Rail signals should act the same to auto and manual trains

[Zion Fox]

My suggestion is to make rail signals react the same way to both automatic and manually driven trains.

I know that automatic trains "reserve" the track ahead of them, making their next signal amber, and effecting any chain signals based on this reservation, which in turn effects other traffic on the line. I'm assuming the reservation is based on distance to stop based on a full brake action, although I could see this also being purely AI related. This "reservation" should also apply to manually driven trains. I really enjoy driving on my rail network and it makes it a very easy way to get about to outposts without waiting for a load/unload train, I just wish the train I drove reserved the track ahead as I've destroyed many automatic trains because we both crossed the junction at once.

In addition to this, flashing amber and solid amber signals should appear on the two signals before a stop signal, just like real railways. This alerts you as a manual driver that there's a stop signal coming up ahead, and to start preparing for it.

Although this is low priority, I think this addition would be greatly appreciated in the community.

[ssilk]

I thought also a lot of times about this. The problem: I'm not 100% sure, if that is useful. Cause to work properly the train needs to reserve any track, where you as player can steer it into. And the other way around: You cannot roll just over a signal, even if it is red. Which is sometimes needed (even in real rail traffic this is needed!).

Instead of that I would suggest "one-time routes" (ovrrides current route but only one time) and routing not only to train-stops, but also to any rail-piece-points on the map.

[Zion Fox]

The thing with manual trains being able to take any route is true, however it's only taking one route when it approaches a switch. You use a left/right keys to alter the switch for you to take the new route in relation to the train's forward direction. The track reservation could be updated to reflect this when you change your route using the left/right keys.

I agree also that trains need to pass a signal at Danger, but they only do that in the real world with authority from the local control room, which the driver needs to call in and request. In-game, automatic trains will never pass a red signal, even if the route is available. I think blocking being able to pass signals is a bad move, as it doesn't reflect how railways work, so this isn't an alternative.

I'm not sure what you mean by "one-time routes", could you elaborate?

[ssilk]

The thing with manual trains being able to take any route is true, however it's only taking one route when it approaches a switch. You use a left/right keys to alter the switch for you to take the new route in relation to the train's forward direction. The track reservation could be updated to reflect this when you change your route using the left/right keys.

As player you can decide at every tick different. So the game needs to reserve the tracks.

See how the gates work: They open, even if you don't want to go through.

I agree also that trains need to pass a signal at Danger, but they only do that in the real world with authority from the local control room, which the driver needs to call in and request. In-game, automatic trains will never pass a red signal, even if the route is available. I think blocking being able to pass signals is a bad move, as it doesn't reflect how railways work, so this isn't an alternative.

Let's see it so: This doesn't work, cause automatic rail is research after you research rail. There is always a time, where you don't have automatic. And I won't like to change this, cause that is a very interesting part of the game.

I'm not sure what you mean by "one-time routes", could you elaborate?

The train interface has a new button, like "Single Journey". If you click that and then a station or a point on the map the train drives to that point, no matter, what is defined in the current schedule. Once it arrives it will stop and wait, until the (also available) wait-condition is true.
In other words: It's nothing else than a second scheduler with only one entry and once it is finished it will not continue but delete itself. (Everybody who knows object oriented programming will understand).

[vanatteveldt]

The shuttle train mod effectively adds this. You craft a special 'shuttle train' (which is just a normal diesel for all other purposes) and once you enter it you get a popup with all stations. Click on a station and the train routes there and goes back to manual mode on arrival. You can also summon a shuttle to a station if you got there on foot. Since many people use trains for personal transportation I think this is an extremely useful addition.

[Zion Fox]

As player you can decide at every tick different. So the game needs to reserve the tracks.

See how the gates work: They open, even if you don't want to go through.

As a player, yes you can decide where you're going, but you only go in one direction per game update, not all directions. When driving the train manually towards a switch, it will take one of the routes by default, usually the straight ahead route. It will not choose a route randomly. You control which track you then take by using the left/right key before a switch, and your route changes accordingly.

