Rails & Riches

[Gumboots]

The game behind RT3 was much more expansive and there was much more that could be done than in RT2. RT2 was primarily focused only on the rails, which that's fine, but a real railroad tycoon controlled all the lines of industry and that was much more encompassed in RT3 than in RT2. The greater use of industry was nice as it presented additional ways to play the game, rather than just focus on a rail line, which eventually grows repetitive and tiresome.

How many times can you set up a set and give it stations in the same scenario? I think 95% of my trains in RT2 were run on custom consists to maximize profit and make sure cargo got where I wanted it. Overall, that was just too much micromanaging when scenarios had large numbers of trains.

^This. I think it would be a pity if the new game was restricted to just making the same train set over and over again, and micromanaging cargoes.

[Viconius]

I can honestly say, we never had nor do have the intention of making the same railroad set over and over again.

[Lone Cat]

Speaking of heavy freight trains, it'd be nice if it were possible to do the game physics such that long freight trains were possible. This could give a much better purpose for the various locomotives in the roster. RT3's 8 car limit renders the larger engines hardly more effective than the rest of them. If the limit could be upped to 20 cars or whatever, you'd finally have a good use for heavy freight locos.

20 or 25 is nice.
but .... meh I pefer the RT3 freight movement pattern that a railraod doesn't need to hook that 'freight generators' to the rail system. freight moves to the nearest city train station either by wagons, trucks and boats... with less efficiency and high costs :P (and this renders railroading more useful)

Track system. what is the maximum track parallels and will there be 'normal' and 'high speed' versions?
And talking of prime movers.
1. can a player stacks one to adds more tractive force to a train?
2. and what will be the first prime mover? Horse, or Stephenson steamer?

[Lone Cat]

While RT2 was my favorite of the series for awhile, the more I played RT3 the more it grew on me. At first I thought I didn't really have to do anything in it as I could just set up trains and let them haul whatever and the cargo traveling on its own would take care of itself, but then I gave it another chance a few years later and realized there was a lot more to it. The game behind RT3 was much more expansive and there was much more that could be done than in RT2. RT2 was primarily focused only on the rails, which that's fine, but a real railroad tycoon controlled all the lines of industry and that was much more encompassed in RT3 than in RT2. The greater use of industry was nice as it presented additional ways to play the game, rather than just focus on a rail line, which eventually grows repetitive and tiresome.

How many times can you set up a set and give it stations in the same scenario? I think 95% of my trains in RT2 were run on custom consists to maximize profit and make sure cargo got where I wanted it. Overall, that was just too much micromanaging when scenarios had large numbers of trains.

RT3 was nice in that if you find say a couple profitable mines, maybe you start the scenario by buying the mines and from there you build a railroad. In effect, it was as if you were (in this example) the mining company and you created your own railroad out of necessity and then expanded it into other ventures for profits. (Sort of like the Erie mining company)

It will be interesting to see how this turns out though. Either way it would be nice to have an updated railroad game, whether it takes RT2 or RT3 aspects as it's basis.

----
As for snowboarding and rails, I think rails are what they use to do tricks on and boardslide down on. Whether that's like a metal railing that could essentially be used for stairs or other type of "rail" used for tricks.

Is it Rails to Riches or Rails 2 Riches which was taken? And since it's a snowboarding group would it even matter if you created a railroading game by the same or similar name as it is a very different industry and you'd be selling different products/services so for trademark purposes I'm not sure there would be an issue.

Talking about industries and their supply chains. Steel industry should...
1. Begins at the early game.... Steel mill shows up earlier than 1850s (can't remember the exact year)
2. Steel Ingots formula 1 Steel ingots = 1 Iron Ore + 1 Coal +1 Rock, the steel output increases over the same inputs once Bessmer Process is discovered (and later with evenmore advanced steels)

Also Bakery should make its own freights..... breads! (and some AAR documentary movies which can be found on Youtube... freight train hauls bread too!).

