First pic has way too many signals imho. Second doesnt look too bad.
I still like the pic I posted for a station layout ... it is simple and seems to work well ... I do need to do some more testing with connecting more spurs. Only thing that worries me is too many trains will quickly clog the station since there are only 2 main tracks.
Things to think about in this game when laying track even tho you get more money for passenger trains for speedy trips it still pales in comparasin to how much you make with freight. Only thing passenger trains have going for them is the fact they usually make money on both trips.
Track routing and management FAQ
@Jabberdau: Nice station layout. I would like to see more examples from others.
I read some people dedicate certain lines for specific trains. I do not like that. But the problem i run into is deadlocks sometimes.
Another strategy I tried is to have no switches at all, but let the trains use loops behind the last station. That didn't seem to work.
Being able to isert your own signals, and being able to insert waypoints would give a player a lot more control.....
I am ging to try Jabberdau's techniques.
I read some people dedicate certain lines for specific trains. I do not like that. But the problem i run into is deadlocks sometimes.
Another strategy I tried is to have no switches at all, but let the trains use loops behind the last station. That didn't seem to work.
Being able to isert your own signals, and being able to insert waypoints would give a player a lot more control.....
I am ging to try Jabberdau's techniques.
Hi All,
Sorry to say, but I've seen some good samples in this thread about how you shouldn't do it.
One thing is that it is not good to make a crossover too short and therefore not the best possible, if there is enough space available for a perfect crossover. When you create the crossover have a look for the numbers that show up at your cursor tip. The crossover has the best possible length if the max speed has just changed to 200mph. This means that trains passing the crossover do not have to slowdown at all!
I do that whenever possible.
Another thing I'll never do because it does not work correct and can lead to CTD's, is connecting more than 2 tracks on one side of a signal.
Now on to how to best connect several tracks. I use the following scheme:
=======\\==================//========
=========\\==============//==========
===========\\==========//============
Town A -------------------------------------------- Town B
(--- means no track, it's just a placeholder)
This makes sure a train can go from any track to every other track and back again if necessary.
Here is an image:
Greets
McSchaff
Sorry to say, but I've seen some good samples in this thread about how you shouldn't do it.
One thing is that it is not good to make a crossover too short and therefore not the best possible, if there is enough space available for a perfect crossover. When you create the crossover have a look for the numbers that show up at your cursor tip. The crossover has the best possible length if the max speed has just changed to 200mph. This means that trains passing the crossover do not have to slowdown at all!
I do that whenever possible.
Another thing I'll never do because it does not work correct and can lead to CTD's, is connecting more than 2 tracks on one side of a signal.
Now on to how to best connect several tracks. I use the following scheme:
=======\\==================//========
=========\\==============//==========
===========\\==========//============
Town A -------------------------------------------- Town B
(--- means no track, it's just a placeholder)
This makes sure a train can go from any track to every other track and back again if necessary.
Here is an image:
Greets
McSchaff
In my experiance the shorter the crossover the less chance of a head on lock up.
I dont usually worry about a 200 mph crossover since the train is about to slow down to get into the station or is just leaving a station.
In your example how does a train get from the top track get to any other track to the right hand city if it is already past the switches next to the left city.
A train will never go from the bottom track all the way to the top and will never go from the top to the bottom in your example. You would have to have a second signal (3rd if you count the station signal) on the middle track if you wanted a train to jump past the middle track from one of the outside tracks.
I have ran a system like your example ... it worked well but felt slow at some points and seemed a bit limited.
I do like the fact that it is a simple layout .. simple is always better.
I think alot of people can use your example and run a good track, probably wont have too many problems with it. I have, seen in other threads people having head on lock ups with a similiar setup. I assume since you brought it here you havnt had that problem?
Have you tried,
==\\=====\\====
===\\=====\\===
====\\=====\\==
Sort of keep the traffic in a circular motion.
Anyway thanks for posting your layout , I hope you dont take anything I have said in a bad way it is not meant to be that way.
I dont usually worry about a 200 mph crossover since the train is about to slow down to get into the station or is just leaving a station.
In your example how does a train get from the top track get to any other track to the right hand city if it is already past the switches next to the left city.
A train will never go from the bottom track all the way to the top and will never go from the top to the bottom in your example. You would have to have a second signal (3rd if you count the station signal) on the middle track if you wanted a train to jump past the middle track from one of the outside tracks.
I have ran a system like your example ... it worked well but felt slow at some points and seemed a bit limited.
I do like the fact that it is a simple layout .. simple is always better.
I think alot of people can use your example and run a good track, probably wont have too many problems with it. I have, seen in other threads people having head on lock ups with a similiar setup. I assume since you brought it here you havnt had that problem?
