Cargo & Industry fixes for 1.06

[Blackhawk]

Adding the last cargo is a question mark. Milo said he thought it caused issues, but on the other hand TM has been able to take advantage of that slot. TM has things rearranged and named a little differently in the language file if that makes any difference or not.

Whether or not another cargo gets added doesn't much matter to me. I figure at this point if people are going to voice some ideas, it's best to get the ideas now rather than later.

[OilCan]

Is it possible to add cargo demands to department stores, retails stores, hospitals and stadiums?

Also, is it possible to create an industry which creates cereals as a cargo and demands corn, rice, grain, sugar and paper? Just asking at this point.

[Gumboots]

Adding the last cargo is a question mark. Milo said he thought it caused issues, but on the other hand TM has been able to take advantage of that slot.

Yeah but OTOH Ned has said that some cargoes were funny and he didn't know why. They just were.

[Gumboots]

Is it possible to add cargo demands to department stores, retails stores, hospitals and stadiums?

Also, is it possible to create an industry which creates cereals as a cargo and demands corn, rice, grain, sugar and paper? Just asking at this point.

Yes to both, AFAIK. I think you can add demands to any building.

[Wolverine@MSU]

.... it would be useful to have some stand-alone utility (or instructions for manual modification of the GMP file) that would allow one to make a 1.07 map openable in the 1.06 editor for conversion purposes.

Shouldn't be hard to arrange, since it should just be a matter of adding manually code for the new industries. I can't seriously see anyone (meaning anyone who is here now) writing a tool to do it automatically.

I wasn't talking about recoding of industries, which would need to be done manually, but rather (assuming that V1.07 games couldn't be opened in the V1.06 Editor), doing what needs to be done (via hex editing of GMP file) to get them to open in V1.06. As it is now, 1.06 maps in the 1.05 MAP folder don't show up on the loadable-map-list, so they can't be played or edited. What I am asking for is the ability to open a 1.07 map in the 1.06 interface. Does anyone know how to hex-edit a 1.06 map to make it show up in the 1.05 interface?

[RulerofRails]

Oilcan, I am glad to see you are back. I am also of the same mind that cargo chains should be kept simple where possible. From what I have seen of 1.06 maps having enough cargo available to make a Machinery Shop (I have never made any electronics in 1.06) work well seems to make the map too easy economically.

I love the balancing you put into your maps and would love to hear about any ideas you have to try to balance out the 1.06 cargoes or changes to make to them. We have been throwing around some ideas here about the inadequacies of the current concrete, crystals, medicine, dye and chemicals cargoes/supply chains while thinking in terms of a patch not 1.07. But with 1.07 the door is potentially flung farther open to new changes.

Have you tried TM? Ned has added quite a few demands to most of the municipal buildings. These, the agricultural communities that replace farms, the necessity to supply specific cargoes to agricultural communities, logging camps, and mines to get a decent output, and the much more complicated supply chains that change much more frequently are the main differences to game-play that I have found.

[OilCan]

Does anyone know how to hex-edit a 1.06 map to make it show up in the 1.05 interface?

There were some step by step instructions in a thread a few years ago. I think it was Sugus who posted it, but not certain.

[OilCan]

Have you tried TM? Ned has added quite a few demands to most of the municipal buildings. These, the agricultural communities that replace farms, the necessity to supply specific cargoes to agricultural communities, logging camps, and mines to get a decent output, and the much more complicated supply chains that change much more frequently are the main differences to game-play that I have found.

I know enough about TM to admire it, but have yet to play a game. I have to be honest, it looks too complicated; too many plates to keep spinning so to speak. I might be wrong because I've never tried it. I have studied the supply chain guide with great interest and looked at it again today. Ned's brilliance shows in the ways he has crafted and woven the cargos together to produce a very multi faceted economy.

This venture would do well to copy some of his ideas.

[OilCan]

Allow me to share my thoughts about the 1.06V industries and possible transformations as 1.07V.

I will start with the farms.

I would keep all the 1.06V farms except for the coffee farm. The farms work well together, none of them seem to be broken (even the coffee farm) and they are very integral part of the economy. I would not mess with them. Why get rid of coffee? It is not intertwined with the other farms, there is no mill or factory to increase the value of this cargo and its only use are houses (as far as I can tell). I’d delete it and hold its cargo slot for a new cargo.

I would keep the rubber farm and increase its demand beyond tires. I’ll elaborate on this later.

