Early trains

[syneris]

Trains predate automobiles and the oil industry by many decades. Steam locomotives should be an option for early game before oil. Electric locomotives would come later that provide better efficiency. This seems like it would fit nicely with the existing systems to have the current trains not require any oil-based products and more advanced trains after lubricant/engines.

[Sedado77]

Agree... And if you haven't got oil at first, you can't use trains to transport oil to start oil production, to research the train xD

[Coolthulhu]

I support this one. As long as the steam trains are to use water to make them something different than "diesel trains but with worse stats".
Also, move cargo wagons from automated rail to railways. Or better - merge them. It's like with oil production/processing - the only reason to research them out of sequence is to prepare a framework before adding the key elements.

[ssilk]

hm...

- railroads are very inflexible to built, they take up some space
- this is not Railroad Tycoon and we don't begin in seventeenhundredanything: if I had the chance to build all new (we are fresh on an untouched planet), I would begin with cars, because they are the most flexible transport. Then comes ship (because cheap and huge), and then (!) the trains, because the tracks are very expensive...

But agreed, that starting with a diesel locomotive isn't the best idea. I'm sure, at some time we can have more.

[Bleda]

It's a combined coal/solid diesel fuel driven steam locomotive with a built-in steam recycler, so it doesn't need to fill in water.

No, come on. It's a good thing that trains are available early. If you start with only a very small resource fields, you need to be able to bring in stuff from further away soon. I think the car should be available earlier though. It's no fun to go out looking for more resources walking.

[MaxStrategy]

I would love this and I'm not even a train enthusiast.

[syneris]

I was thinking that the new electric trains would be all electric based. It could require more steel, accumulators, engines, and ??? (processing units?) It would not create any pollution, would recharge at train stops if it has electricity coverage (allowing essentially unlimited travel distance). Depending on game mechanics it could have better speed when pulling more cargo containers.

The current steam engine should dump out much more pollution and possibly be a lot slower overall. Steam engines instead of the oil-based engines and could cost more resources overall. Right now it is 1 steel, 1 gear, 1 pipe, 15 engines... really?!

[Rjskeet]

Old thread I know, however early trains that come after steel would be great for marathon worlds and altered rail worlds right now. and would make it easier to start setting up your rail system.

It could be called locomotion and use steel, steam engines, plate and copper while giving it the cargo wagon as a companion. limit the trains to 1 engine per actual train( notice in history there are very few twin engine steam locomotives )
move diesel locomotives into oil territory because lets be honest they are... call that Advanced locomotion and give them tanker cars as its companion.

There should be tradeoffs, early trains would be less efficient and limited by the per engine limit, which then limits max acceleration, that way people who only use 1-2 trains can plan out there factories around that rail system. Later people who need more acceleration for longer trains can upgrade to diesel locos that can have more then 1 engine per train and be more efficient overall.

hm...

- railroads are very inflexible to built, they take up some space
- this is not Railroad Tycoon and we don't begin in seventeenhundredanything: if I had the chance to build all new (we are fresh on an untouched planet), I would begin with cars, because they are the most flexible transport. Then comes ship (because cheap and huge), and then (!) the trains, because the tracks are very expensive...

But agreed, that starting with a diesel locomotive isn't the best idea. I'm sure, at some time we can have more.

It isn't railroad tycoon, however the game is about progressive technologies, the rail tech stops after you get it and that equals no progression( rail signals do not count as progression ). Also as you said Railroads are inflexible and take up large amounts of space, so they should be introduced early to help the player integrate them into there factories.

[Zavian]

however early trains that come after steel would be great for marathon worlds and altered rail worlds right now. and would make it easier to start setting up your rail system.

Trains are already available fairly early. Just red+green science, and need only steel, engines, and logistics 2.

[Trebor]

limit the trains to 1 engine per actual train

What about trains that go in both directions?

[Rjskeet]

limit the trains to 1 engine per actual train

What about trains that go in both directions?

make loops to begin with and then later on you can upgrade to bidirectional. That way early rail is easier to setup ad drops the annoying learning curve.

however early trains that come after steel would be great for marathon worlds and altered rail worlds right now. and would make it easier to start setting up your rail system.

Trains are already available fairly early. Just red+green science, and need only steel, engines, and logistics 2.

Read what I posted. Marathon and rail worlds. Yes you can have trains in 90 minutes flat, in ideal conditions in a normal game( after you started your factory and just use belts because resources are to far away). However the scenarios that I listed could take much longer. I've had some Railworld starts where I literally couldn't get 1 resource because it was forever away or I ran out of resources before i could get to rail research forcing me to restart.

And im not saying we add a slower train, or one that needs water. Just one that is less efficient and can only run in one direction.

