In very limited testing, Named Trains were found to increase the value of delivered Passengers by about 10% (10.1%; range 6.7% to 12.5%, n=5).
Test conditions: Northeast map, Financier diff., no opponents, minimap says Passengers are 5k and F5 says they're 4k, NYC <-> WDC run without anyone else blocking test trains (but see below), GP-Series engine w/1 Passenger car. Out of the 5 tests, only 1 started engines afresh, with one Named... this was found hard to test because a Named train was hard to generate just before an unnamed one, and in the meantime, Passenger base value fluctuated over time (as always). The other four tests were 2x2 design with two GP-Series carrying 1 Passenger car on the test track; half the time, the Named train got High priority (and stopped the Normal priority GP-Series w/1 P round-tripping the same track), the other half, the unnamed train got High. (2x2 = Named/unnamed vs. High/Normal priority.) For the 2x2s, at least 3 values were averaged (as the trains passed each other, WDC <-> NYC), and averages of the 3+ values were used (this let me see they were relatively stable versus fluctuating Passenger prices).
You should note that testing was done with GP-Series across a long distance. If the speed/distance bonus does not interact with (probably, is not multiplied by) the Named bonus, these results will not apply to other trains. Worst case: If Named trains add a fixed bonus (regardless of speed/distance), they could be much more important in the early game. In my ultra-fast (GP-Series), very-long (NYC to WDC) tests, Named trains increased Passenger revenue by $6.26k (62.32 to 68.58) per car, on average.
Also of note: Named trains only affect Passenger revenue. Mail and Food (Fast Freight) trains were tested and found to be entirely unaffected by use (or not) of a Named train.
Findings to date: Only Mail and Passengers are affected by speed/distance; everything else is simply given the current market price (as per F5 or "Goods" prices over mini-map). And only Passengers are affected by Named trains.
More to come...
Named trains
Further testing was done on a short route (Harrisburg to Williamsport) using a variety of engines, always hauling one full Passenger car. Instead of income from a single one-way trip (in the previous post), total income from deliveries in the period Jan 1952 to April 1954 was used.
Faster engines (P5a, 3.5 round-trips, Gold State and GP-S, 4 RTs) showed the same 10% difference.
The Grasshopper made 2 RTs and showed a 13% difference. The American made 3 RTs and showed a 16% difference.
It's hard to tell if these apparent increases are real, or due to some external variable (like underlying Passenger price fluctuation). In any event, to summarize my findings...
(drum roll)
* Named trains add ~10% to Passenger revenues.
* The distance travelled does not appear to matter.
* Mail and other resources do not benefit from Names, only passengers do. So try to avoid adding other types of cars to Named Passenger trains, if they will slow them down. (Only Passengers and Mail benefit from speed, anyway.)
* It is possible that Names add a little more than 10% for slower trains, but not any extreme amount.
Faster engines (P5a, 3.5 round-trips, Gold State and GP-S, 4 RTs) showed the same 10% difference.
The Grasshopper made 2 RTs and showed a 13% difference. The American made 3 RTs and showed a 16% difference.
It's hard to tell if these apparent increases are real, or due to some external variable (like underlying Passenger price fluctuation). In any event, to summarize my findings...
(drum roll)
* Named trains add ~10% to Passenger revenues.
* The distance travelled does not appear to matter.
* Mail and other resources do not benefit from Names, only passengers do. So try to avoid adding other types of cars to Named Passenger trains, if they will slow them down. (Only Passengers and Mail benefit from speed, anyway.)
* It is possible that Names add a little more than 10% for slower trains, but not any extreme amount.
One thing I don't see mentioned, unless I missed it, which happens, is the size of the station. My bro keeps on me about getting up to terminal size because the same amount of passengers makes more money at a terminal than a depot. True/untrue...tested/untested????
I know you do better because of speed of load/unload in all loads, but put that aside.
I know you do better because of speed of load/unload in all loads, but put that aside.
I'm correct 97% of the time..... who cares about the other 4%....
I definitely should've said that I was using Terminals. In everything I post, I'm using Terminals, unless otherwise stated.
I haven't tested Depot upgrades per se, but remember watching it a little once, and it seemed to do what it says - a Station is +25% to P&M revenue, and a Terminal is +50%. I can't remember if that was with a Named train.
To answer your question then, it's possible that the increase due to Named trains is not affected by Depot/Station size. If the bonus isn't affected, then it must be a fixed amount, which would make it be more than 10% for Depots and Stations (but only because you're getting less due to Depot/Station size, vs. Terminals).
But since P&M are often your two largest income sources (see F1 in the game), I would think you'd still want Terminals regardless anywhere you're dropping off P&M. Unless perhaps your P&M train(s) is coming from a highly competed city (with little P&M to pickup).
I haven't tested Depot upgrades per se, but remember watching it a little once, and it seemed to do what it says - a Station is +25% to P&M revenue, and a Terminal is +50%. I can't remember if that was with a Named train.
To answer your question then, it's possible that the increase due to Named trains is not affected by Depot/Station size. If the bonus isn't affected, then it must be a fixed amount, which would make it be more than 10% for Depots and Stations (but only because you're getting less due to Depot/Station size, vs. Terminals).
But since P&M are often your two largest income sources (see F1 in the game), I would think you'd still want Terminals regardless anywhere you're dropping off P&M. Unless perhaps your P&M train(s) is coming from a highly competed city (with little P&M to pickup).
Oh blah -
I just noticed this in the "View Readme" found in the Start menu's Railroads! folder:
And we can scratch my text about how slower trains might earn more than 10%.
I just noticed this in the "View Readme" found in the Start menu's Railroads! folder:
So I guess I've confirmed that it works as advertisedSpeed Records:
When any train in the game sets a new speed record, it gets a unique name (you may rename it by selecting the train and clicking the "rename" icon in the panel at the bottom of the screen), and henceforth earns a 10% bonus to passenger revenue.
And we can scratch my text about how slower trains might earn more than 10%.
Aye well, the 1.1 patch helps a bunch. I especially like how one can have 4 inputs to a terminal now. After having disciplined myself to use 3, it's like icing on the cake.
But I do wish trains were a smarter, so one didn't have to worry about them making poor choices if one gives them choices. I haven't played much with 1.1 (Xmas games!); maybe they're better now.
But I do wish trains were a smarter, so one didn't have to worry about them making poor choices if one gives them choices.
I haven't played much with 1.1 (Xmas games!); maybe they're better now.