upgrade bridges

[Andarix]

Is it possible that bridges can also be upgraded?

It is always very time-consuming to impossible to replace bridges because they have to be remove before a better one can be built.

[Mariculous]

Is it possible that bridges can also be upgraded?

No, but would be a quite useful feature imho.

[Ters]

Replacing bridges is a lot more complicated than upgrading roads in real life. You can't just close down one lane and fix that, or take small sections at a time.

[makie]

Yes, that would be a quite useful feature.

[Vladki]

Even now it is much quicker than in real life. Destroy, rebuild, electrify... All within few game minutes. Honestly I would forbid upgrades of elevated roads too.

[Leartin]

Replacing bridges is a lot more complicated than upgrading roads in real life. You can't just close down one lane and fix that, or take small sections at a time.

Let's assume the game would not place everything instantly, instead each object had a construction time, so you have to wait a few seconds before a road or bridge becomes operational. In such an environment, you could still allow to upgrade ways (but set the top speed to thirty during construction), and you could allow upgrading bridges with one click, which would still close the bridge for traffic, spend some time deconstructing the old bridge, then spend some time to construct the new bridge before reopening. Would you argue that it shouldn't be automated, and rather a process that requires player attention?

Now, we don't have construction times for anything. You can instantly switch bridges in Simutrans (as long as nothing is on it), so it's rather a question of how many clicks you need to perform the action.

My point: If Simutrans wanted to depict constructions, it could without being inconvenient to control. But it does not, so can that really be used as a reason for inconvenient gameplay? (As in: For inconvenient gameplay that could rather easily be improved. If it couldn't be done in the first place it's of course good to invent a lore reason for it.)

[DrSuperGood]

I support this feature as well. Bridges are annoying to upgrade.

[Mariculous]

I absolutely agree with Leartin.
Usability and realism are two entirely different things. Allowing bridge upgrades would increase usability.
If we really want construction times for realism reasons, we should implement it in a usable way rather than simulating complex construction by unneccessaryly complex micromanagement.
The same goes for conecting bridges to sloped elevated ways btw.

[Ters]

It is not about construction time. Setting up alternate routes for the vehicles using the bridge and dealing with the consequences of this is a realistic challenge. More realistic than a lot of other difficulties in Simutrans. Having to use two tools rather than one to replace the bridge is nothing compared to this.

[Mariculous]

Draging new tracks above existing ones is also nothing compared to setting up alternative routes, dismounting rails and installing new ones. Will we simulate this in simutrans? I hope not!
To be honest, I have never set up an alternative route when upgrading a bridge. I just wait until there is no train approaching, delete the bridge and build a new one.
This is just unneccesary micromanagement and does not add up anything to realism.

[prissi]

I wonder how many people upgrade their bridges. This is something I never did.

[Ters]

Draging new tracks above existing ones is also nothing compared to setting up alternative routes, dismounting rails and installing new ones.

As I have already stated, simply replacing tracks does not create anywhere near the same amount of disruption as replacing an entire bridge. Especially on lines with more than one track. It is technically possible, if economically infeasible, to replace the rails on hundreds of kilometers of track in an hour (maybe even less). Just distribute all the construction material beforehand and have enough people. Not so with bridges. They take time no matter how many people you have, except perhaps for very low bridges. There is just too much material to move.

I wonder how many people upgrade their bridges. This is something I never did.

I do it probably once per bridge built before 1950 or so. pak64 doesn't have many bridges, so one quickly reaches maximum speed. If people play pak sets with lots of bridges with small increases in maximum speed, I can see how bridge replacements become more tedious. However, if bridges need constant upgrading due to this, I'd say there is something wrong with the pak set. I've never heard of speed being an issue for old bridges in real life. Maybe if they are curved, it would make some sense, even beyond that of a regular curved track, but Simutrans doesn't have curved bridges.

Weight limits are more common for bridges, but it is my impression that trains are not getting particularly heavier, in terms of axle load, since the mid 20th century. (Passenger trains are probably getting lighter, due to modern construction materials and techniques.) I don't have the impression that lots of people play in the (very) early 20th century or even 19th century, when replacing bridges not supporting newer, heavier trains should be an issue. If there even are bridges in Simutrans with axle load limits.

