Factorio Forums

i would like to see train station, that can be used in both directions, probly it was suggested before.

i have such designs, but it requires 2 stations to share same space atm.

How would that even work? Trains travelling in opposite directions would stop on opposite sides of the station, so you'd need two sets of inserters and chests. It's more efficient in every respect to put a second train stop down further along the track so trains travelling opposite directions still stop in the same place.

Deadly-Bagel wrote:How would that even work? Trains travelling in opposite directions would stop on opposite sides of the station, so you'd need two sets of inserters and chests. It's more efficient in every respect to put a second train stop down further along the track so trains travelling opposite directions still stop in the same place.

you don't need to have inserters on both sides, just on one, but you can have trains that will travel from one end to other, unloading midway for example

...What? I don't follow.

If you have a station on a rail, a train travelling east will stop to the left of the station. A train travelling west will stop to the right of the station.

I made the same mistake, we shouldn't mix up train stations with station stops . A train station is a concept, whereas a train stop is an item.
Although I believe it may be possible to replace the train stop with small modular roofless platforms like in locomotion, which have the length of an locomotive or a waggon, but with a different concept. You define the platform where the train stops and it should be possible to load one wagon after another (train advances to the next platform), and of course, a train shouldn't be able to turn the direction magically like in most other railroad games.

Deadly-Bagel wrote:...What? I don't follow.

If you have a station on a rail, a train travelling east will stop to the left of the station. A train travelling west will stop to the right of the station.

Code: Select all

__________[]__________
==========>
           <==========
______________________
[] - Station
==> - Train and carriages

they share single rail, and you can stop going from both direction.
your picture is about something different

i will post a pic, if i don't forget.

driver wrote:I made the same mistake, we shouldn't mix up train stations with station stops . A train station is a concept, whereas a train stop is an item.
Although I believe it may be possible to replace the train stop with small modular roofless platforms like in locomotion, which have the length of an locomotive or a waggon, but with a different concept. You define the platform where the train stops and it should be possible to load one wagon after another (train advances to the next platform), and of course, a train shouldn't be able to turn the direction magically like in most other railroad games.

i think with new enhacements to scripting engine, this actualy might be possible, have not checked programing for trains yet.

and here trains don't magically change direction, they only drive in engine unit facing direction, so you need two engine units to move both ways. no magic involved.

Derp yeah I meant stop.

But it doesn't make sense if he says station as it's easily possible with two train stops as I said earlier?

Deadly-Bagel wrote:Derp yeah I meant stop.

But it doesn't make sense if he says station as it's easily possible with two train stops as I said earlier?

two stops means two different names (And two buildings) - and yes, i'm aware, you can name multiple train stops with same name, i'm using that on multirail stations, so train will arive on whatever unload platform is free, but having "train stop" working both ways is again, matter of convenience.

...Okay so now we're back at our original point, trains will stop either side of the train stop so what's the point?

BTW in the code above the only reason the two trains are on separate rows is to distinguish that they are two separate trains, they are on the same rail. It's just to show that if train stops work both ways the trains won't stop in the same place.

Deadly-Bagel wrote:...Okay so now we're back at our original point, trains will stop either side of the train stop so what's the point?

BTW in the code above the only reason the two trains are on separate rows is to distinguish that they are two separate trains, they are on the same rail. It's just to show that if train stops work both ways the trains won't stop in the same place.

ok let say you have


a ----- b ----- c

if in point b you put single train stop, train can stop there only in one direction, not in other

so you need to plan path a -> b -> c -> a (path a)
if you have both sided train stop you can plan path a -> b -> c -> b -> a (path b)

atm. i solve this by having 2 train stops at point b, each in one direction and both carry same name, if you have only one, you will get error "no path", when you will try to reach station from oposite direction that train stop is oriented, unless behavior of train stops changed in .14 (which i have not see in any patch notes)

also for 2 trains , in case of path a a-> b train will go back and forth, b -> c train will go only to c, but can't return to b, because b train stop is facing only in one direction, while in case of path b (both sided train stop), both trains can go back and forth.

Yes, that's what I thought you meant.

So, let's say you have this train stop, and a train approaches from station C:
So what exactly happens when the train is coming from the opposite direction, from station A?
This is the problem I am talking about, and it's easier, cheaper and more compact to have two train stops instead, one each end of the station.

train is going from station at north, to coal in middle, then to another station at bottom, unloading at both, loading in middle


i have also setups, where "middle" is unloading, and not loading station, like in this case

Exactly. That is what I'm saying, you need two train stops. So what are you trying to do?

Uhm, can you both please continue in Gameplay-Help board?

