Factorio Forums

1. Create 2 - 4 stations with the same name.
2. Create a train with 1 station in it's routing list set to the name created in step 1
3. Create additional train stations that will be used for other trains to route through
4. Create enough trains with no stops in them and park them in front of the all but one of the stops created in step 1. *** Issue #1: If there is a running train (multiple stop train set to go) parked in the only functioning train stop, other trains will incorrectly route to the blocked lanes and sit there forever, using double stop method of train stations or chain signals.
5. Remove the parked trains and tell the train created in step 2 to go. The train will go and fill one of the stations created in step 1 and sit there forever. *** Issue #2: Other trains will route to this blocked station (the engine that is there will never move) even when other stations are open.

These appear to be the same issue with train routing logic not correctly taking into account train stops being filled by a non moving entity. They should in both cases be able to take that into account and route around them. It's even more frustrating when they block themselves when other lanes are open that they could have taken.

This is a known problem and will be addressed in 0.13.

See here as well:
viewtopic.php?f=47&t=32591
viewtopic.php?f=47&t=30885

I considered this issue to be duplicate of viewtopic.php?f=173&t=21603, but this seems to be not correct.
I separated those reports again, with this report as the "mother report" and moved them to Waiting for 0.15 as it fits thematically.

HanziQ wrote:This is a known problem and will be addressed in 0.13.

Correction: will be addressed at some point when someone feels like gutting how trains work and re-doing it completely. So, we don't really have an estimate as to when it will happen or if it will happen.

In the meantime use unique station names.

The fix seems straight forward enough. Store train paths in memory or let user draw a line for trains to follow. After any construction an attempt should be made to re-connect the part between the two links, if a path was running through that piece of rail.

axelsword wrote:In the meantime use unique station names.

The fix seems straight forward enough. Store train paths in memory or let user draw a line for trains to follow. After any construction an attempt should be made to re-connect the part between the two links, if a path was running through that piece of rail.

The fix is to not park trains on rails that are never going to move. Trains aren't meant to sit stationary forever or they're pointless and you can just replace them with a steel chest.

Rseding91 wrote:

axelsword wrote:In the meantime use unique station names.

The fix seems straight forward enough. Store train paths in memory or let user draw a line for trains to follow. After any construction an attempt should be made to re-connect the part between the two links, if a path was running through that piece of rail.

The fix is to not park trains on rails that are never going to move. Trains aren't meant to sit stationary forever or they're pointless and you can just replace them with a steel chest.

Well, I see your point, but there is always the usefulness of filters and the amount of inserters that can access it.

roaringdragon2 wrote:

Rseding91 wrote:The fix is to not park trains on rails that are never going to move. Trains aren't meant to sit stationary forever or they're pointless and you can just replace them with a steel chest.

Well, I see your point, but there is always the usefulness of filters and the amount of inserters that can access it.

If that's all you want just don't connect the rails to your main network and it's a non-problem.

Probably fixed by one of the many train routing improvements