[bobucles]

the rail tech stops after you get it and that equals no progression( rail signals do not count as progression ).

Except rail signals ARE progression. A single train will work on any track without signals and is good enough for simple outposts. Signals allow multiple trains to use a track.

[Rjskeet]

the rail tech stops after you get it and that equals no progression( rail signals do not count as progression ).

Except rail signals ARE progression. A single train will work on any track without signals and is good enough for simple outposts. Signals allow multiple trains to use a track.

you can have multiple trains on a rail system using the time table... signals just make it easier to automate.

[Hannu]

Read what I posted. Marathon and rail worlds. Yes you can have trains in 90 minutes flat, in ideal conditions in a normal game( after you started your factory and just use belts because resources are to far away). However the scenarios that I listed could take much longer. I've had some Railworld starts where I literally couldn't get 1 resource because it was forever away or I ran out of resources before i could get to rail research forcing me to restart.

If you select intentionally very hard settings it is not good idea to demand new things to be able to play. Hard and time consuming grinding and possibility of failure are the points of marathon settings.

And im not saying we add a slower train, or one that needs water. Just one that is less efficient and can only run in one direction.

What do you mean by efficiency? Higher fuel consumption? Fuel consumption is just formal thing. You have to build some kind of fueling to keep trains running but consumed amount is absolutely negligible compared to energy consumption of science production. You could increase it by factor of 50 and notice no effect. Also one direction is not real limitation. I have never used bidirectional trains and have played thousands of hours.

I agree that some development in trains would fit very well in the game. Current system is very toy like. I would make trains like trains. Slow method to transport very large masses. First tier could be for example max speed 60 km/h and cargo capacity per wagon 5 times current and then higher tier (purple science level) of 100 km/h top speed and 20 times current cargo per wagon. Numbers are guesses without any thinking, but maybe first tier could be about as effective than current trains (transported items per hour at typical route length and train size) and higher tier significantly more capable for megabase purposes.

[Hannu]

Except rail signals ARE progression.

Maybe on paper, but does anyone really begin to use trains before research of signals? At least I think that there is no point even it is technically possible.

[Rjskeet]

Except rail signals ARE progression.

Maybe on paper, but does anyone really begin to use trains before research of signals? At least I think that there is no point even it is technically possible.

Never thought about it but no I actually don't...
But isn't that because signals come around with the station research?

And by less efficient, I mean base trains have efficiency of 120% ( it's on the engine itself) make the early train like 90% and if you want to make super long runs you would have to carry fuel with you and have stops for refueling the engine, on top of 1 engine per train

I know most people don't use bidirectional trains. Honestly what you said before kinda outlines what I'm getting at, that by making them available right after steel research doesn't affect the normal player other then introducing the system earlier. While still giving trains an upgrade for later, by giving them better benefits like the improvement in efficiency, and more engines per train.

[GrumpyJoe]

Creating a whole new tech, new entities (at least in stats) etc for the offchance that in a marathon rail world someone doesn't get enough resources near the start? Sounds abit overkill. If its really THAT far away, you'd need more iron into steel for the tracks than the locomotive anyway.
you could just start another burner phase at the outpost, before giving up the map. Nothing is impossible

[Koub]

Except rail signals ARE progression.

Maybe on paper, but does anyone really begin to use trains before research of signals? At least I think that there is no point even it is technically possible.

I do. I'm not a train enthusiast, and most of the time, I just have 1 or 2 tracks that link an outpost to my smelting area, without even crossing each other. my tracks are usually loops with 2 stations, one to load, one to unload.

[CDarklock]

most of the time, I just have 1 or 2 tracks that link an outpost to my smelting area, without even crossing each other. my tracks are usually loops with 2 stations, one to load, one to unload.

This is typical of my setups, too. I get confused trying to use signals, so I just keep everything really simple. I still research signals, but they're not necessary.

[Rjskeet]

Creating a whole new tech, new entities (at least in stats) etc for the offchance that in a marathon rail world someone doesn't get enough resources near the start? Sounds abit overkill. If its really THAT far away, you'd need more iron into steel for the tracks than the locomotive anyway.
you could just start another burner phase at the outpost, before giving up the map. Nothing is impossible

I can concede on the railworld and marathon points they are niche. But again what about introducing new players with trains? The earlier they start the less of a hill to climb later on.
Also its only one entity, a new engine, and most of the groundwork is already there for the current engine. However I will still argue that train progression is extremely lacking, even if you consider signals a progression. Once you get the engine the only increase in efficiency or acceleration is fuel, there is no upgrade path like assemblers or inserters there is no thinking about distance traveled or acceleration limits. In summery there is no depth, usually by the time you have multiple trains on a network you've blueprinted your intersections and all the challenge is gone.