Gates in this game work in two ways: proximity and velocity. Proximity is based on closeness to the gate. You can open a gate by standing near it but not going through it. Velocity is based on approaching a gate at your speed. Velocity is implemented because the gate moves at a fixed rate, however everything that's designed to pass the gate can move at different speeds (yourself, cars, tanks, trains, enemies, etc). When running towards a gate, it'll start to open so that it's fixed opening speed means that the gate is open by the time you get there. This ensures that no matter how quick you're moving, the gate will be open by the time you get there. I'm not sure why the topic of gates was brought up though, as it's unrelated to this.

The shuttle train mod effectively adds this. You craft a special 'shuttle train' (which is just a normal diesel for all other purposes) and once you enter it you get a popup with all stations. Click on a station and the train routes there and goes back to manual mode on arrival. You can also summon a shuttle to a station if you got there on foot. Since many people use trains for personal transportation I think this is an extremely useful addition.

This sounds like a suitable alternative, however requires building more stations for your sidings. It could be a cost I'll willing to part with for convenience though. Thank you.

[Mengmoshu]

I don't see why manually driven trains couldn't just reserve all exits of a switch. I also wouldn't mind some way to have my manual train obey signals the way auto trains do. Maybe even require pressing/holding a hotkey to get the signal ignoring behavior we have now. Though which one is the default should probably be a setting in the options menu.

[Hannu]

I think that better idea would be to make signal colors unambiguous and show color and distance to the next signal to the player. It would be player's responsibility to drive correctly and brake in time but it would also keep possible to break the rules if for example construction work or error in signal placement needs it.

[Mengmoshu]

The problem with just giving the player more information is that it doesn't actually make "manual" driving any safer. It can be really hard to know when you need to start braking to avoid other trains. Right now driving a train manually around a busy rail network either results in damaged/wrecked trains, or you driving slow so that doesn't happen. Right now a big part of that issue isn't that the player doesn't know though, it's that the auto trains don't know what blocks the player will occupy next/soon. Whereas they know whether a block is going to be occupied by another auto-train just fine.

My very strong preference is for manual trains to stop at red signals at least, with a simple way to override, like holding a modifier key while trying to drive. Especially if that is combined with manual trains reserving blocks so your auto-trains don't cross junctions after you've run out of stopping distance.

[aeros1]

Don't see problems or a lot of problems, just check next after yellow path or chain signal if it is red force manual train to slowdown, maybe slowdown on blue chain signal if you want pass on correct path, because sometimes I just zoom past split.
If next siginal is green or chain signal is blue just continue.
If signal is red force train to stop.
If chain signal is blue you just force train on next free unreserved track locking it away, this includes also one that is next after last yellow.
You may make some congestion problems, but usually it is solvable if train network is good enough. Btw RL trains don't reserve any tracks(or too far) they just pick free tracks leading to destination or slowdown if they encounter yellow signal, till they get chance to go on other lane and get past slower train.

[ssilk]

I link back to viewtopic.php?f=6&t=30540&p=200374#p193093
--> We need a way to roll over red signals. This is sometimes needed to avoid hazards or other ugly train situations, where you bugged your train network or so.

Which leads again back to the special automatic mode for "one-time-travel", which would solve all of that problems and adds useful functionality to your trains.

[aeros1]

The thing with manual trains being able to take any route is true, however it's only taking one route when it approaches a switch. You use a left/right keys to alter the switch for you to take the new route in relation to the train's forward direction. The track reservation could be updated to reflect this when you change your route using the left/right keys.

I agree also that trains need to pass a signal at Danger, but they only do that in the real world with authority from the local control room, which the driver needs to call in and request. In-game, automatic trains will never pass a red signal, even if the route is available. I think blocking being able to pass signals is a bad move, as it doesn't reflect how railways work, so this isn't an alternative.

