[0.17.49] Train ignores circuit stops and changes to green afterwards

[exgen]

I found two bug while working on managing trains. What I wanted to do was to change a train's path after it reserves a chain signal block but before it's brake distance actually reaches the signal. When the train reserves a chain of blocks in it's path, all of them turn yellow. So my setup is to simply close the rail signal when it's yellow.
This is normal behavior of the train:

Normal.mp4

(8.64 MiB) Downloaded 32 times

This is what happens when I close the signal on yellow:

Bug.mp4

(7.81 MiB) Downloaded 42 times

There are two things that happen:

1. Rail signal ignores the close command. You can see here that the braking distance is far from the actual intersection:

   

   1.PNG (1.92 MiB) Viewed 561 times

   

   2.PNG (1.84 MiB) Viewed 561 times

   Train also ignores it:

   

   3.PNG (1.77 MiB) Viewed 561 times

   I'm not entirely sure if this is a bug or an intended behavior but considering that ignoring circuit condition when braking is possible could invalidate many of rail signal circuit uses, I assume it's a bug.
2. Rail signal changes to green after the train goes past the signal:

   

   4.PNG (415.45 KiB) Viewed 561 times

   

   5.PNG (394.46 KiB) Viewed 561 times

   

   6.PNG (399.71 KiB) Viewed 561 times

   

   7.PNG (385.56 KiB) Viewed 561 times

   And it stays green until the train leaves the block.

My setup's blueprint:

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

Copy blueprint

[kovarex]

Hello.

1) Isn't a bug, as you (obviously) can't close signal by a circuit network if it is already reserved by a train.
2) Is a bug that is solved for the next release (related to other problem in other bug report solved already)

[exgen]

Thank you.

I would argue it's not so obvious because the only way to actually try to make logic integrated with train pathfinding algorithm is to let the train reserve a block and try to manipulate it afterwards. What seems right to me that if the train's braking distance has not reached a reserved signal you want disabled and it's part of a chain signal block, it should try to re-path if possible, and if it can't then maybe ignore.

Then I would like to hijack this thread to make a suggestion. The actual situation I needed this for was for this build:

sq.PNG (2.83 MiB) Viewed 526 times

What I'm trying to achieve here is to prevent the algorithm from using the inner lanes unless it's absolutely needed, to make more throughput possible.

My suggestion is simple and very robust: add a player chosen "penalty value" to rail signal interface which then adds or subtracts from path score when algorithm uses this signal.
What makes this interesting is that this opens so much more possibilities from more intelligent stackers and stations to priority paths for near or far destinations.

If you think this thread is not a good place for suggestion I would be happy to make a proper one.

[kovarex]

My suggestion is simple and very robust: add a player chosen "penalty value" to rail signal interface which then adds or subtracts from path score when algorithm uses this signal.
What makes this interesting is that this opens so much more possibilities from more intelligent stackers and stations to priority paths for near or far destinations.

This is planned for a quite some time already. But not before 1.0 Factorio is finished. (And everything after 1.0 is just a speculation)

[exgen]

As expected from the greatest developer team I’ve interacted with, making the best game of this genre.