Factorio Forums

Optera wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 23, 2019 6:25 am

Sad_Brother wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:53 pm

Tunnels/bridges do not need switches/signals. And bends are not extremely needed. I can agree with static length and two directions only.
Trains so often need different levels crossings.

Sounds like you never played OTTD.
Having no signals severely limits throughput either forcing very short or multiple parallel tunnels/bridges.
And I can't begin to count the times where I wanted tunnels to bend like almost every tunnel does in reality.

Those issues will be less severe in Factorio as large mountains don't exist, but they will come up if a hack solution is implemented instead of a clean one.

Bridges/tunnels can't turn in OTTD, can they?
(but yes, that would be nice, and signals would be far nicer).

Jap2.0 wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 23, 2019 12:19 pm

Bridges/tunnels can't turn in OTTD, can they?

Not to my knowledge. Bridges and tunnels had been discussed to be implemented as proper tracks, like in Locomotion or Transport Fever, rather than teleporters with visual hacks for over a decade when I stopped following OTTD forums 3 years ago.

Back to Factorio. Having a track that can link 2 surfaces would be the cleanest way to do tunnels in Factorio.
This would require some expansion to the pathfinder and a 2nd optional surface parameter for tracks. Both would have to be done in the engine and might cost some performance for a feature not used in current base game. So it seems a unlikely we will see it happen.

Tekky wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:35 pm

I agree.

However, I see the following problem:

Since the train can run out of fuel at any moment and therefore can get stuck inside a tunnel, the player must have some way of going into the tunnel to rescue the stuck train. This would require an underground view to be implemented. I imagine that this would be a lot of work.

This could be solved by simply coding the train to teleport to the exit of the tunnel if it runs out of fuel.

Optera wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 23, 2019 6:25 am

Sad_Brother wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:53 pm

Tunnels/bridges do not need switches/signals. And bends are not extremely needed. I can agree with static length and two directions only.
Trains so often need different levels crossings.

Sounds like you never played OTTD.
Having no signals severely limits throughput either forcing very short or multiple parallel tunnels/bridges.
And I can't begin to count the times where I wanted tunnels to bend like almost every tunnel does in reality.

Those issues will be less severe in Factorio as large mountains don't exist, but they will come up if a hack solution is implemented instead of a clean one.

You are right. I did not try it. Is it worth now?
In my humble opinion Tunnels should not be long in Factorio. It can be just enough to resolve crossing with other road, railroad, water etc.
I prefer not to allow several trains in one Tunnel, so doubt any signals inside needed.
I understand inconvenience of bend and direction restriction. But I ask for minimal addition here. More would be luxury.

(I can use word "I" too much because lack of practice Do not think I'm too selfish)

Alien_Squasher wrote: ↑

Wed Jan 23, 2019 5:08 pm

Tekky wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:35 pm

I agree.

However, I see the following problem:

Since the train can run out of fuel at any moment and therefore can get stuck inside a tunnel, the player must have some way of going into the tunnel to rescue the stuck train. This would require an underground view to be implemented. I imagine that this would be a lot of work.

This could be solved by simply coding the train to teleport to the exit of the tunnel if it runs out of fuel.

Take the idea of a train track tile that connects 2 surfaces. You then have tracks leading up to the tunnel and on the other surface you have the inside of the tunnel. And factorissimo already solve the problem of people entering the tunnel and ending up on the other surface too. So players can just walk into the tunnel.

That's why I think tunnels are the only way to go instead of bridges. Tunnels only need that one little extra feature of the connecting train track tile. Everything else already exists. Bridges add a whole new set of problems to collision detection and graphics engine.

Really, a simple solution would be to have it act like an underground belt, except it is able to curve around.

"Yeah, REAL simple" i hear some say. Look, i am not a programmer. I dont have any experience with making games, but to me the logical solution is to make it act like an underground belt. There are a few complications, sure, but we can figure it out. We're all intelectuals here, lets put our minds togher and see what we can make.


Sorry

ImTheRealSlayer wrote: ↑

Thu Jan 31, 2019 11:49 am

Really, a simple solution would be to have it act like an underground belt, except it is able to curve around.

"Yeah, REAL simple" i hear some say. Look, i am not a programmer. I dont have any experience with making games, but to me the logical solution is to make it act like an underground belt. There are a few complications, sure, but we can figure it out. We're all intelectuals here, lets put our minds togher and see what we can make.


Sorry

Underground belts don't transport trains. Totally different thing.

Simplest solution would be track with hidden vision/collision in the middle.
It would be just enough minimum.

Simplest and doable i think is :

add a slope (20 tiles or whatsoever) after and before it all collisions and checks are ignored with the train/rail/signals.
Maybe then you could make the rails and trains in this are transparent, so it would be also visible different.

nosports wrote: ↑

Thu Jan 31, 2019 5:28 pm

Simplest and doable i think is :

add a slope (20 tiles or whatsoever) after and before it all collisions and checks are ignored with the train/rail/signals.
Maybe then you could make the rails and trains in this are transparent, so it would be also visible different.