I would even keep the dye plantation, but I’m not 100% solid on this. I’d vote to substitute it for ‘Hemp’ as Ned did for TM but there is the whole drug connotation that goes with hemp these days. Yet, hemp would add another raw cargo for pharmaceutical plants. Peanuts are another option to substitute for the dye plantation. Peanuts would be a raw cargo for pharmaceuticals, dairy processors and maybe bakeries (not to forget taverns).

I would add a machinery demand to all the farms and maybe an auto demand. For the animal farms, I’d add a medicine demand and a salt demand (I’ll explain the salt later).

That's my thoughts about the farms.

[RulerofRails]

Oilcan, I like those ideas. I agree, the farms shouldn't be changed to TM style. I do like the idea of a production increase when a farm is supplied with say Machinery for example. But that might be too difficult to achieve so just having a demand would be ok.

TM is a bit of a challenge to grasp quickly, but after learning it, it is quite fun. There still aren't many maps for it, and I am supposing that economically simpler maps could be made. The map Ned has just been working on finishing up is quite good as it has some warehouse supplies that give more easy access to some higher level cargoes. This prevents some of the head-scratching I have had in the past when trying to find/produce/deliver all the inputs for a particular industry with more requiring three and some even four inputs.

[OilCan]

Ok. My next set of personal opinions: chemical plants, logging camps, mines, wells and quarries.

I’d keep all of them as they are, without any change except the quarry and ore mine (& the chemical plant).

I regularly use the chemical plant in making games. It works very well with fertilizer plants. Their profits are not enormous, but they certainly contribute to the map’s economy. Only change would be an added demand for pulpwood by the chemical company (1 pulp = 1 chemical). This gives pulpwood another demand besides paper plants.

Next, the quarry and ore mine. The ore mine and the rock from the quarry are confusing to me. I can’t recall which one uses the furnace and then realize they both use the furnace, and then I can’t recall which one creates which product in the furnace. I don’t think I’m alone on this. This needs a total redo.

About the quarry, the crystals do not contribute to the game. I would modify crystals to be sand (as several in this thread have already said). Players understand what sand is. Sand would then be accepted as a cargo by construction firms, cement plants and the furnace. Sand would be used by oil wells, retail, and chemical plants as a background demand.

I would modify rock at the quarry to be ‘clay’ but leaving it as ‘rock’ is fine by me. The rock/clay to ceramics via the furnace would stay the same. Ceramics would go to the cement plant and electronics as cargo (no change) and to the other industries already set up for background demand (no change).

Yes, I would change the furnace. I’d make it a glass furnace and a ceramics furnace under the same roof. Sand would change to glass. Clay would change to ceramics. This allows a player to haul both cargos from a quarry (sand and clay) to a single furnace. This is simple to remember, simple to use and promises to be a great source of profit.

Glass would be shipped as a cargo to construction firms and to retail and be used in the background demand of auto plants and the stadium (and restaurants?). Glass would boost alcohol production by 50% and pharmaceuticals by 50%.

Sand will become a serious contributor to the game via its use as a mineral and as glass.

I would rename the ore mine to be a salt mine. I understand the needs for salt much better than for ore, as most would do. Salt would be a cargo to fertilizer plants (1 salt = 1 bag of fert) and pharmaceutical plants (1 salt = 1 medicine). A background demand would be animal farms, dairy processors, meat plants, cereal plants, homes (in place of coffee), and other appropriate users. Salt would boost cheese production by 50%. This should create a satisfactory demand for salt.

That’s all I’ve got for chemical plants, logging camps, mines, wells and quarries.
I’ll take a rest before giving my opinion about mills and factories.

[Gumboots]

I know enough about TM to admire it, but have yet to play a game. I have to be honest, it looks too complicated; too many plates to keep spinning so to speak. I might be wrong because I've never tried it. I have studied the supply chain guide with great interest and looked at it again today. Ned's brilliance shows in the ways he has crafted and woven the cargos together to produce a very multi faceted economy.

This venture would do well to copy some of his ideas.

Without getting too complicated. As far as mapmakers go, TM seems to have complicated itself out of the market, as indicated by your second sentence and by general results to date. We need something with broader appeal.

I would even keep the dye plantation, but I’m not 100% solid on this. I’d vote to substitute it for ‘Hemp’ as Ned did for TM but there is the whole drug connotation that goes with hemp these days. Yet, hemp would add another raw cargo for pharmaceutical plants. Peanuts are another option to substitute for the dye plantation. Peanuts would be a raw cargo for pharmaceuticals, dairy processors and maybe bakeries (not to forget taverns).

Why keep the dye plantation?

