Train stations

[svish]

I find the loading and unloading of trains a bit silly at the moment. The whole adding lines of inserters <> chests <> inserters <> belts... trying to line them up with the wagons... and so on... maybe someone likes it, but I just find it annoying and a bit weird.

I would much rather have a freight train type station I could put down. Some suggested features of it:

• Like in Transport Tycoon, choose how big it should be (length=support shorter/longer trains, width=number of simultaneous trains supported. (If a too long train enters, it would for example not be able to unload the wagons sticking out the end)
• Direct connection for belts that you'd choose a direction of (input or output).
• Internal chest type storage that would scale with length and width (and maybe possible to increase further through research?).
• Optional output filtering, like with smart inserters, possibly also connectable to logistics network and so on, also like the smart inserters/chests.
• Tiered (that what it's called?) stations, where for example higher tiers would allow for more belt connections. For example a tier 1 station would support 1 belt; a tier 3 station would support 3 belts (so you could for example have 1 input, 1 output for iron ore and 1 output for copper ore), etc.
• The output(s), where you can optionally assign what type of thing to output (like with smart inserters).
• Module slots for speed modules to increase loading/unloading times.
• The speed of the input/output "connection" should scale with what type of belt you connect to it (normal, fast, express), but could maybe be limited by research, so even though you connected an express belt to the station, it would only output on fast speed until you researched "Express station connection" or whatever.
• The train station should have a special fuel storage that would refuel trains while they are being unloaded/loaded.
• A train station connection should also be possible to set to fluids so you could connect oil pipes to it and load tanker carts, which I know aren't in the game currently (only in a mod), but they really should be

Adding this I think would make the train thing a lot more enjoyable for me at least. I definitely enjoy the optimization "puzzles" currently in the game, but the train unloading/loading one with chests and inserters are rather meh. I know you can also do stuff with robots here, but find that even weirder/more unatural. Think this would make it a bit more "realistic", if you think of for example ore hopper type cars that you'd load using belts and unload unto belts. So some additional thoughts in relation to this:

• There should be actual hopper cars that would only support "raw" type stuff like iron ore, copper ore and stone. Maybe these could also be the only type of cars supporting direct loading/unloading from/to belts?
• The mentioned tanker cars should be added to the game.

Hope this suggestion will reach the developers and be implemented. Really feel it would make a great addition and make the whole train experience more enjoyable and smoother. Don't see how it would be taking away anything (you'd still need to properly handle those output belts and use inserters to insert into whatever and so on), and rather just add more to the game. More research (to get the next tiered station, support faster output, etc), something more to think about (can I get by with just one station and use one output belt for iron, one for copper and one for stone, or do I have so many trains coming in with copper that I need all three for that and build a separate station for iron and stone).

Love the game! Please take this into consideration and make it even better

[daniel34]

This Idea reminds me a lot of the loader entity the devs presented a few weeks ago in FFF #128 (scroll down), which is one of the most controversial / most discussed ideas.
It's basically an entity that can load/unload the contents of a belt directly into a chest (or cargo wagon in your example). Some people in the comments thought this was way too overpowered and made other suggestions, such as a running cost (with lubricant) or limiting it to basic resources like ores.

See also FFF #133 where another idea is presented: the heavy inserter which can also use the stack inserter bonus on belts.

I don't think a train station entity is necessary.
For one, trains are being redone for 0.13 and will likely be aligned with the grid, making it easier to line the inserters etc. up with the train wagons.
Also, once you've made a custom train loading/unloading design you can blueprint it and make a copy whenever you want.
If one of the two ideas mentioned above is implemented this would reduce the number of entities you'd need to put down, as no buffer chests would be needed.
Gameplay complexity is another reason: while it would be easy to build train loading/unloading stations with train station entities I feel this makes it too easy and takes away the challenge. It may also make new players think this is the only option for trains and they don't come up with their own solutions. It takes away a puzzle from the player.