[Leartin]

However, if bridges need constant upgrading due to this, I'd say there is something wrong with the pak set. I've never heard of speed being an issue for old bridges in real life. [...] Weight limits are more common for bridges

You are right. Ideally, way and bridge would be seperate, the way on top would define the speed limit, while the bridge would only care for weight and how far it can span (and perhaps an indirect speed limit, to disable high-speed-tracks on wooden constructions). In this case, rebuilding a new bridge could be inconvenient, while upgrading the speed limitation, just like for the way, is not.

However, if this seperation does not happen, you don't even know whether rebuilding a bridge in the game really means a completely new construction, or rather new tracks on top. Given your judgement that old bridges have no speed issues, we would have to assume a replacement for more speed is just some tracklaying, not reconstruction, meaning that they should be upgradable like roads.

Too many bridges in a pakset can only be the case if there were more bridges than track speeds (functionally identical ones excluded), otherwise you won't have to upgrade bridges more often than tracks, and that's just part of the normal gameplay. Only issue is that replacing bridges is more tedious - that's a game flaw, not a pakset flaw, for which a fix is requested.

[Vladki]

Extended has separated track from the bridge as suggested above. So you can build a brick viaduct in 19th century with low speed track, and upgrade just the tracks up to 160 km/h. But for higher speed you have to upgrade the bridge too

[Leartin]

I'm aware of that, but right now, I'm not advocating for that. Rather, I use examples of how realism could be implemented with nice gameplay as a counterarguement to excuse bad gameplay as realisms.

If we talked about how to do it, I'd prefer to leave the bridge-object as-is and rather create a new object that's a symbiosis of elevated ways and bridges, since it would be easier for backward compatability.

[Andarix]

I wonder how many people upgrade their bridges. This is something I never did.

It is a question of playing. For timeline games over longer times this is necessary if you have to / want to expand routes to higher speeds.

It may also depend on how long the bridges are built. Longer bridges are more likely to be replaced than short ones.

It also depends on what design a graphic set has for the bridges.

If a graphics set has very slow wooden bridges for roads, they are built when the map is generated. But then these are traffic jams. If a station was built on the bridge, it is difficult / expensive to replace it. Especially when the public player is not accessible.

[prissi]

For exactly that reason most pak64 bridges have a high speed limit. One 160 km/h bridge even appears before the corresponding 200 km/h track and is faster than the 120 km/h track. (Same issue would arise for tunnels as well ...)

Well I will look at patches for that, but this is nothing I would ever need to have, so no work on it from my side ...

[Matthew]

I wonder how many people upgrade their bridges. This is something I never did.

I don't have the impression that lots of people play in the (very) early 20th century or even 19th century, when replacing bridges not supporting newer, heavier trains should be an issue. If there even are bridges in Simutrans with axle load limits.

I mostly play 19th/early 20th century Extended and I do have to replace bridges fairly regularly because they can't take heavier trains/wagons/trucks (speed is almost never the issue). But, like Ters said, I think the rerouting adds to the realism, so it doesn't annoy me at all.

I guess there are two dimensions of playstyles that line up together on this question. If you are a min-maxer and playing an online game, you just want to be able to upgrade ASAP, without making any expensive mistakes and before your rivals get there. If (as I am) you're a role-player and on your own PC, then you can plan, pause, and if necessary reload in order to execute a complex bridge replacement programme.

[Ters]

Beyond dirt roads, which easily become so bad it physically limits the speed, I wonder how much the roads themselves actually correlate to speed limits in real life. The main thing is perhaps how wide and how straight the road is. Simutrans has other mechanisms for limiting speed on curvy roads. Railroads are perhaps more dependent on smooth roads than regular roads, due to trains not having rubber tires for smoother riding, and how much more problematic it is for the wheels to lose contact for brief moments (cars lose a bit of traction, trains derail).

It therefore seems that the reason for upgrading road bridges would be to make them wider, once the old, rickety wooden bridges are gone, while rail bridges need smoother tracks, which might be possible to get on old wooden bridges. I certainly see for more old rail bridges that are still in use than I see old road bridges. It would therefore make most sense to allow surface upgrading only for railroad bridges.

What kind of bridges are most annoying to replace? Road? Rail? Aqueducts?

[prissi]

Since standard has no axle load, replacing bridges is not needed. Even more, most bridges tend to be short, and thus a small slowdown might not even be noticeable on trains until they really become a bottleneck with 250 km/h or higher. (But those are usually anyway dedicated and not updated tracks.)