If you want extra cargoes for the pharmaceutical plant there are other options apart from hemp. The amount of hemp that goes into pharmaceuticals is negligble, AFAIK, compared to everything else. Hemp grown for fibre production is no good for "pharmaceuticals". Oh and really, anything that goes into pharmaceuticals has a drug connotation. You Yanks even call chemists "drug stores".

Why peanuts to dairy processors? That one seems decidedly odd. There are all sorts of things that use peanuts as a base, but dairy products don't seem to be one of them. If you're thinking of "peanut milk" that's not a dairy product, and is something I'd never even heard of until I looked up uses of peanuts. AFAIK it's not even sold over here.

Ok. My next set of personal opinions: chemical plants, logging camps, mines, wells and quarries.

I’d keep all of them as they are, without any change except the quarry and ore mine (& the chemical plant).

I regularly use the chemical plant in making games. It works very well with fertilizer plants. Their profits are not enormous, but they certainly contribute to the map’s economy. Only change would be an added demand for pulpwood by the chemical company (1 pulp = 1 chemical). This gives pulpwood another demand besides paper plants.

Next, the quarry and ore mine. The ore mine and the rock from the quarry are confusing to me. I can’t recall which one uses the furnace and then realize they both use the furnace, and then I can’t recall which one creates which product in the furnace. I don’t think I’m alone on this. This needs a total redo.

TBH I find this no more confusing than logging camps producing both logs and pulpwood. Although I think the furnace needs a revamp anyway, it's quite normal to get ore from a mine and rock and sand from a quarry. Ore usually means a metallic end product, while rock generally doesn't. This all seems perfectly sensible to me.

About the quarry, the crystals do not contribute to the game. I would modify crystals to be sand (as several in this thread have already said). Players understand what sand is. Sand would then be accepted as a cargo by construction firms, cement plants and the furnace. Sand would be used by oil wells, retail, and chemical plants as a background demand.

Why retail?

I would modify rock at the quarry to be ‘clay’ but leaving it as ‘rock’ is fine by me. The rock/clay to ceramics via the furnace would stay the same. Ceramics would go to the cement plant and electronics as cargo (no change) and to the other industries already set up for background demand (no change).

Ceramics as input to a cement plant doesn't make sense to me. Cement is not produced from clay, or from clay-based products. That would just be adding another illogicality to the game. If we want a cement plant it should take raw rock, without an intermediate furnace, since a cement plant is a furnace of sorts and basically processes limestone.

Yes, I would change the furnace. I’d make it a glass furnace and a ceramics furnace under the same roof. Sand would change to glass. Clay would change to ceramics. This allows a player to haul both cargos from a quarry (sand and clay) to a single furnace. This is simple to remember, simple to use and promises to be a great source of profit.

But the primary problem people report with the existing furnace is its double production stream making it unpredictable when both inputs are available. The idea of revamping the furnace was to split it into two industries that each have a single production stream. What you propose here would recreate the existing problem in a slightly different form.

I would rename the ore mine to be a salt mine. I understand the needs for salt much better than for ore, as most would do.

Salt goes on the table. Ore goes into making cutlery. I don't find this difficult to understand.

Salt would be a cargo to fertilizer plants (1 salt = 1 bag of fert) and pharmaceutical plants (1 salt = 1 medicine). A background demand would be animal farms, dairy processors, meat plants, cereal plants, homes (in place of coffee), and other appropriate users. Salt would boost cheese production by 50%. This should create a satisfactory demand for salt.

Salt, as most people understand it, is sodium chloride. This is not used as a primary feedstock for either fertiliser or medicine AFAIK, so a 1:1 conversion into either is likely to seem weird to a lot of players. In fact, over here salination of agricultural land is a big problem. The last thing farmers want on their land is more salt.

Having salt boost cheese production by 50% doesn't seem right to me either. Salt is only used in small amounts for flavouring cheese, or as a preservative. It doesn't contribute to increased production, and there's a market for unsalted cheese.

If you want a mineral input for fertiliser I think rock (phosphate) would be a better choice than salt.

[Blackhawk]

Thanks for the posts with your ideas. Some may be more feasible than others.

Next, the quarry and ore mine. The ore mine and the rock from the quarry are confusing to me. I can’t recall which one uses the furnace and then realize they both use the furnace, and then I can’t recall which one creates which product in the furnace. I don’t think I’m alone on this. This needs a total redo.

About the quarry, the crystals do not contribute to the game. I would modify crystals to be sand (as several in this thread have already said). Players understand what sand is. Sand would then be accepted as a cargo by construction firms, cement plants and the furnace. Sand would be used by oil wells, retail, and chemical plants as a background demand.

