Train connection bonus

[Rjskeet]

So are we ever going to see a train connection bonus like we see with nuclear reactor neighbor bonus? Would people like a bonus for that? I know I would.

Edit: and by train I mean engine to engine bonus

[Ace_W]

I think this is an interesting idea. And one way to make a huge train without using a pile of engines. But i think the bonus would have to be calculated by engine vs cargo. So a 2-4 would only barely be out run by a 5-10 so eventually you run into a point where you cannot get any bigger.

[DerGraue]

This is already in the game

For the acceleration at least

A 2-4 train is not accelerating as fast as a 5 - 10 train, even though the ratio - locomotive - cargo wagon - is the same

I think it behaves like this because the game is calculating "wind resistance" as a fixed value

[Hannu]

No, that would change train physics even more unrealistic and inconsistent than it is now. I do not see any reasons to non newtonian movements on unrealistic tricks (like fuel dependent pulling force and childish nuclear fuels) (I know that some steam locomotives give different power when they burn oil, coal or wood, but changing the fuel needs workshop level structural changes and that detail is far above reasonable in Factorio). Realistic physics (for speed, centifugal forces in curves can not be taken into account without massive overhaul of rail system) would be mathematically simple, very easy to program and most intuitive for players, even for those who found more interesting things to do on their physics lessons.

[Rjskeet]

This is already in the game

For the acceleration at least

A 2-4 train is not accelerating as fast as a 5 - 10 train, even though the ratio - locomotive - cargo wagon - is the same

I think it behaves like this because the game is calculating "wind resistance" as a fixed value

Its not... acceleration is a horrible metric because it means nothing. Cargo to engine metric should be used, I say this because people want trains to accelerate faster to speed up there network however rails and trains are like a pipe. For example what moves more water, a small tube with high pressure, or a tube twice the size with half the pressure.

[Zavian]

Its not... acceleration is a horrible metric because it means nothing. Cargo to engine metric should be used, I say this because people want trains to accelerate faster to speed up there network however rails and trains are like a pipe. For example what moves more water, a small tube with high pressure, or a tube twice the size with half the pressure.

Acceleration is important. It affects how long it takes a train to clear an intersection after stopping before the intersection and how long it takes to enter/leave a station, which affects intersection/station throughput. (Yes other factors, like train length and number of rails/tiles the train needs to cross also matter, but acceleration is a significant factor).

But if people really want realistic physics to be used for train acceleration, then you need to consider cargo mass (empty trains should accelerate faster), and wind resistance, bearing friction etc. But the real showstopper would be turning radius. Trains simply cannot turn in a 30 meter radius when going to 200+ kph, at least without a crazy banked curve that would be unusable at low speed.

I'm not sure it is worth the devs time to work on realistic physics for factorio trains.

[Rjskeet]

Acceleration is important. It affects how long it takes a train to clear an intersection after stopping before the intersection and how long it takes to enter/leave a station, which affects intersection/station throughput. (Yes other factors, like train length and number of rails/tiles the train needs to cross also matter, but acceleration is a significant factor).

But if people really want realistic physics to be used for train acceleration, then you need to consider cargo mass (empty trains should accelerate faster), and wind resistance, bearing friction etc. But the real showstopper would be turning radius. Trains simply cannot turn in a 30 meter radius when going to 200+ kph, at least without a crazy banked curve that would be unusable at low speed.

I'm not sure it is worth the devs time to work on realistic physics for factorio trains.
[/quote]

Not asking for Physics just and an efficiency bump for using multiple engines. Also I did say acceleration isn't important however I also said its not a good metric to go by that is what I was focusing on. Intersections that allow multiple trains through an intersection at any one time doesn't affect acceleration, that just takes signaling, same with stations if you put signals between the cargo wagon spots then while the train pulls out the next one can pull in.

[Koub]

[Koub] Moved to ideas and suggestions

[Tekky]

In my opinion, the main problem of the propulsion power of multiple engines is that the engines facing the other direction do not contribute at all to the propulsion of the train. This is very unrealistic.

This issue has been discussed in the following thread:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=40644 propulsion power of bidirectional trains

[darkfrei]

It will be good as option, may be due mods.

[Rjskeet]

In my opinion, the main problem of the propulsion power of multiple engines is that the engines facing the other direction do not contribute at all to the propulsion of the train. This is very unrealistic.

This issue has been discussed in the following thread:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=40644 propulsion power of bidirectional trains

thank you!! didnt see that thred when i searched