[Gumboots]

I can honestly say, we never had nor do have the intention of making the same railroad set over and over again.

My apologies. That was rather crudely worded on my part. A better way of putting it would be to say that I am concerned that the game you are thinking of will be, from my perspective, more simplistic and less interesting than RT3.

Can I ask if you have considered how freight will move across stretches of water? IMO this aspect of RT3 was useful, since it broadened the scope of what was possible in terms of scenarios.

[Gumboots]

Speaking of heavy freight trains, it'd be nice if it were possible to do the game physics such that long freight trains were possible. This could give a much better purpose for the various locomotives in the roster. RT3's 8 car limit renders the larger engines hardly more effective than the rest of them. If the limit could be upped to 20 cars or whatever, you'd finally have a good use for heavy freight locos.

20 or 25 is nice.
but .... meh I pefer the RT3 freight movement pattern that a railraod doesn't need to hook that 'freight generators' to the rail system. freight moves to the nearest city train station either by wagons, trucks and boats... with less efficiency and high costs :P (and this renders railroading more useful)

Track system. what is the maximum track parallels and will there be 'normal' and 'high speed' versions?
And talking of prime movers.
1. can a player stacks one to adds more tractive force to a train?

I assume you are asking for a feature that would allow double or triple heading locomotives. That would be great, if it can be done. I can see that being both popular and useful.

[Lone Cat]

yes! American freight trains are made with at at least 4 Diesel locomotives stacked, allowing a stacked tractive forces for a miles-long freight train. (and also allows a back-up power should one locomotive breaks down and others still running :P )

[Hawk]

Speaking of heavy freight trains, it'd be nice if it were possible to do the game physics such that long freight trains were possible. This could give a much better purpose for the various locomotives in the roster. RT3's 8 car limit renders the larger engines hardly more effective than the rest of them. If the limit could be upped to 20 cars or whatever, you'd finally have a good use for heavy freight locos.

20 or 25 is nice.
but .... meh I pefer the RT3 freight movement pattern that a railraod doesn't need to hook that 'freight generators' to the rail system. freight moves to the nearest city train station either by wagons, trucks and boats... with less efficiency and high costs :P (and this renders railroading more useful)

Track system. what is the maximum track parallels and will there be 'normal' and 'high speed' versions?
And talking of prime movers.
1. can a player stacks one to adds more tractive force to a train?
2. and what will be the first prime mover? Horse, or Stephenson steamer?

yes! American freight trains are made with at at least 4 Diesel locomotives stacked, allowing a stacked tractive forces for a miles-long freight train. (and also allows a back-up power should one locomotive breaks down and others still running :P )

You guys looking for a train simulator or a train strategy game?

[Gumboots]

Well people have already made double headers for RT3, and having longer consists has been talked about before. Both can be thought of as broadening the range of strategic choices.

[Hawk]

Yes I know, but 25 cars and 4 engines? Isn't that a bit overkill?

[RulerofRails]

If you looked closely, the FAQ on the game's site says that he wants up to 15 cars depending on the size of maps. I think that this is a good compromise. Too many more and it might get unwieldy for an average player in any train-routing/setup interface. Programming in such a way as to be able to easily add more cars later makes sense, but in my experience the most efficient way to play is often to use max cars so an initial limit sounds good to stabilize gameplay. If pricing is not dynamic as in RT3, speed to deliver for freight becomes less important as far as I can tell.

Will there be the ability to control the radius of the curve on the track we are laying? It's unclear from the video. Railroads and RT3 fail at this, certain curves are incredibly hard to do without small sections/using the bulldozer.

[Hawk]

15 cars wouldn't be bad, but I don't think the game needs 4 engines for that (relating back to LoneCat's post).
Around here, on the CSX Western & Atlantic sub between Atlanta and Chattanooga, most trains only have 2 engines, and that's on consists with 80 to 120 cars.