Have you tried,
==\\=====\\====
===\\=====\\===
====\\=====\\==
Sort of keep the traffic in a circular motion.
Anyway thanks for posting your layout , I hope you dont take anything I have said in a bad way it is not meant to be that way.
.Hey McShaff,
I did some testing yesterday evening, and came up to exactly your approach. It seemed to work quiet well.
Bringing back 3 tracks to 1 does make it possible to jump from every track in station A to station B.
Something else I experianced what you can see in the screenshot, os that adding / deleting track etc. sometimes a signal is left behind. The second signal from the right is an example. That one shouldn't be there I think.
Nice to exchange insights on station layout. I think nobody is 'talking in a bad way' Leo! All feedback and criticism is welcome!
All aboard!
I did some testing yesterday evening, and came up to exactly your approach. It seemed to work quiet well.
Bringing back 3 tracks to 1 does make it possible to jump from every track in station A to station B.
Something else I experianced what you can see in the screenshot, os that adding / deleting track etc. sometimes a signal is left behind. The second signal from the right is an example. That one shouldn't be there I think.
Nice to exchange insights on station layout. I think nobody is 'talking in a bad way' Leo! All feedback and criticism is welcome!
All aboard!
- Attachments
-
- Sample station layout
- SMRailroads!0000.JPG (196.65 KiB) Viewed 11235 times
@leo
I tried lots of different layouts before I realized that the one I proposed is by far the most stable and fastest of all. For testing try and run 4 trains between the two towns. You will see that there will be no lockups and the wait times are very short (<5% measured over 10 years).
However if you have more trains running at the same time on such a track you have to put in additional signals or build additional tracks to avoid lockups.
The following setup you proposed causes on the same track with 4 trains waiting times of 15% in average compared to the 3% my setup causes.
==\\=====\\====
===\\=====\\===
====\\=====\\==
@outager
I experience the same difficulties like you regarding signals not always can be connected correctly and therefore spawning an additional signal just in front of the one I want to connect to. I hope that this will be fixed with the next patch.
Greats
McSchaff
I tried lots of different layouts before I realized that the one I proposed is by far the most stable and fastest of all. For testing try and run 4 trains between the two towns. You will see that there will be no lockups and the wait times are very short (<5% measured over 10 years).
However if you have more trains running at the same time on such a track you have to put in additional signals or build additional tracks to avoid lockups.
The following setup you proposed causes on the same track with 4 trains waiting times of 15% in average compared to the 3% my setup causes.
==\\=====\\====
===\\=====\\===
====\\=====\\==
@outager
I experience the same difficulties like you regarding signals not always can be connected correctly and therefore spawning an additional signal just in front of the one I want to connect to. I hope that this will be fixed with the next patch.
Greats
McSchaff
I'll try to post a screenie later, but i've been toying with avoiding running my man lines through the stations at all.. except for major terminals at the end of the line.
Basically I'll meander some single and double track with as few tight curves as i can manage though the open land, then i'll build spurs that ease off the main line, run through the town's station or resource annex and then rejoin the main line.
Main Line
==\============/========
\ /
====A======
Station A
Now the station design itself might actually be double track or triple track to allow multiple trains to load/unload at the same time, but I'm ignoring details for the moment and just thinking about the overall network.
I really hate always having trains that just go back and forth between two spots and really try hard to design networks that support travel across larger stretches of the network.
It may not be as competitive or efficient in a hectic match, but I'm mainly looking for something that can handle a bunch of different trains, doesn't deadlock, and is aesthetically pleasing....
Basically I'll meander some single and double track with as few tight curves as i can manage though the open land, then i'll build spurs that ease off the main line, run through the town's station or resource annex and then rejoin the main line.
Main Line
==\============/========
\ /
====A======
Station A
Now the station design itself might actually be double track or triple track to allow multiple trains to load/unload at the same time, but I'm ignoring details for the moment and just thinking about the overall network.
I really hate always having trains that just go back and forth between two spots and really try hard to design networks that support travel across larger stretches of the network.
It may not be as competitive or efficient in a hectic match, but I'm mainly looking for something that can handle a bunch of different trains, doesn't deadlock, and is aesthetically pleasing....
Great read....I have spent the last 20 hours playing around with different layouts. I now realize I need to make my trains more efficient.
Does anyone have a secret to connecting track to an existing light (switch) without it creating a new switch 1 foot in front of the existing one. On average it takes me 3 or 4 tries and sometimes I have to delete the existing switch and redo it all to get it right. By the time I finish routing a single city the AI has gone to 2 or 3 new cities.
