Railroad

[Hannu]

How in your opinion pathfinding should predict the time needed for waiting?

It may be too complicated thing to be taken into account. I think that devs do not want to make a large overhaul to train logistics. It would be enough that path finder would compare distance between the shortest free path and the absolutely shortest path. If difference would be more than some adjustable value, it would wait that shortest route is freed instead of taking the longer route. Default value would be infinity which would give exactly current behaviour but if somebody would like to different behaviour he could adjust the value.

It would be very easy and fast to program, it would not practically increase CPU load during the game, it would not disturb most player's experience at all but it would give more possibilities to make different rail systems for those who want it. In my opinion bang for the buck would be good.

A simple solution would be to disconnect your 5 km defence route from the main transport system.

Thanks for the help. However, I know relatively well how trains work in Factorio and how to make optimal train network (at least enough optimal for my needs). But I have some personal gamestyle things (like we all, I think) which run over maximum effectivity. Key point is that I ask devs to change the game a little bit so that my way would work better. If they think that it would benefit too small group of players, it is OK for me and I will continue to find trade offs between my personal style and the Factorio reality.

[TheTom]

With a little more programming - every signal can count wait time over time (statistics - they collect a lot of them anyway) and this can be used to evaluate the length of a bypass allowed. If average wai time on a signal is 30 seconds, the detour should not take longer than 30 seconds + margin.

[fod]

Dev team Hi

You could create a new kind of wagon which would substitute the oil barrels: an oil tank wagon, specific to transport any kind of fluids (water, steam, oil, natural gas, light and heavy oil).

This could lead to reinforce the role of railroads as supply lines to different advanced outposts or forward mine stations defended by flamethrowers.

This can be done at the moment with oil barrels to transport crude oil to the site and supply it to the flamethrowers... unfortunately, the current worth of crude black oil is infinite. The supply of flamethrowers with this is a waste of a valuable resource instead of refining it and use its products as ammo (like heavy oil).

Moreover, the use of an oil tank wagon would be more realistic.

regards

[steinio]

Wow, just suggested and already planned for 0.14: https://www.factorio.com/blog/post/fff-151

[fod]

Wow, just suggested and already planned for 0.14: https://www.factorio.com/blog/post/fff-151

Your are absolutely right. I should have missed it the first time i read the fff.

Anyway it will be a great addition.

[steinio]

Until then you can use the mod RailTanker: https://mods.factorio.com/mods/Choumiko/RailTanker

[driver]

Not sure if this has been mentioned before:
Automated trains which need only one locomotive to run forward or backwards.
Diagonal stations or a special station to (dis-)connect a locomotive automatically to some wagons.
In sandbox mode, it would be interesting to spawn a driver avatar temporarily to drive a vehicle.

[Deadly-Bagel]

Not sure if this has been mentioned before:
Automated trains which need only one locomotive to run forward or backwards.
Diagonal stations or a special station to (dis-)connect a locomotive automatically to some wagons.
In sandbox mode, it would be interesting to spawn a driver avatar temporarily to drive a vehicle.

Factorio is a logistics challenge, if you want multidirectional trains you need to put an engine facing each direction. Trains move very slow going in reverse and it creates a lot of problems if you suddenly remove the best way of forcing your trains to be single direction.

Diagonal stations might sound like a good idea but consider how the inserters would load and unload them. Not saying it's impossible, just a lot of work for the devs for not really much payoff.

However I did have that problem in sandbox mode yesterday trying to test a solution for a problem with a chain signal to enter a waiting bay array, had to keep mining the trains, placing them down again and refuelling. Just a bit tedious was all. Would prefer a "ghost" engineer that can enter vehicles but that biters ignore and has no unit collision.

[driver]

As far as I know electric Diesellocomotives run in both directions without problems in real life. It's also about aesthetics, because trains are usually quite short in factorio.
Inserters are already able to (un-)load at diagonals tracks, but you can use diagonal stations for other purposes, for example to turn a train.
One advantage of sandbox mode is certainly that you can't die and move freely on the map for example for "trainspotting". You practically would only need a button or a telephone to ring someone up to drive a train sometimes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyykeqC8Nn8

[Deadly-Bagel]

IRL trains that run in both directions have an engine on both ends of the train. I suspect a single headed train CAN reverse, however it would only ever be used to back it out of storage, connecting wagons, correcting position, etc, not for proper travel and certainly not in any automated process.