[Gumboots]

Yes I know, but 25 cars and 4 engines? Isn't that a bit overkill?

Yes it probably is. I'd be happy with doubling RT3's consist size, which is about what they seem to be thinking anyway. Consist size is going to be related to map scale, as they say on the site. The bigger the map scale, the more cars you can fit in before things start clogging up and/or looking stupid, so it comes down to determining the best choice of map scale, then assigning whatever max consist size works wells with that.

With multiple locomotives, from a coding point of view it probably makes little or no difference how many you assign. You'd just have an extra data slot that denoted the number of locos and code that adjusted grunt to suit. Doing it for 2, 4 or 64 probably takes much the same amount of processing. However, I'd be perfectly happy with a limit of two. If locos and tenders are coded much the same as RT3, that would still allow quadruple diesel locos if two of them could be done via tender slots, or double steamers.

[Hawk]

Franz -

I understand that you want to sell Rails & Riches through Steam to reach a greater audience and to aid in updates, but would it be possible for the folks that have stated that they don't use Steam, like those over at The Terminal and here, to buy the game without having to deal with Steam; requiring a Steam account to register the game or buy it?

[Lone Cat]

Will there be speed restrictions in curvetures?

[Silverback]

Its worth looking at the Kickstarter website again. The project is now open for backing. I hope it gets its funding.

A lot of the questions above are currently irrelevant as the emphasis is on steam locos in North America before 1930 "For content at launch, we are focusing on the steam locomotive in North America between the 1880’s to the 1930’s" says the website.

If it uses the unity 3D engine then there's also a possibility that other operating systems such as Linux (e.g SteamOS) may be supported eventually but I guess Windows will be the intial platform although I don't think the site is explicit on that.

I'm not a great lover of the Steam platform but its far better than no possibility having Rails & Riches at all.

[Gumboots]

Most of the questions are relevant, since most of them relate to what is being built into the game in terms of strategy options, scripting options, etc, etc. There's still very little detail on what is proposed to be included. Content, as in campaigns and locomotives, etc is not a big deal IMO, since that can be added to later anyway. What's important is the basic "toolkit" that will define the limitations of the game forever.

[Viconius]

Franz -

I understand that you want to sell Rails & Riches through Steam to reach a greater audience and to aid in updates, but would it be possible for the folks that have stated that they don't use Steam, like those over at The Terminal and here, to buy the game without having to deal with Steam; requiring a Steam account to register the game or buy it?

We were talking about that on Friday and we're definitely going to look into it. We need to get a bit farther on our system architecture to be able to make that call for certain. We "feel" this need though so we'll give a hard look.

[Viconius]

Most of the questions are relevant, since most of them relate to what is being built into the game in terms of strategy options, scripting options, etc, etc. There's still very little detail on what is proposed to be included. Content, as in campaigns and locomotives, etc is not a big deal IMO, since that can be added to later anyway. What's important is the basic "toolkit" that will define the limitations of the game forever.

So a quick update first.

We went live with our Kickstart page
http://kck.st/1AXOhrv

Please give it look see. You'll see me in my old and fluffy form and get to listen to my hideous voice. Oh I hate that sound. Where was I when they handed out James Earl Jones' voice?! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2LkdNls4bw

Second, some more information on things. I'll probably post some of this in another Q&A blog on our site... let's all urge uncle Cameron to finish our site forum.

As I stated earlier we want to focus on the spirit of Railroad Tycoon series with some added focus on the train aspect found in RT2. That's our philosophical goal. Make a fun train game, NOT a dumbed-down train simulator. With that in mind...

+ I'd like to add the ability to adjust the track radius within a range just like the elevation currently allows in R&R (bit of it in the editor video, it's adjustable with the keyboard). Right now elevation can go all the way up to 15% grade. Steep yes, insane no. Insane to me means it isn't fun as a game control. I'd like to do that with track radius. The minimum will have to allow rolling stock not to look broken.