Deadly-Bagel wrote:Exactly. That is what I'm saying, you need two train stops. So what are you trying to do?

guess, due all explaining you totaly forgot my post to which you did react

mexmer wrote:i would like to see train station, that can be used in both directions, probly it was suggested before.

i have such designs, but it requires 2 stations to share same space atm.

maybe if i posted picture then, it will not go to this length

love trains, must say i used to play Transport Tycoon and then TTD lots of hours. i had to say that when first saw factorio remembered to my old days with TTD. i must say im missing tunnels, more than bridges, cause with landfill u can cross water, no need of bridges there cause there are no boats and water is nottotally limited as a resource, just limited by offshore pumps space if needed. Also loved your train conditions add, in the .13 but i missing one that would improve gameplay for expert players that is skip trainstop if condition. i think it gives many possibilities for circuit network, more control on your trains. a cool adition to i his would be a new item to avoid massive rail wiring, that sends the signals of de circuit network to the train so you could manage train between stops too.
next long goal could be adding an electric loco. that means that an electric rail system must be added. so i guess its a large task or even too much work.


but i play vanilla and im trying to build a mega base, where most items are produced individually in big modules. so i move each item through a train network to next module and with every update im just waiting to see any addition to trains.

I have a couple of suggestions regarding Trains and my most recent playthrough. Obviously better Train/Circuit integration would be nice, maybe an ability to have a signal add a Station or Station Queue to the train at a given stop for dynamic routing. I haven't played too much with the Circut Network involving Trains so I don't really have many specific suggestions on that front.

Suggestion 1, add a Loop Stops checkbox option to the Train's interface. Sometimes I have an outpost with a few clean up items left from deconstruction but I know it only needed one train. rather than having it continue looping, clogging up my rail network and consuming fuel, I would have liked to have it be in a semi-auto mode. The ability to send it off and when it gets to the last stop on it's list, it drops back to manual mode.

Suggestion 2, in continuation with the idea above, possibly have a selector for Looping the orders, as well as Stepping the orders. Basically have it drop back to Manual when it reaches the next stop on the list. I found I liked to set up my personal train to have all my *important* player spots I would want to go to. That way when I wanted to head to an outpost I didn't need to scroll through the (very tiny) Train Stop selection menu and only had to go through the smaller filtered list of added stops to the train. The biggest benefit of this would be when I was clearing Biters. I wanted very badly to be able to tell my train to go to a stop, then clear Biter Bases along the way and have the train waiting for me when I got there. I either had to manually set up the orders each time (which doesn't take long but is very annoying and tedious), or decide it wasn't worth it and order (and wait) for the train once I got there.

TehDwArF wrote:I have a couple of suggestions regarding Trains and my most recent playthrough. Obviously better Train/Circuit integration would be nice, maybe an ability to have a signal add a Station or Station Queue to the train at a given stop for dynamic routing. I haven't played too much with the Circut Network involving Trains so I don't really have many specific suggestions on that front.

Suggestion 1, add a Loop Stops checkbox option to the Train's interface. Sometimes I have an outpost with a few clean up items left from deconstruction but I know it only needed one train. rather than having it continue looping, clogging up my rail network and consuming fuel, I would have liked to have it be in a semi-auto mode. The ability to send it off and when it gets to the last stop on it's list, it drops back to manual mode.

Suggestion 2, in continuation with the idea above, possibly have a selector for Looping the orders, as well as Stepping the orders. Basically have it drop back to Manual when it reaches the next stop on the list. I found I liked to set up my personal train to have all my *important* player spots I would want to go to. That way when I wanted to head to an outpost I didn't need to scroll through the (very tiny) Train Stop selection menu and only had to go through the smaller filtered list of added stops to the train. The biggest benefit of this would be when I was clearing Biters. I wanted very badly to be able to tell my train to go to a stop, then clear Biter Bases along the way and have the train waiting for me when I got there. I either had to manually set up the orders each time (which doesn't take long but is very annoying and tedious), or decide it wasn't worth it and order (and wait) for the train once I got there.

for suggestion 1 you can use the signal condition. That way the train will stay there until you tell it to go (either with a circuit signal or manually)

I would like to see a method to influence the rail pathing decisions. The idea is simple: a rail segment that increases the apparent distance cost to pass over it. In practice, it could be a special rail segment item (with a settings window for value), or a normal rail section connected to a constant combinator with the value set by the combinator. When performing pathing calculations, the arbitrary additional distance set by value is added to the calculated cost, making a route over the special rail segment less desirable.

As for the rationale, I offer two, although there are certainly many more:
1) It would be possible to make "express lanes" that bypass T intersections. If a train needs to make a turn at the the "T", then it is forced to absorb the additional distance cost. Trains that do not need to turn will preferentially choose a nearby rail segment that does not incur the extra distance penalty.
2) Prevent travel through sidings -- A siding off a main line will sometimes see through-traffic, although it should not. Adding a rail segment with small distance penalty will prevent (or at least penalize) trains from using that siding unless the have business there. In a recent reddit post, someone asked about this very issue -- how to prevent trains from going into a siding with station when they aren't scheduled to stop at the station.

This request falls into the ethos of the game, whereby it is not necessary to use, so players are not penalized for not knowing or not using it; However, using it allows for a more complex and rich experience in optimization.

Even if the devs don't want to add it, allowing the train pathing to be influenced via LUA would allow modders to fill the gap.

Thanks!

Edit: I just found a linked page with similar proposals under the ideas page: viewtopic.php?f=80&t=21899. Please add my vote!