I'm not sure what you mean by "one-time routes", could you elaborate?

IT could be as separate mode, Instead of manual let's say safe. No sane driver would remove automatics on signals if he just needs get train from a to be by proper not decided route. Just because having you train ram another train because driver missed signal is bad idea. It is option just in case it required, and could be made as switch.

[bobingabout]

This one is probably a bug, but... I've had an automatic train rushing up my rear, and smash clean through the back few carriages of my train before.

It was like... Argh, that train must really hate me!

At which point I then reloaded from the last autosave, because, through no fault of my own, an angry train destroyed a huge load of cargo (I think it was solar panels, accumulators, and laser turrets for use in building up the defences of an outpost)

[aeros1]

This one is probably a bug, but... I've had an automatic train rushing up my rear, and smash clean through the back few carriages of my train before.

It was like... Argh, that train must really hate me!

At which point I then reloaded from the last autosave, because, through no fault of my own, an angry train destroyed a huge load of cargo (I think it was solar panels, accumulators, and laser turrets for use in building up the defences of an outpost)

Or you drived onto it's block after train passed block. Train checks signals before it passes I think. Plus if it for some reason drived in opposite direction on one way it could have been just ignoring signals because there is none to stop train.

[Deadly-Bagel]

This one is probably a bug, but... I've had an automatic train rushing up my rear, and smash clean through the back few carriages of my train before.

It was like... Argh, that train must really hate me!

At which point I then reloaded from the last autosave, because, through no fault of my own, an angry train destroyed a huge load of cargo (I think it was solar panels, accumulators, and laser turrets for use in building up the defences of an outpost)

Or you drived onto it's block after train passed block. Train checks signals before it passes I think. Plus if it for some reason drived in opposite direction on one way it could have been just ignoring signals because there is none to stop train.

I've driven into an intersection and been T-boned by an automatic train, and yeah I worked out the order of events - First the auto train approaches the intersection, nobody on it, passes the (green) signals. Next I enter the intersection in a manual train, ignoring the red signals, I am going faster because auto train has just come out of a station so I make it to the crossed tracks first. Auto train collides with the side of the manual train.

I don't see what else could be done, you need to be able to pass red signals to do things like debug complex signal setups or untangle a deadlock. If it really causes you problems a lot of players have a third rail for personal use, if it intersects with an automatic rail have the signals so that no auto train will cross the rails if you're anywhere near it. Basically you an auto train to enter and leave the intersection in less time than it takes for you to pass the last signal and reach it.

[Mengmoshu]

I still think that making manual trains reserve blocks based on speed and acceleration is a must. Otherwise it won't be practical to drive anywhere close to full speed. The impact on congestion is a pretty reasonable tradeoff, and I'm fairly sure there are a lot of cases where it would actually improve, since manual trains already reserve the block they're in and cautious driving is likely to result in trains waiting behind the player.

Of course you should be able to bypass signals, but that is easy to allow (from a UI design perspective anyway). A toggle and/or hotkey to disable the train's automatic braking in manual mode would be simple, and easy to explain to new players and veterans alike. A third mode does not sound easy, though it could be something like automatic/manual(Safe)/manual(Less Safe), but where and how do you explain to people that it really just means the train will brake at red and yellow signals?

Are there any actions that use the Shift key while you're actively driving a train? I don't believe there are, which means a toggle in the Other section of the options menu for setting the default behavior and holding Shift to temporarily invert the default could easily work. That would allow us to drive through red signals, go against the direction of a signal, etc. without users having to understand anything more than "Hold Shift+W to drive through red signals." Heck, there could even be a notification of some kind if you try to drive through a red without holding Shift.

I don't know how much programming work these two ideas would take since I'm not an expert and I don't have access to the Factorio source, but I suspect it would be a reasonable amount given the improvement of the user experience it could give.