+ Multiple locomotives are not planned right now. My take on this was that Railroad Tycoon games gave up most of the advances of modern locomotives for nominally the same number of cars of greater weight. The reality is that is way short of the actual ability. If we get to the 15 or so consist, I think we'll make better use of locomotive differences that more accurately reflect the sheer enormity of what get's moved now. The exception to this will be passengers. To this end, I'd like to add more variety to the consist for dedicated passenger routes. More car types to improve rates and rot factors and ways to promote travel as a priority for the locomotives using particular tracks. Like so many questions regarding strategy games, this has an answer but the process of getting to the answer often has multiple conditions. Could the game support multiple locomotives on a consist... definitely. How and why are the devil's details. At the moment, we have some performance issues that may impact this, Darrin says no... but I'm stubborn and he's a spectacular programmer. So, I hope he's right. If the scale of the world turns out as I see it, I'm hoping to have about 50%+ larger worlds in terms of fidelity. That means a map of N. America with a consistent scale similar to the maps of the US east of the Mississippi River seen in RT2 but include all of the land west of the Mississippi River and all of Canada. That should allow 15 or so car consists without overcrowding the landscape. In theory. My emphasis on this role is going to be look and feel, so if it looks and feels right then that's what we will push. Hopefully, we'll get the backing and testers to makes sure we get on the right track.

+ What will our Editor allow you to do? Well, there's sort of two editors... or will be. The first is the map editor and tools to make that happen. I'm doubting this will be anything less than what RT2/RT3 had but probably more configurable for the player. Since most of you folks know what that is, I'll skip that for now. I'm hoping to be able to do more with letting players just choose a region of the world and import a map of a selected region or import a Dem map of their choosing.

The second editor is the event editor. I'm expecting there to be a parser that's more robust than RT2 or 3. Here is insight #1 on me as a designer, particularly a designer that has learned something about working with teams. I don't assume that I'm right when it comes to design only that I might come to a conclusion faster than others and still not have it right. That, and despite my high voice (did I mention I hate my voice?) I've learned how to be loud. These have taught me to listen to others, particularly engineers. I can't code like they can, just as I can't make art like dedicated artist can. Both can have good ideas and know best how to use the tools of their trade. My trade is to consume all the information and create a plan to follow. If I do that right, the team members will decide how to best facilitate the plan. It's faster, funner and functional. All that just to say, the event editor is not even roughly prototyped yet. I just want it to be at least as good as the RT series.

+ Adding player created content. This is a big, big add in my opinion. For this it will be a system that can import objects and properly identify them in the game. It's going to be both a UI and a code hurdle. However, using Steams Workshop, we will have a template that has already be proven in games like Civilization. It even comes with rating and sorting options. Fusing it properly to the code is a lot of ifs and thens... so to speak. Hopefully, Darrin will chime in on that over time. The goal with this is to avoid the hurdles that the guys that did RT3's mods had to overcome. If we can do that, I think more people will use mods.

I'll do more of these Q&As now that our KS has started. Please check out our Kickstarter at http://kck.st/1AXOhrv

[Viconius]

Its worth looking at the Kickstarter website again. The project is now open for backing. I hope it gets its funding.

A lot of the questions above are currently irrelevant as the emphasis is on steam locos in North America before 1930 "For content at launch, we are focusing on the steam locomotive in North America between the 1880’s to the 1930’s" says the website.

If it uses the unity 3D engine then there's also a possibility that other operating systems such as Linux (e.g SteamOS) may be supported eventually but I guess Windows will be the intial platform although I don't think the site is explicit on that.
I'm not a great lover of the Steam platform but its far better than no possibility having Rails & Riches at all.

Windows will be our initial platform and we are going to be using Unity 5. We've lots of experience with Unity and feel it'll hold up well over the years. However, we do think there is a good chance for Linux and Mac. This is really going to be funding bound though. So to that end, we're going hell bent for leather on Windows. Up and running ASAP.