[SUGGESTION] Remove the loading-time penalty for trains that are longer than the platform of a station (maybe as cheat-function)

[Quast65]

Hello,
First of all, many thanks for all of your work on this great patchpack!!

Could it be possible to remove the loading-time penalty for trains that are longer than the platform of a station? (For example as an extra cheat option)

This is what I did to remove the penalty from a pre-compiled game:
https://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?p=1208248#p1208248

And HackaLittleBit has also already made a patch:
https://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?p=854926#p854926

Kind regards
Quast65

[James103]

Alternatively, you could make the loading time penalty proportional to the length of the train divided by the length of the platform. In other words, suppose it takes 20 ticks to load/unload a 3-tile train on a 3-tile platform:

With the same 3-tile train on a 2-tile platform,

• Overhang: 1 tile * TILE_SIZE = 1 * 16 = 16 units
• Current behavior: 20 << 1 = 40 ticks, 40 + (16 * 40) / 8 = 40 + 80 = 120 ticks (6x)
• Proportional penalty: 20 * (3 / 2) = (20 * 3) / 2 = 30 ticks (1.5x)

With a 10-tile train on a 2-tile platform without through loading, and a base load time of 200 ticks:

• Overhang: 8 tiles * TILE_SIZE = 8 * 16 = 128 units
• Current behavior: 200 << 1 = 400 ticks, 400 + (128 * 400) / 8 = 400 + 6400 = 6,800 ticks (34x)
• Proportional penalty: 200 * (10 / 2) = (200 * 10) / 2 = 1000 ticks (5x)

[Quast65]

This feature would mainly be to solve issues for eyecandy players that encounter things like this:

The actual stationtile is the one outside of the tunnel, but the main part of the train is inside the tunnel (and thus it looks like the station is elongated inside the tunnel)

By using overlapping platforms a switch has been made to look like it is part of a station, while it offcourse actually is not.

[Quast65]

No interest in adding this feature?

[JGRennison]

I'm considering it, this has significant gameplay implications so isn't something to add in without some thought.

[Quast65]

Thank you for your reply and that you are contemplating this!
I agree that it has great implications on gameplay and therefor I would suggest to add it as a cheat.
Maybe even not completely remove, but with an option/parameter to significantly lower the penalty amount.
I consider it in the same category as the "Big planes don't crash frequently on short runways" cheat.

I would like to add to the above mentioned uses of this feature, that it can also be used when you for example want to set-up an underground Metro-network for big cities.
That is where lack of space can really be an issue (as you also need 2 tiles for tunnel-entrance/exit) and every tile that is then saved from being used as a stationtile, could really make the difference...
Even more so, when maybe in the future it may be possible to build road/rails over tunnel entrances...

I tried compiling a version myself, where I removed the above mentioned section in economy.cpp
But I get issues with saving a 8K size scenario and/or game (some kind of memory warning), issues I dont get when I save the same kind of 8K in the pre-compiled version of the pack.
So a stable working thing, compiled by someone who actually knows what he/she is doing would be greatly appreciated ;-)

[Sinas128]

A great idea but what to do with through loading?
Keep it or do a reduced amount or...?

[Quast65]

A great idea but what to do with through loading? Keep it or do a reduced amount or...?

If I recall correctly, the Through Loading only applies to cargo trains.
My suggestion is mainly aimed at Passenger trains.
So (if code-wise possible offcourse), it could co-exist with the Through Loading by only lifting the loadingpenalty for too long passenger trains.

[Quast65]

I was wondering if this suggestion still has a chance to be added...
*Insert fingers-crossed emoji*

[EmperorJake]

I feel it's important to include this discord discussion: https://discord.com/channels/142724111502802944/919788785217179738/1077563363577561148

If this feature's full potential is to be realised, it would require a change in the behaviour of where trains stop at a too-short platform. currently they always stop at the end of the platform no matter whether it's set to near end or far end. You should be able to use these options to decide which end of the train overhangs the platform, making stuff like this possible: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/919788785217179738/1077570386713128991/load.gif