With roads, bridges tend to break quicker, due to the more uneven shakier loading when lorries enter and exit them. (That is why there is a speedlimit enforced when a bridges gets to its end of life.)

Otherwise, I would go with Ters: The speedlimti on Simutrans bridges is from the width of them.

[Leartin]

Beyond dirt roads, which easily become so bad it physically limits the speed, I wonder how much the roads themselves actually correlate to speed limits in real life.

This perhaps also asks the question why we would need different roads with different speeds in the first place.

It could be that those roads are physically identical, and their difference stems from something else. For example, the speed restriction might be in place to reduce wear, so you don't have to pay as much for repairs. Or the other way around, in order to legally operate at a higher speed, you'd have to implement many more checks and safety procedures, which are much more costly. Would make perfect sense, but would also apply to bridges.

you can plan, pause, and if necessary reload in order to execute a complex bridge replacement programme.

If you pause to replace a bridge, you shouldn't fall victim to all the negative side effects, effectively like upgrading the bridge. It's only a challenge if you can't pause. If you choose not to pause in single player, then you might as well choose not to upgrade but rebuild, you won't lose that option.

[Ters]

Even more, most bridges tend to be short

What counts as short?

This perhaps also asks the question why we would need different roads with different speeds in the first place.

I was trying to answer that question.

For example, the speed restriction might be in place to reduce wear, so you don't have to pay as much for repairs.

I've never heard of speed restrictions for this, just weight restrictions.

If you pause to replace a bridge, you shouldn't fall victim to all the negative side effects, effectively like upgrading the bridge.

My main problem when replacing road bridges is clearing it of traffic so that it can be deleted. Pausing doesn't help there.

[Roboron]

Linked suggestion on Steam.

You are right. Ideally, way and bridge would be seperate, the way on top would define the speed limit, while the bridge would only care for weight and how far it can span (and perhaps an indirect speed limit, to disable high-speed-tracks on wooden constructions). In this case, rebuilding a new bridge could be inconvenient, while upgrading the speed limitation, just like for the way, is not.

I really like this approach. But a simple upgrade tool would be enough, I think.

I don't think we should reject this for realism reasons. This is a game, after all, and we have to abstract the reality to make room for playability (fun). Simutrans is a transport simulator, not a builder simulator - we don't have to buy materials, ship them to the construction site, hire construction workers, buy construction machines, etc. It makes sense to abstract boring and repetitve building tasks, and upgrading bridges is one of them (specially if you have many).

Anyway, having the possibility to upgrade a bridge don't deny "realistic" players the possibility of not using it and just build another, more modern bridge.

EDIT: that was my personal take, Steam user @Huperspace aded some comments

they seem to forget that you can place stations and so on on a bridge.
to upgrade a bridge you need to clear the bridge from all vehicles (1min min, with vehicle scedule open because no stop button, the longer the bridge the longer it takes to clear). destoy it and rebuild it with all modifierer (stations, tram rails, catenary,...) I almost spend 2h for upgrading my bridges from slow 40km/h i had around 200 in high dense cities.
And you can instant upgrade elevated tracks which are nothing else than "bridges".
it's all about efficiency bridges with stations can connect to the undertrack and thus you have no slow downs due to crossings (halving the max rate of one street) important for the early ages when horses where slow and low cap. the cost of a bridge are lower than the maintainance of most vehicles or the loss of profit because of overfilled streets.
second due to the order limitation of building a bridge make rebuilding also harder as you need a special order if your start and endpoint are special (road, station, powerline, slope not flat,....)

[makie]

There is a possibility to renew bridges.
A hack you know.

Edit the file "compat.tab" in the pak128.german folder.
Add 2 lines
first the name of the old bridge
second line the name of the wished new bridge

Bahnbruecke_40Kmh
Bahnbruecke_210Kmh

Do not add single lines or empty lines. Add only pairs.

then rename the file of the old one to "nopak" so that simutrans can not find the file

bridge.Bahnbruecke_40Kmh.pak ---> bridge.Bahnbruecke_40Kmh.nopak

Start the program and load your save game.
If you do all right then the bridge all replaced without a comment.

[prissi]

That tunnel and bridges contain their way is a hack. Actually, internally they have a way object. This was just for backwards compatibility then. That is also why is was relatively low effort to separate ways and bridges in extended.