For tanker cars, or Fluid wagons as the devs call them:
Originally they were already planned for 0.13 but had to be postponed to 0.14 due to time constraints.

[SyncViews]

I actually was thinking about this sort of thing recently. Allthough with it doing less than shown above. Instead just being like a 1-per wagon warehouse building with the same item filter and storage space as the cargo wagon, maybe logistic bot in/out support, and maybe a dedicated belt in/out port that works at fast belt speed (not filtered, just loads/unloads the belt directly largely like a line of fast-inserters would).



Inserters are a bit of a pain with trains with the need for a line with buffer chests for each. They also cause the horizontal and vertical length difference issues.


I dont think "less stuff to place" is an issue here. If anything its just tedious to make sure I got the train stopping point right. All i then do is decide if I want inserters on one or both sides of the track, then mass place the same belt-inserter-chest-inserter along the length of the cargo wagons at the station

A station type loader would result in a fixed transfer rate per wagon, and the length of the wagon would not matter avoiding crappy scaling/spacing issues. Inserters could also then be dissallowed from using wagons directly, which means the station could actually be slower than the current inserters.

[svish]

I don't think a train station entity is necessary.
For one, trains are being redone for 0.13 and will likely be aligned with the grid, making it easier to line the inserters etc. up with the train wagons.
Also, once you've made a custom train loading/unloading design you can blueprint it and make a copy whenever you want.
If one of the two ideas mentioned above is implemented this would reduce the number of entities you'd need to put down, as no buffer chests would be needed.
Gameplay complexity is another reason: while it would be easy to build train loading/unloading stations with train station entities I feel this makes it too easy and takes away the challenge. It may also make new players think this is the only option for trains and they don't come up with their own solutions. It takes away a puzzle from the player.

The alignment of inserters shouldn't be an issue to begin with in my opinion. And regarding gameplay complexity I really think a proper train station would improve that rather than take anything away. It would make the whole thing look and work better, and feel more natural. I feel this reluctance to "take away a puzzle" to be a bit weird. Kind of seems that, since there has been no train station yet, people have had to make their own weird solutions to it, so they feel invested in that, and are reluctant to let it go, if that makes sense. Like, "I've had to battle with loading/unloading trains, so others should too".

I love the logistic puzzles in this game, but I don't want puzzles for the puzzles sake, just to make things more difficult and annoying. Their existence should make sense too. Otherwise, shouldn't the devs just make everything as difficult, tricky and annoying as possible? Wouldn't automation be much more of a puzzle without the smart inserter and the long-handed inserter? Why have the roboports and bots, doesn't that just take away puzzles?

When you have trains in a game, to me, it makes a lot of sense to have a train station, and with required research, cost, etc, it would still be a challenge. You could also have the space requirement of the station increase a lot with each tier, which would mean that the main station(s) in your base would "cost" a lot space-wise as well.

[bobingabout]

Didn't read much beyond the first line, but...

Trains will have a specific uniform length come version 0.13, so part of the puzzle of figuring out just where to place your inserters will be removed at that point.

[svish]

Didn't read much beyond the first line, but...

You should, it's really good

[ssilk]

In my games every station is different. Ok, not every station, but there is really not much repetition, because I have different tasks for the trains.

Ok, I'm not the average player, but I really think with the introduction of tank wagons you will understand, what i mean.
So with new types of wagons/trains the train station must change to fit the train.it would be really stupid to miss this part of the game out.

[SyncViews]

yeah, thats kinda what I was thinking instead of something really complex, some kind of pump for tankers, and some kind of station crane with warehouse for wagons (rather than a line of loaders + chests), with a 1-per wagon/tanker limit, so side stepping annoying scaling issues (e.g. 7 tiles horizontal vs 6 tiles vertical doesn't really matter)

[ssilk]

I've stations, where every inserter does a different job. Quite complex stuff sometimes.quite simple other times ...