trains, bridges and improvements to the rail system

[theradman221]

does anyone else think that it would be cool if you had a version of rails functioned like a ramp? by this i mean that you could something like under ground belts except in opposite. My base that i am using is huge and i really want to put in a rail system for easy transport but there is no room! So the idea for a ramp/bridge would be that it would elevate your tracks to a level above most buildings (such as the conveyor belts and possibly walls and the assemblers. But not like robo ports and steam engines since they seem a lot bigger.) but to get it to that level the adapter track would take up a lot of space or something. Because then that way even if you have a developed base you can add rails into it, i think that it would be cool because i personally love the train system but i think that it deserves a height modifier like the underground belts in the cause of conveyor belts.
Another possible thing i think would be cool is if there was a turret car for the trains, that way you could ride around shooting biters from the back of a train!
these of course are just crude ideas and could use a lot of refining, but i just wanted to get the idea out there!

[kovarex]

The ramp sounds cool, but there would be the typical problem. You wouldn't see the things under it. It would make more sense probably to do some kind of underground rail.

[quinor]

Openttd handles bridges nicely.

[ssilk]

The ramp sounds cool, but there would be the typical problem. You wouldn't see the things under it. It would make more sense probably to do some kind of underground rail.

They had this idea:

https://forums.factorio.com/forum/vie ... =33&t=7414

[Smarty]

Ramps could be nice but only for small distances and underground railways for as long as you want

[Xterminator]

I would love either ramps/bridges or underground tunnels. Would add a lot to the train system even if it is just for aesthetics.

[Zourin]

I'm still jonesing for some kind of paving ("soft rail") system to make cars more useful to navigate places other than open deserts.

But this post does bring up a good point.. why can't we traverse puddles? not just trains, but belt-bridges? I don't think we'll see railway overpasses anytime soon, it just wouldn't blend with the tile system.

[aRatNamedSammy]

omg..underground tracks ... wow i want it now, i already see my trains no more in open space and appear directly inside my outposts , for those places with higher risk on rails destruction
..why not underground electric lines .. could be cool to connect outpost with main base power safely, better than just putting lots of turrets around poles, cause when its out of range for roboports and i forgot to check and fix it, i feel stupid when i see my outpost beeing destroyed because of that single pole ..

[Armed_Monkey]

Would be nice to have "Pre-signal" for railways, the sort of thing that is in TTD. http://wiki.openttd.org/Signals#Pre-signals
It would make rail Stations/Junctions allot easier to manage.

[ssilk]

Would be nice to have "Pre-signal" for railways, the sort of thing that is in TTD. http://wiki.openttd.org/Signals#Pre-signals
It would make rail Stations/Junctions allot easier to manage.

https://www.factorio.com/blog/post/fff-81

[Vergoz]

From the fact that no one has answered, I can assume that there is no mod bridge or subway...

[impetus maximus]

From the fact that no one has answered, I can assume that there is no mod bridge or subway...

it's my understanding that there is only 1 surface plane in Factorio. unless the devs add more to the core game we won't have elevated bridges or tunnels.
train overpasses would be awesome.

also, welcome to the forums.

[orzelek]

From the fact that no one has answered, I can assume that there is no mod bridge or subway...

it's my understanding that there is only 1 surface plane in Factorio. unless the devs add more to the core game we won't have elevated bridges or tunnels.
train overpasses would be awesome.

also, welcome to the forums.

You can have more surfaces easily. Tricky thing is that trains would need to be aware of that kind of transition - and that can only be coded by devs. Modding it is not possible or would need some very complex workarounds.

[vampiricdust]

Would it be possible then to mod in a subway station? Like, use a new layer underground that only allows train tracks except where there's a subway station. It would sort of act like Factorissimo, but have an infinite layer that that matches up the subway stations.

[Lastmerlin]

Belts do not need another surface either. If you could somehow hide the train in the tunnel or overpass, then it could work quite similar.

Something I want to remark is, that this would raise the power of trains remarkably in certain use cases. If you use a general purpose train network it is not big difference. But if you try to use dedicated train lines for different products and point-to-point transport, then this would be a huge help. You could completely decouple and untangle a large number of lines, that require a huge effort in signaling correctly right now. I am trying to build such a system for my current base and its almost like the difference between having underground belts or not for belt-based transport. So it makes the game strictly easier and quite a lot in some cases.

I would certainly like such an addition. If you are really seeking this particular challenge, you can always decide not to use these tunnels/bridges. However, my impression in the bots vs belt discussion was, that most players are not capable to make this sort of a decision (just not to use something, if you believe it makes something too easy). Hence you should think twice before adding something, that eliminates a specific type of challenge from the game.

[vanatteveldt]

I think adding surfaces or bridges is not a good idea (except possibly for bridges over water as a more aesthetically pleasing solution than landfill). They add a large amount of complexity without clearly solving a pressing in-game need.

IMHO, the only real problem that might need solving is non-level rail-rail crossings to allow for higher throughput junction designs. IF this is desired it would require an underground rail, possibly with an aesthetic such as proposed above, that only needs to be able to go under other rail. Alternatively, a rail bridge with three elements (on-ramp, crossing rail, off-ramp) could ensure that it only traverses over existing rail (so there are no occlusion problems), but I'm not convinced that would be prettier than an underground solution.

[Elharion]

As an openTtd fan, I would love to see this in the game.

The ramp sounds cool, but there would be the typical problem. You wouldn't see the things under it. It would make more sense probably to do some kind of underground rail.

It would be possible with some kind of transparency ? Maybe when the player is under the rail, with a small radius ?

[impetus maximus]

I think adding surfaces or bridges is not a good idea (except possibly for bridges over water as a more aesthetically pleasing solution than landfill). They add a large amount of complexity without clearly solving a pressing in-game need.

IMHO, the only real problem that might need solving is non-level rail-rail crossings to allow for higher throughput junction designs. IF this is desired it would require an underground rail, possibly with an aesthetic such as proposed above, that only needs to be able to go under other rail. Alternatively, a rail bridge with three elements (on-ramp, crossing rail, off-ramp) could ensure that it only traverses over existing rail (so there are no occlusion problems), but I'm not convinced that would be prettier than an underground solution.

trains crossing paths is a pretty large pressing need for me. i don't care how well a crossing you make, at some point trains are going to be stopped waiting for the path to be clear.
being able to go over or under another track would help train throughput. yes you would still have trains merging but it would be a hell of a lot better than it is now.

as Elharion (welcome to the forums!) said, you could have a transparency around the player.
like when you are in a house in a top down game and can see through roof.

[Elharion]

Thank you

By the way, the elevated rail should cost a lot of ressources. And it should be limited to the rail itself, no elevated train station as it would add a full layer of elevated building creating a lot of confusion to the readability of the game.

[impetus maximus]

Thank you

By the way, the elevated rail should cost a lot of ressources.

absolutely. lots of concrete, stone, steel, wood etc. should take a while to build as well.