Topic: [BUG] Inconsistent shared access permissions.

[DrSuperGood]

So on the Bridgewater Brunnel server I kindly shared access rights with another company. However they used it rather annoyingly to build a railway crossing right near the entrance to one of my stations, disrupting the trains entering it. My station and railway has been there over 100 game years. Since they own the road I cannot remove their crossing. I cannot modify the replace type for my railroad over it either since they did not share permission back with me.

I cannot even bridge over it efficiently since you are not allowed to build single height bridges over other player's ways. However they were allowed to build a railroad crossing over my way without sharing permission back to me which is a lot worse due to how disruptive they are. Even removing permission still does not let me remove this crossing.

For now my only solution is to sabotage their nearby road network to prevent any traffic from running through that crossing. If there is no traffic through the crossing it will not interfere with my trains. Hopefully they will eventually remove this crossing but it is a situation that one should be able to solve ones self.

In my case my railroad was on that tile since 1835 while their road was built in 1958. Since his road is not a public right of way and I technically own the land the rail was placed on (I imagine building a railway means buying the land either side of it like in real life), then I should be allowed to bulldoze it whenever I feel like as part of the terms of access, similar to how I can pull their permission to share access at any time. If their road was built there before my rails then they could do the opposite to me since they own the road.

Since this rail crossing was the result of a company with company access deal, it is technically private land and so the road should never be able to become a public right of way, since I did not give permission for the public to cross my railway there. So that this makes sense I suggest implicit private road sign mechanics to block public vehicles at such crossings (company B builds road over the tracks of company A using an access deal). On the other hand if the railway was built across the road then technically the road owner owns the land and hence if they permit the public to use the crossing then there is nothing the rail owner can do.

At the very least there is a bug that prevents me from dragging renew replacement rails over such crossings. This is probably because they are not sharing access permission with me. Since I own the rails I should be able to renew them whenever I like to whatever I like.

EDIT:
Once again I find myself fighting the stupid "public right of way" system. I cannot even stop vehicles going to his crossing because it refuses me from removing the public right of way leading up to it despite the crossing itself and all road beyond not being public right of way and hence this tile of public right of way is effectively a dead end. Not only have they built a crossing that is negatively effecting me but the stupid systems are protecting their right to their crossing and ignoring any rights that I should have as the track owner. And yes I made sure the crossing itself is not a public right of way.

Looking at the position and the fact they did not share access back it is quite likely they did this crossing on purpose to sabotage me...

The crossing is @5986,1923 and @5986,1922 on the Bridgewater Brunel server game.

[ACarlotti]

Which station is this crossing next to?

EDIT: It's Plumcott Mill Terminal Station at (5993,1922)

[jamespetts]

Thank you for your report, and apologies for not having been able to look into this earlier.

First of all, I am unable to look into this using the Bridgewater-Brunel server game owing to my computer issues at present. However, I infer that the issue is probably one relating to the system for determining whether crossings may be built and the consequences of this. Access rights permits the construction of crossings. Once built, each independent way on the crossing has its own independent set of permissions based on the owner of that way. That is quite fundamental to how the game works. Thus, any removal or alteration of the road part of a road/rail crossing will need the permission of the owner of the road. The rail can be removed from over it by the owner of the railway.

There is no easy way to do anything more sophisticated along the lines of some of what has been suggested (such as special treatment of mixed owner road/rail crossings as to public rights of way, or different treatment according to which was built first) without some fairly significant redesign of the underlying system for ownership rights, which, given current constraints on coding time, is unlikely to be an efficient use of that time to address an issue of this nature which arises in relatively limited circumstances.

One thing that might be worth considering, however, is whether to permit road/rail crossings to be built on the basis of access rights alone, or whether a crossing between two types of way should be able to be built only by the public player or the owner of the existing way already on the land. Even this would require some substantial extra coding, as there is currently no code differentiating permissions for two roads joining each other and a road crossing a railway (etc.).

I should be grateful for people's views on this somewhat complex question.

[DrSuperGood]

The rail can be removed from over it by the owner of the railway.

But...

At the very least there is a bug that prevents me from dragging renew replacement rails over such crossings. This is probably because they are not sharing access permission with me. Since I own the rails I should be able to renew them whenever I like to whatever I like.

Because they have a crossing there I cannot modify my rails over it. This is clearly a bug as I own the rails...

In any case it was solved and they removed their road. Turns out it was a drag related mistake.

In review of the situation I would suggest an enhanced permission tab allowing a company to disable permissions such as "can build crossing across my ways". This would allow them to do other things such as use your ways and stops but not make crossing over them. They would have to bridge or tunnel around your ways, which does not conflict with them.

[jamespetts]

I will look into the bug relating to upgrading existing ways when I have time: this is clearly incorrect behaviour. However, adding more detail to the permissions system will require a substantial amount of coding work which is unlikely to be a priority for a long time, unless somebody else would like to implement this?

[Vladki]

If the permission system is reworked, it would be nice to have more granularity in waytypes, i. e. to be able to share harbors but not railways.

[jamespetts]

I have now found and fixed the issue with not being able to upgrade a way over another player's crossing: I should be grateful if you could re-test and confirm that the fix is successful.