Tristate Train Stops

[whitecold]

Train stops are either disabled or enabled currently. Enabled, any trains can arrive while disabled all trains are rerouted and skip the station.

I suggest adding in a third state. In this state, trains already on the way to this station continue on there, and hold as normal, but any train that just departs the station before skips this station.

The purpose would be to allow smarter rail systems that dispatch multiple trains at need to several different stations, as currently there is no way to spread out trains, to make two trains with identical schedules go to different stations during operation using the circuit network.

[Lav]

If I understand the goal of the suggestion correctly, then an alternative would work too: allow "hard" and "soft" disabling of a station. "Hard" means trains re-route, "soft" means they continue moving to the station normally.

[JohnyDL]

yeah there are a bunch of ways suggested to allow multiple stations to share names and trains but for distributing the trains out to all the various stations, I tend to just add a bunch more trains and allow the waiting block of each station to allow bypassing

By controlling the station with circuits and you can turn it off if there's not enough resources in it to fill a train full, I haven't tried it yet but I'm assuming that if the train is in the station loading and you turn the station off a train will move on but if it doesn't you could even do math of if train is in station resources available = resources in chests - (empty space in train + another train train) then if resources available <0 close station with combinators, which would let the train fill up but deny other trains arriving, then if a train (or a bunch of trains) get right to that station and can't use it the bypass allows them to reroute to another station with the same name, it's a little inefficient as you need more trains to do the same job as programing each ore patch to have a unique train but most of the time it seems to work for me.

That said adding this or something like it as a suggestion to the Logistics Trains mod makes a bunch of sense to me

[whitecold]

yeah there are a bunch of ways suggested to allow multiple stations to share names and trains but for distributing the trains out to all the various stations, I tend to just add a bunch more trains and allow the waiting block of each station to allow bypassing

By controlling the station with circuits and you can turn it off if there's not enough resources in it to fill a train full, I haven't tried it yet but I'm assuming that if the train is in the station loading and you turn the station off a train will move on but if it doesn't you could even do math of if train is in station resources available = resources in chests - (empty space in train + another train train) then if resources available <0 close station with combinators, which would let the train fill up but deny other trains arriving, then if a train (or a bunch of trains) get right to that station and can't use it the bypass allows them to reroute to another station with the same name, it's a little inefficient as you need more trains to do the same job as programing each ore patch to have a unique train but most of the time it seems to work for me.

That said adding this or something like it as a suggestion to the Logistics Trains mod makes a bunch of sense to me

The point would be exactly to prevent the second train heading to the same destination before the first one arrived, not simply bypass the station once it is all the way out at a remote outpost already. As far as the logistics train mod goes, that goes too far for my taste. I want to automate my trains myself using the circuit network, not have them automated for me.

[JohnyDL]

yeah like I said there have been a bunch of suggested methods to do this and I'm definitely behind an alternative to what I have, I do like the logistics trains but I see they aren't for everyone, if you know a bit about the coding you could probably configure it the way you like.

But back to suggestions made by others in the same vien:
A post a few days ago suggested a penalty against stations with trains already in boud viewtopic.php?f=6&t=47969
Another a few days before that on train stations providing a counter for the number of incoming trains so you can do it yourself with circuit networks viewtopic.php?f=6&t=47695
And ssilk has a whole page for suggestions specifically related to rails and their issues with other ideas to help this problem collated over the last year viewtopic.php?f=80&t=21899

[whitecold]

yeah like I said there have been a bunch of suggested methods to do this and I'm definitely behind an alternative to what I have, I do like the logistics trains but I see they aren't for everyone, if you know a bit about the coding you could probably configure it the way you like.

But back to suggestions made by others in the same vien:
A post a few days ago suggested a penalty against stations with trains already in boud viewtopic.php?f=6&t=47969
Another a few days before that on train stations providing a counter for the number of incoming trains so you can do it yourself with circuit networks viewtopic.php?f=6&t=47695
And ssilk has a whole page for suggestions specifically related to rails and their issues with other ideas to help this problem collated over the last year viewtopic.php?f=80&t=21899

Messing with the pathfinder is for my taste inelegant. It may be useful to control multiple trains in the same logical station, but for determining to which of several stations a train goes, a more elegant solution would be nice. Also the pathfinder leaves the question open if trains en route to the station may not decide to reroute if they get to a stop at an intersection, as during the repath, they will be affected by the same pathfinding penalties.

The alternative I see would be to have circuit conditions in the schedule before departure that tell if a stop should be skipped or not