Quality should increase train wagons capacity.

[functional]

Why?

With Space Age, potential throughput has increased drastically due to new tier of belts and stacking. Where previous max throughput per a single belt was 45/s, the new limit is 240/s. Quality changes to inserters also help you to reach these ridiculous levels quite easily.

Trains—in particular cargo trains—have difficulties in keeping up with this new level of throughput. Having quality affect wagon capacity it under standard multiplier (up to 2.5x) would help trains at least slightly here. Otherwise trains, by comparison, remain mostly the same as before besides fluid wagon capacity doubling. While bridges allow better throughput in intersections, intersections themselves rarely were the issue before Space Age assuming one was designed properly.

[Wappinhat]

It would be great if train wagon + fluid + storage tanks https://wiki.factorio.com/Storage_tank etc size increased

Storage chests were gladly adjusted

[AileTheAlien]

Definitely a +1 for quality improving cargo / liquid storage tanks on trains!

[NGMZero]

that would leave storage tanks

[AileTheAlien]

that would leave storage tanks

Oh yeah, improving those would be nice too! I could totally reduce the size of my acid-storage on Nauvis.

[SHADOW13]

+1

also locomotives should increase max speed/acceleration with quality as well

[jopo_jp]

+1

For me too

[functional]

+1

also locomotives should increase max speed/acceleration with quality as well

Technically it already does, because it does so for the fuel. While this may seem trivial, after playing with legendary fuel the difference is absolutely bonkers. Of course, that requires you to keep making legendary fuel.

[spacedog]

+1, but I won't hold my breath. I think the devs secretly hate trains.

I agree it's completely nonsensical that they increased chest capacity with quality, and not cargo wagon capacity. 99% of rail setups involve trains loading from chests. With the larger capacity chests, now we just need more trains to empty them. It's lame that we have to run 2.5x as many trains to empty the same amount of chests. I find I'm just running long turbo belts in a lot of places I would have previously used trains.

Storage tanks also deserve the same buff, but the tiny cargo wagons are 100x more annoying.

[Orum]

I'm in the same boat. I have no idea why they increased chest size with quality, but then left storage tanks, cargo wagons, and fluid wagons untouched? It doesn't make any sense.

[Khazul]

Being selfish and just thinking about my train network and the way I use stops and little circuits to auto-set priorities and limits based upon how much cargo space in boxes vs the train, then I would never use this - too much trouble because there is no way to specify that this stop can accept a train right now with this much space in it per carriage for this cargo.

I also know for a fact that many other players do an almost identical thing with their stops for the same reason, so I'm not sure they would use this either.

OTOH if trains got a significant overhaul that allowed for much richer signalling and reading of sizes along with interrupts condition for how much space they have in their carriages then it becomes useuable.

I would also add a caveat that all carriage must be of the same quality. Probably easier to just state that the entire train must be of the same quality as this constraint would allow for a simple implementation of extra signaling and/or interrupts for train capacity.

[Khazul]

Storage tanks also deserve the same buff, but the tiny cargo wagons are 100x more annoying.

As soon as they cranked up the fluid wagon capacity, I made a mod to increase the the storage tank to 50K as well as it just broke blueprint that depend on 2 tanks having more space than a wagon for setting limits/priorities etc. II never understood the point of the change TBH and would have been just as happy had they left them at 25K or they had at least done both. 4 tanks per carriage per stop is just a space hog.

[rosilisk]

+1 from me, see also viewtopic.php?p=666022#p666022 and viewtopic.php?t=124077.

[Chrisdasdasd]

+1 for rolling stock capacity scaling with quality.
+1 for locomotive speed/break scaling with quality.

and I will add one more:
+1 for train speed/break scaling with quality of rails.

[AntiElitz]

Trains are great, but stacked belts outclass them in raw throughput.
If the legendary version of Cargos had increased cargo size, they’d be a much stronger alternative and stay competitive in late-game setups.

[freeafrica]

+1, also just generally (w/o considering quality) I feel like trains are weak compared to how cheap/fast belting is...

[juliawtapp]

I like this idea, or at the very least I like the idea of trains being better.

Maybe there is a reason that train wagons aren't affected meaningfully by quality, but maybe not? steel / logistics chests were originally unaffected by quality and were patched to be bigger with quality AFAIK

On that note, maybe quality train locomotives could accelerate a bit faster and have a slightly higher top speed, too.

[CyberCider]

On that note, maybe quality train locomotives could accelerate a bit faster and have a slightly higher top speed, too.

This is already provided by quality fuel. But I think braking force would be more useful anyway. It’s actually quite important for throughput.

[juliawtapp]

On that note, maybe quality train locomotives could accelerate a bit faster and have a slightly higher top speed, too.

This is already provided by quality fuel. But I think braking force would be more useful anyway. It’s actually quite important for throughput.

given the fact that quality fuel does do that, and the fact that braking force is not an infinite research, it does make sense that they could have better brakes.
anything more interesting than increased health (not super useful) would be welcome for me.

[Koub]

[Koub] Merged innto an existing thread with the same suggestion, and moved back to Balancing subforum.
See also viewtopic.php?t=119199