[0.13.x] Train car indicators when placing rail signals

[Kelderek]

0.13 added a wonderful new feature that shows white bracket indicators of train car positions when you try to place a rail signal. Unfortunately this only shows train cars from the signal and back, but not in front of it. Is there any chance we can have this feature expanded so that it shows train car positions in front of the signal too?

Here's an example:

I want to place a signal far enough behind (in this case North of) the chain rail signal at the bottom of this image so that there is enough room for a 4 car train (1-2-1) to fit between them, but the train car indicators are only shown behind the signal I want to place and not in front of it so I have to do a bit of eyeballing and guessing or mousing over the chain rail signal below to get it to show up.

The way it works now assumes you are only placing signals as you move forward along a track, but in my experience sometimes you need to move backward along a section of rail to place new signals - especially if you have just added a new intersection. Having the car indicators in front of the signal in addition to behind it will allow for proper spacing of signals to see if you can provide enough room to fit an entire train.

[ssilk]

Ah, yes, I the indicators should be shown also before signals.

[siggboy]

+1, it was my first thought as well when I tried this new feature. Should work in both directions.

Maybe the colors of the outlines (which are white right now), could be shaded to make it clear what's "in front of the signal" and "behind the signal. So we'd have white and light grey outlines, for example.

[ssilk]

Very good point. Or an arrow in each indicator? Cause for double signals it is valid for both directions.

[Kelderek]

It doesn't need to be any more complex than it is now, in my opinion. I would be happy to just see the same white brackets in front of a signal that I am holding to place as the brackets that are currently visible behind it. Perhaps a different color than white, but I don't think more than that is needed.

[Neotix]

Add numbers for that indicators because is tedious to count them every time. With numbers even long trains won't be a problem because we just see how many wagons fit between signals.

Example:

[siggboy]

Neotix, this is beautiful, +100 for this idea!

[Klonan]

I think it works just well as it is now, and you generally place signals as you move along the track in that direction:

Example

Only if you're working backwards along your rail would you need the indicators in front of the signal

[Neotix]

Try it with long trains like with 10 wagons and 2 locomotives in both sides.

Also try place signal in opposite direction not along with train driving direction.

[Kelderek]

I think it works just well as it is now, and you generally place signals as you move along the track in that direction:

Example

Only if you're working backwards along your rail would you need the indicators in front of the signal

I find that I am moving backward when placing rail signals as often as I am moving forward, and thus why it is frustrating to only have the indicators work in one direction.

The most common example of why I would be moving backwards is whenever I add an intersection or branch off a new rail line from an existing one. If I make an intersection, I have to add new signals to prevent collisions and I always want to be able to add a new block that is 4 cars long (the size of all my trains) before and after every intersection. So in that case I place the signals in the intersection first and then move backward and forward along each line to measure out and place a signal far enough away to allow a full train room on each side of the intersection.

Another example is when building two rail tracks simultaneously where each track provides one-way travel in opposite directions. So if I am moving my character West to East and laying down two track lines, then I am moving forward along one track, but backward along the other since they are meant to move trains in opposite directions. Depending on how cluttered the area is, it may not be possible to just match up the signals of the forward and backward directions and I need to measure and use the indicators to get it right.

There are lots of times that I find the need to place signals such that it would be a huge help if those indicators were also in the front of a signal.

[siggboy]

I think it works just well as it is now, and you generally place signals as you move along the track in that direction:

No.

If you create a station, it's not unusual to make the train stop first, and then add a waiting stop behind it.

If you create a waiting bay, it makes perfect sense to create the front of the waiting bay (where it joins the main line or station area) first, and then create the actual rails for the waiting area.

If you create a junction in between junctions you want to make sure there is enough space in front of your junction until the next junction to fit at least one train.

If you make big changes to your rail network, anything is possible.

It's very unreasonable to assume that you move forward in most cases and the current indicators are efficient.

The current indicators are extremely helpful but they're also completely useless in a significant number of circumstances.

[ssilk]

So I recommend to make an own suggestion out of that, siggyboy, cause I move this now to implemented.

[siggboy]

So I recommend to make an own suggestion out of that, siggyboy, cause I move this now to implemented.

The suggestion that was made is not implemented, or is it?

[ssilk]

That is the reason, why I want to have a new one: To avoid confusion.

[siggboy]

That is the reason, why I want to have a new one: To avoid confusion.

I'd say you're causing confusing by moving suggestions to "implemented" that are, in fact, not implemented.

[Kelderek]

Why would he need to make a different suggestion? As I read it he was just giving additional examples why what I originally suggested in the first post is actually necessary and valuable and worth implementing. This is all really just the one suggestion: to add train car indicator brackets ahead of a rail signal you are trying to place to go along with the ones already shown behind it.

I think it's very confusing to move this to implemented forum if it has not yet been added to the game by the devs.

[daniel34]

I think it's very confusing to move this to implemented forum if it has not yet been added to the game by the devs.

I think that was a mistake on ssilk's part, moved back to Ideas and Suggestions.

We might move ideas that are confirmed to be implemented by the devs to the Implemented Suggestions (we did this with ideas for 0.13 before it was available), but this idea is only 3 days old and I doubt the devs have found time to implement it yet

[Kelderek]

Thanks! I know they're probably getting a ton of feedback on 0.13, but I really hope this can find a way in to the game. The train car indicators are a great feature, but it feels only halfway done, and I think this would make it more complete.

[siggboy]

Thanks! I know they're probably getting a ton of feedback on 0.13, but I really hope this can find a way in to the game. The train car indicators are a great feature, but it feels only halfway done, and I think this would make it more complete.

Yes, I very much agree with that. Right now (in 0.12) it's basically impossible to correctly space the signals if you want tight waiting bays and buffers before junctions. I usually make a blueprint just so I can space the signals correctly.

The 0.13 indicators basically solve this problem (unless your trains are excessively long), but they only do it half the time. If you work into the "wrong" direction, then you're back in the 0.12 situation where you have to eyeball it or use a blueprint.

So it really should be bidirectional, with some shading/color indication that would make it easier to see the orientation (the numbering that Neotix suggested looks awesome, too, but it's a bit technical/immersion breaking; it could be a hidden/debug option that one could enable).