this suggestion  yes it would still be great to be implemented ^^