[1862] Incorrect freight revenue when running multiple overlapping permanent freights.

[mtsay]

This is yet another edge case with freight revenue.

When a company owns multiple permanent freight trains, they are allowed to run each freight train on separate freight routes, which may overlap. My understanding of the rule is that each freight route is then considered a separate route so pays separately. Hence the starting hex and end hex only pays once because they overlap, but intervening hexes will pay out one more time.

I run into this issue in a hotseat game ( game data ).

In the above screenshot, the revenue for the trains should be:

• 7F: 200 (London) + 130 (Netherland) + 6 * 30 = 510
• 6F: 30 (Bishop's Stortford) + 0 (Netherland because 7F already cover it) + 5 * 30 = 180

So the revenue for these runs should be $690 instead of $230.

It looks like the game is treating both freights as having concatenated into one (as in the case of non-permanent freights) and treated it as a single freight route from London to Bishop's Stortford.

[mtsay]

Sorry to bring this up. As you can see, ECR is stuck in the southern part of the map with 5 permanent trains but only access to 2 off-boards and 2 ports, so the 3rd freight will have to re-use one of the ports.

[roseundy]

This is discussed in the wiki for 1862. Since it is legal to run permanent trains end-to-end, my code has no way of knowing what your intentions are.

[roseundy]

The workaround is to make sure the 6F doesn't share an endpoint with the 7F

[crericha]

An idea: Calculate it both ways and give the company the higher revenue option for their total run. It's an edge case to not want to maximize your run, so make that the workaround.

[roseundy]

The problem is that the code that has to link trains together is already quite complicated and this will make it worse.