I assume it has something to do with the green arrows that appear but I have tried figuring it out but it seems to behave almost randomly
Does anyone have a secret to connecting track to an existing light (switch) without it creating a new switch 1 foot in front of the existing one. On average it takes me 3 or 4 tries and sometimes I have to delete the existing switch and redo it all to get it right. By the time I finish routing a single city the AI has gone to 2 or 3 new cities.
I assume it has something to do with the green arrows that appear but I have tried figuring it out but it seems to behave almost randomly
I have the same question... anyone have some input on this?KW33D wrote:Great read....I have spent the last 20 hours playing around with different layouts. I now realize I need to make my trains more efficient.
Does anyone have a secret to connecting track to an existing light (switch) without it creating a new switch 1 foot in front of the existing one. On average it takes me 3 or 4 tries and sometimes I have to delete the existing switch and redo it all to get it right. By the time I finish routing a single city the AI has gone to 2 or 3 new cities.
I assume it has something to do with the green arrows that appear but I have tried figuring it out but it seems to behave almost randomly
Before you first click on the existing rail, you'll be looking at a yellow or green cursor, if the cursor is yellow you'll get new signals, if the cursor is green the new spur/turnout/whatever will attach to the existing signal... move the cursor close enough to an existing signal and the cursor should go green.Bleser wrote:I have the same question... anyone have some input on this?KW33D wrote:Great read....I have spent the last 20 hours playing around with different layouts. I now realize I need to make my trains more efficient.
Does anyone have a secret to connecting track to an existing light (switch) without it creating a new switch 1 foot in front of the existing one. On average it takes me 3 or 4 tries and sometimes I have to delete the existing switch and redo it all to get it right. By the time I finish routing a single city the AI has gone to 2 or 3 new cities.
I assume it has something to do with the green arrows that appear but I have tried figuring it out but it seems to behave almost randomly
I have found the connection of multiple tracks with signals to be a very tricky business. I just try to have 3 trains per town. The 4th train I resolve with connecting it's path to the route that takes the longest to complete of the existing ones and upgrading the depot to station/terminal to speed up the goods unload/load hence making the wait time lower if one of the 4 trains is waiting to get into town.
Good thread...
I had been trying to milk every resource on my maps, which meant tons of trains. Prior to looking at anybody else's info, I'd simply criss-crossed every track leading into a station, and even figured, the more signals, the better. I also put signals very close to the station itself (by making and removing a small section of track), figuring that it would keep unloading trains to the smallest length possible (and let others get that much closer while waiting).
Ultimately, this led to insanity, once traffic got huge. Including trains that went the god-awful long way around a big circle (instead of to the city B "right next door", as originally set up), as well as some extreme oddness like a train going ping-pong between some of the complicated sets of track around a station (from one, far side of the station, to its other far side)... and never getting to any station. I didn't know trains could turn around outside a station, but some buggy ones do for me. Below is a pic of what I had been setting up near most cities.
Let me try McSchaff's layout, and watch for the green track connector.
I guess I need to choose what I'll do more wisely? It's a shame one seems to have to stick to no more than four trains per city... IRL they do far more than that, with fewer tracks (and more valid station stops than 3), don't they?
Four trains is the limit? Perhaps unless you coming in the "back end" of a station with resources, but that only applies to outlying towns.
I had been trying to milk every resource on my maps, which meant tons of trains. Prior to looking at anybody else's info, I'd simply criss-crossed every track leading into a station, and even figured, the more signals, the better. I also put signals very close to the station itself (by making and removing a small section of track), figuring that it would keep unloading trains to the smallest length possible (and let others get that much closer while waiting).
Ultimately, this led to insanity, once traffic got huge. Including trains that went the god-awful long way around a big circle (instead of to the city B "right next door", as originally set up), as well as some extreme oddness like a train going ping-pong between some of the complicated sets of track around a station (from one, far side of the station, to its other far side)... and never getting to any station. I didn't know trains could turn around outside a station, but some buggy ones do for me.
Below is a pic of what I had been setting up near most cities.Let me try McSchaff's layout, and watch for the green track connector.
I guess I need to choose what I'll do more wisely? It's a shame one seems to have to stick to no more than four trains per city... IRL they do far more than that, with fewer tracks (and more valid station stops than 3), don't they?
Four trains is the limit? Perhaps unless you coming in the "back end" of a station with resources, but that only applies to outlying towns.
- Attachments
-
- Example of cross-overs going into a station. Also, the depot itself is surrounded by signals very close to it.
- RrCrossovers.jpg (158.93 KiB) Viewed 11074 times