Non-uniform stations disabled - why?
9 posts by 5 users
12/19, 2010 04:53PM
rubinho
10 posts
Hi,
I noticed today that non-uniform station building has been disabled.
Is there a reason for that?
It kind of makes in more realistic because you can't sort of build your station up a hill to reach an industry without having to go up that hill with your train. So there might be a point in that.
So was is on purpose, or is it temporary? And what do the others think?
I noticed today that non-uniform station building has been disabled.
Is there a reason for that?
It kind of makes in more realistic because you can't sort of build your station up a hill to reach an industry without having to go up that hill with your train. So there might be a point in that.
So was is on purpose, or is it temporary? And what do the others think?
12/19, 2010 05:13PM
Ed le fou
161 posts
Hi,
Yes the purpose is to prevent some players to reach an industry up a hill.
The best thing would be to forbid joining a station if the ground height is different, but that case is not checked by OpenTTD.
This morning i have seen a player still doing it, may be the only way to prevent those exploit is to disable joined stations :(.
Ed.
Yes the purpose is to prevent some players to reach an industry up a hill.
The best thing would be to forbid joining a station if the ground height is different, but that case is not checked by OpenTTD.
This morning i have seen a player still doing it, may be the only way to prevent those exploit is to disable joined stations :(.
Ed.
12/19, 2010 08:13PM
rubinho
10 posts
I think that's a good thing. It also stops players from covering two industries too easily. Now if you want to do that, you have to build a gigantic station and pay the price.
I think it's fairer this way.
I think it's fairer this way.
12/20, 2010 02:59AM
JStaxton
162 posts
I dont like this!
Why?
[b]
Because no easy feeder builds are possible anymore![/b] But they are part of good networks.... I would vote for reenabling it.
And why not "climbing the hill with station" ? normally that saves about 2tiles upwards, yes... but still people have to think carefully how to do it. Sometimes it costs lot of terraforming to set up a good "climbing station". And with costmodding in action I dont the the problem here.
JStaxton
Why?
[b]
Because no easy feeder builds are possible anymore![/b] But they are part of good networks.... I would vote for reenabling it.
And why not "climbing the hill with station" ? normally that saves about 2tiles upwards, yes... but still people have to think carefully how to do it. Sometimes it costs lot of terraforming to set up a good "climbing station". And with costmodding in action I dont the the problem here.
JStaxton
12/20, 2010 12:13PM
Wakoo
49 posts
Well it didn't fix anything, you can still do it via the bus/truck station... Only one fix possible then, reduce the size of a station from 7*7 to 5*5(meaning a train of 10 possible down to 14), or maybe forbid it on the rules, but it's hard to moderate since everyone do it actually.
12/20, 2010 01:13PM
JStaxton
162 posts
Yeah but I dont see the point of disabling non-uniform stations:
- there are lots of stations with different length platforms
- I dont like the idea of reducing the max train length.
- after all this feature provide cool flexibility and is a nice feature.
Greetings
JStaxton
- there are lots of stations with different length platforms
- I dont like the idea of reducing the max train length.
- after all this feature provide cool flexibility and is a nice feature.
Greetings
JStaxton
12/20, 2010 01:30PM
Ed le fou
161 posts
The point was to disallow the use of station expansion, to save 2 or 3 tile height.
Pic related.
Without non uniform station : It's not possible to do it with rail station (as they must be uniform), but it's possible with road station (see the picture).
Actually, it's useless. Now, it's either reducing stations size or live with the exploit.
Ed.
Pic related.
Without non uniform station : It's not possible to do it with rail station (as they must be uniform), but it's possible with road station (see the picture).
Actually, it's useless. Now, it's either reducing stations size or live with the exploit.
Ed.
Station2.PNG: Exploiting station, 47 downloads.
SkillShown modification.ods: Spreadsheet file with example data and chart.
SkillShown modification.ods: Spreadsheet file with example data and chart.
12/20, 2010 03:02PM
JStaxton
162 posts
your picture is unfair! Because its far longer than 7 tiles
the way the situation is here with the oil station:
- if you want to "station climb" that shown way, then you have to reduce the max platform length
- if you want to have "station climb" and a long platform (turn 90°) then you have to terraform a lot (note: costmodding would effect this)
- if you want a long platform without any additional costs then you have to place it right next to the oil.
So no, need to disable this feature
JStaxton
the way the situation is here with the oil station:
- if you want to "station climb" that shown way, then you have to reduce the max platform length
- if you want to have "station climb" and a long platform (turn 90°) then you have to terraform a lot (note: costmodding would effect this)
- if you want a long platform without any additional costs then you have to place it right next to the oil.
So no, need to disable this feature
JStaxton
12/29, 2010 01:19AM
UA TRANS
27 posts
In general I agree with that idea... But as Wakoo posted you still can use bus/track stations to make station "longer"...
But I do not agree with Wakoo idea of limiting size os stations... In this case buying CS4000 is foolosh thing because
CS2400 takes your 9 wagons with 112 km/h without any problems... but not 96 km/h like CS4000
But I do not agree with Wakoo idea of limiting size os stations... In this case buying CS4000 is foolosh thing because
CS2400 takes your 9 wagons with 112 km/h without any problems... but not 96 km/h like CS4000