[Hannu]

IRL trains that run in both directions have an engine on both ends of the train. I suspect a single headed train CAN reverse, however it would only ever be used to back it out of storage, connecting wagons, correcting position, etc, not for proper travel and certainly not in any automated process.

You are right. It needs an assistant with radio contact to the driver and there are speed limits. Therefore it is restricted to switching work.

Maybe there could be a simple switching automation in Factorio. Locomotive would uncouple from the cars, move to other end and couple again.

[Deadly-Bagel]

Hmm, perhaps a more flexible alternative will be available when the circuit network is improved with 0.15 hopefully to a point trains can be summoned as required. Then instead of adding and removing wagons we could just park this two wagon train and summon a three wagon train. I imagine this would be a ludicrously complicated setup however automatically connecting carriages and stuff won't be used by 99% of players. I design my stations with a fixed number of wagons in mind, if it's not enough throughput I just add more trains which is the simplest solution.

[aober93]

Naming trains and routes would be good. Because you end up with so many trains that in the train browser a screen full wont fit all of them. AFAIK it shows 20. And the browser isnt exactly good.

The tiny map section is worthless to me, to find the train im looking for in the browser ,i look at the list of stations and click on it to verify if im uncertain.

What would be better was a visual queue either by a graphic, or a text to find quickly and reliably the train your looking for in the browser. A text could be a name. Example "Iron ore Train West field to Main Base No1" And a graphic could perhaps be a tracer of the last roundtrip it took (instead of the map preview) because these potentially look very unique, or simpler just pick icons from a list of icons.

[aeros1]

In fact I am all for for stealing from open TTD train structure and train naming as well as ability to group them up manually for organisation would be as useful, as well as changing Station(name) to stop. And ability to group stops into stations in tree like fassion. So train could arrive on any stop at station.Though naming trains and grouping sounds more useful. Once train count gets huge it becomes hard to find one you need.

[TheTom]

So train could arrive on any stop at station.

Or not. I normally have 3 stops at a station - the normal one, one for supply and one for my personal build train. This makes the list hugh. Grouping them with a subselection would really help keeping the list usable. The usability of most things in train management falls apart the moment you ahve 10+ trains and 20+ stations.

[hitzu]

And ability to group stops into stations in tree like fassion. So train could arrive on any stop at station.

It is currently possible by giving the same name for several stations. The train chooses a closest not occupied one.

[driver]

Maybe there could be a simple switching automation in Factorio.

I like this kind of stuff, and the equal length of locomotives and waggons could make this possible, but there may be a minor problem with the new station placement.
You can see it if you have only one loading station with inserters and let's say two more stations to only advance the train (for example two locomotives and three waggons) to load the next empty waggon.

[afk2minute]

naming trains and ability to read its name at the train station (and output circuit network signal on certain names) would be really nice.

[LittleMiiMe]

Well a feature that I actually missed when the types of floors were added to the game are when you place on for example concrete the rail just lays on top of it instead of being 'embedded' like for example at a railroad crossing with a road.
The railroads aren't just laid over the road, it'd be nice for creating clean industrial railroads.

[mexmer]

IRL trains that run in both directions have an engine on both ends of the train. I suspect a single headed train CAN reverse, however it would only ever be used to back it out of storage, connecting wagons, correcting position, etc, not for proper travel and certainly not in any automated process.

while some might thing this is due "visibility" issue (which can be solved using cameras, and novadays, there are even coupling devices, that have embeded cameras, that are connected to monitor driver cabine), main issue with using single engine unit is energy efficiency. most railways novadays are adhesive, and i believe that also applies to factorio railways.

there is lot difference in force you need to start/stop moving, when you pull, or when you push (while former is lot easier). that's why you use two engine units, when you need to go in both directions without moving engine unit from one end to other.