[aeros1]

It could be done at same place where manual auto switch present. Though I would made it somewhere a bit off so there wouldn't be problem when switching. Also that slider is abnoxious to hit. I would like either some keyboard switch between modes or larger buttons instead slider. Or handcart sugguestion I've seen somewhere which is relatively cheap and allows debugging. I personally don't see need in debugging as I quite capable to se directions and signals. But agree for new player to understand signals would be usefull have ways to experiment to have master movement.

Btw most likely you driven on red signal that's it. I can understand as it is impossble to see signals, and speeds reserve huge lengths. So unless you maximum zoom out and signals blink before you register what lane they are. So you crossed red signal (when train moves too fast it reserves block (yellow signal) so you get on junction red signal), and it was too late for auto train to stop before impact. Hell, friend always bumps the train on one of crooked train stop(on straight rail, and run through on side), and he builds huge train factories. Looks pretty neat because there is no belt intervines(Belts are pretty straight forward and simple), and logistic bots are actually free to resuply base defences with ammo and load unload spares, and do stuff that requires construction and repairs(laying mines restoring destroyed objects)/

[Deadly-Bagel]

Are there any actions that use the Shift key while you're actively driving a train?

Train is classified as a vehicle which doesn't really affect the controls that much other than for movement. So Shift is still used for things like placing ghost entities etc but not sure if this would cause a conflict.

I still think Ssilk's solution is the way to go, have a way of selecting a station to just go to without having to mess with the schedule. There will be some fringe cases this won't work for, mostly a problem in large networks, but for that I'd recommend the third rail approach.

[aeros1]

Are there any actions that use the Shift key while you're actively driving a train?

Train is classified as a vehicle which doesn't really affect the controls that much other than for movement. So Shift is still used for things like placing ghost entities etc but not sure if this would cause a conflict.

I still think Ssilk's solution is the way to go, have a way of selecting a station to just go to without having to mess with the schedule. There will be some fringe cases this won't work for, mostly a problem in large networks, but for that I'd recommend the third rail approach.

As long as I can use map to select station I am all up. in fact it could be done from train interface as lon as you can scroll map, though there is something fun in driving train yourself, so I would like to have safe mode, at least it would bring fun to some players. Actually selecting, stations from maps even for schedulling would be much more usefull than list(though would leave list too). This way there is no need to rename stations to remember which station corresponds to which part of factory. OR way to group in tree list those train stops, to make one big train station. So you may either direct train to stop or any stop on the station. So now you don't need manually tweak trains and stops to get more or less uncongested traffic.
I.e.
>Circuits
--Loader (stop)
->Intakes
---Intake1(stop)
---Intake2(stop)

So you may move your train to any free stop on "Intakes" or "Circuits" or on specific stop if the need would arise. As for selecting station I think algorithm of time reservation (I.e. what train reaches faster) and if all stops are busy( closest stop with least shcheduled trains.) It would also clean up stations list as you may now filter by outposts practically, even if outpost has 10 stops for some reason.

[Mengmoshu]

I think Ssilk and Deadly-bagel are trying to solve a fun-da-mentally (why was this word censored?) different problem than I am. Zion Fox's initial post in this thread was much more about improving manual driving than providing an easier way to get the player from point A to point B in the rail network. I don't see a use for adding an extra interface element just to avoid changing a train's schedule, since adding a station and then removing it when you get there is trivial. I'm not concerned about Automatic trains being easier, they're already really good. What concerns me is making it easier to safely drive a train manually for those circumstances where there isn't a suitably placed train stop. No matter how convenient you make tweaking train schedules there will still be plenty of times you have to take manual control to reach somewhere, or to unsnarl an intersection. I also think that having manual trains reserve blocks (including reserving all choices at an intersection) is a must, because right now I think manual trains cause too much congestion and damage.

Selecting train stations by the map sounds pretty cool, and maybe it should even get it's own thread requesting the feature.