That would be as complex, if not more so, as teleporting the train to a different surface when it hits a special rail and far less flexible.

When running a lot of trains, junctions become the bottleneck. Support for underground train tunnels would reduce this by allowing trains going straight through to skip the merge/turn parts of the junction. It would probably need to run up to 24 train segments (24m?) or more underground.

This has already been suggested and discussed in the following thread:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=46978 Tunnel or bridges for trains

EDIT: Meanwhile, the threads have been merged. Therefore, my above link now points to the current thread.

Hi,

after reading all the thread, the bigger issue is what is going on with fuel or tunnel lenght:

We can make very little undergrounds like 2 or 4 tiles max (like yellow undergrounds lenght, 2 rail road can pass up there), so a locomotive going in it will always have a part visible, no need to make an "underground vision" in case of lack of fuel. To be fair, a zone will be need before the underground to allow the train to go down and after to go up.

Well that was just an idea. have all fun and ty for makin this game great!

Tekillaa wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 19, 2019 10:10 pm

Hi,

after reading all the thread, the bigger issue is what is going on with fuel or tunnel lenght:

We can make very little undergrounds like 2 or 4 tiles max (like yellow undergrounds lenght, 2 rail road can pass up there), so a locomotive going in it will always have a part visible, no need to make an "underground vision" in case of lack of fuel. To be fair, a zone will be need before the underground to allow the train to go down and after to go up.

Well that was just an idea. have all fun and ty for makin this game great!

The tunnel entrance and exit should actually be portals to other surfaces. So you can walk into a tunnel and refuel a train that is stuck.

mrvn wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 20, 2019 6:32 pm

Tekillaa wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 19, 2019 10:10 pm

Hi,

after reading all the thread, the bigger issue is what is going on with fuel or tunnel lenght:

We can make very little undergrounds like 2 or 4 tiles max (like yellow undergrounds lenght, 2 rail road can pass up there), so a locomotive going in it will always have a part visible, no need to make an "underground vision" in case of lack of fuel. To be fair, a zone will be need before the underground to allow the train to go down and after to go up.

Well that was just an idea. have all fun and ty for makin this game great!

The tunnel entrance and exit should actually be portals to other surfaces. So you can walk into a tunnel and refuel a train that is stuck.

I exactly what im trying to avoid, makin the player disapper from the first map is not an option (multiplayer, game script). I guess we just want a feature who allows better path for rail road without big game change.

So teleportation into another map/lvl is for me not an option, or this is not the way i see uderground for train.

Tekillaa wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 20, 2019 6:40 pm

mrvn wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 20, 2019 6:32 pm

Tekillaa wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 19, 2019 10:10 pm

Hi,

after reading all the thread, the bigger issue is what is going on with fuel or tunnel lenght:

We can make very little undergrounds like 2 or 4 tiles max (like yellow undergrounds lenght, 2 rail road can pass up there), so a locomotive going in it will always have a part visible, no need to make an "underground vision" in case of lack of fuel. To be fair, a zone will be need before the underground to allow the train to go down and after to go up.

Well that was just an idea. have all fun and ty for makin this game great!

The tunnel entrance and exit should actually be portals to other surfaces. So you can walk into a tunnel and refuel a train that is stuck.

I exactly what im trying to avoid, makin the player disapper from the first map is not an option (multiplayer, game script). I guess we just want a feature who allows better path for rail road without big game change.

So teleportation into another map/lvl is for me not an option, or this is not the way i see uderground for train.

Why would that be a problem? Install the factorissimo mod and play around with it. When you enter a factory building you get teleported to another surface that holds the inside of the building. Works perfectly fine in single and multiplayer.

Least try of a tunnel mod.

I bet, bridges would be easier instead.

Like you said, it's mod, we are talkin about feature add in vanilla, and this kind of feature don't interest me at all, cause if tunnel exist, so inside fatory too?
It will be totally game change and this kind of feature got to stay in mod. It's not i dont like mod, it's the opposite, but i like to have a true vanilla version with consistency, so no inside. yeah bridge can be good too. but i think people miss my pov.

Tekillaa wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 20, 2019 8:06 pm

Like you said, it's mod, we are talkin about feature add in vanilla, and this kind of feature don't interest me at all, cause if tunnel exist, so inside fatory too?
It will be totally game change and this kind of feature got to stay in mod. It's not i dont like mod, it's the opposite, but i like to have a true vanilla version with consistency, so no inside. yeah bridge can be good too. but i think people miss my pov.

It can't be in a mod. It's something only the c++ code can implement in vanilla. The base game doesn't have to use it but it has to provide the API for it. The base game already provides all for multiple surfaces to exist but not for trains to (or aliens for that matter) to path to another surface.