At this point I think the idea will be 3 industries to replace the 1.06 furnace and concrete plant. 1. A glass factory will produce ceramics/glass from sand. [I'm not sure we'd need a cargo for glass and a cargo for ceramics as in many ways they act similar] 2. A cement plant will make concrete directly from rock. 3. The furnace, maybe renamed, smelter to make ingots from ore.
I hesitate to put more than 1 of those production chains together or else similar problems that occasionally exist with the current furnace not working properly may creep its head back up.

Gumboots, the retail demand for sand would likely be things like a hardware store.

One possibility, if rock is renamed to limestone, it could potentially then also go to a fertilizer factory to produce lime fertilizer. [Potentially waste could go there as well]

Glass would be shipped as a cargo to construction firms and to retail and be used in the background demand of auto plants and the stadium (and restaurants?). Glass would boost alcohol production by 50% and pharmaceuticals by 50%.

As far as I know there isn't a way to boost the production of a output in a production recipe. Unless you include something like a 1 glass + 1 grain = 3 alcohol type recipe. However, then the demand is more from the recipe, than the building itself, so without grain the glass won't be used up. Not necessarily a drawback, but something to consider. Currently, in 1.06 1 ceramic carload gets used up by a distillery/brewery a year.

Salt is an interesting idea, although I wonder if working on the existing ore-ingots supply chain and increasing its depth might just be an easier way to go. Ore -> metals/ingot > ? used in electronics, a mint for increased demand, maybe something like a wire factory where ingots + plastic/rubber could produce goods (or a cargo called wire if a cargo was available).

I would keep all the 1.06V farms except for the coffee farm. ....

There was talk of potentially a cannery that could require coffee to package it and either make goods or food. Except that would require a cargo to become packed food (possibly cheese). That would give coffee another use. Earlier in the thread I suggested cacao as it could go to a candy factory and with milk or sugar could become another good/food.
Overall it does seem there is limited use of this cargo currently. I'll keep note of it for either a cargo that could be potentially replaced or more industry added to. Seems this cargo is one people either like as it is or would really like changed. Maybe renaming it something like spices, or beans/nuts and giving it more uses would be a way to go.

I would keep the rubber farm and increase its demand beyond tires

I'll wait and see what your ideas for increased rubber use would be. As mentioned above 1 possibility could potentially kill 2 birds with 1 stone and give ingots a use and rubber an additional use in a wire factory.

I would add a machinery demand to all the farms and maybe an auto demand. For the animal farms, I’d add a medicine demand and a salt demand (I’ll explain the salt later).

I'm not sure if any farms have a machinery demand, but I think pretty much all the industries in 1.06 have a machinery demand, I suppose it would make sense for the farms to have been included.

I would even keep the dye plantation, but I’m not 100% solid on this. I’d vote to substitute it for ‘Hemp’ as Ned did for TM but there is the whole drug connotation that goes with hemp these days. Yet, hemp would add another raw cargo for pharmaceutical plants. Peanuts are another option to substitute for the dye plantation. Peanuts would be a raw cargo for pharmaceuticals, dairy processors and maybe bakeries (not to forget taverns).

I think I'd prefer to stay away from hemp. Peanut oil or Hemp oil from a pharmaceutical plant doesn't seem like something I'd have thought of immediately when thinking of cargoes for pharmaceuticals. Although peanuts to a processor to make peanut butter (food), if we get a cargo named food could work.

-I wonder what is the general feeling towards medicine as a cargo? Overall it seems to be another rather limited cargo.
-Another cargo that seems to rarely get used is waste. (Although that one may take a bit of effort to find out what produces it and remove it from being produced). Most scenarios for the game seem to be pre-1990 which is when the recycling plant becomes available. And I think waste becomes available in 1987?
-Uranium is also only used by the nuclear power plant. Useful for producing larger amounts of power in, but is it used often enough in maps to justify its place as a cargo?

[Gumboots]

Medicine seems like a very low volume cargo in compared to the sorts of things that are usually shipped in RT3. OTOH, it makes sense if the game is going to have a pharma plant and hospital.

Waste does get used quite a lot in post-1987 scenarios. It actually becomes a significant part of the economy, so should probably stay.

Interesting thought about uranium. Not sure about that one.

[Hawk]

rubber an additional use in a wire factory.

That one I don't get. Where/How do they use rubber to make wire?
What kind of wire are you talking about?

[nedfumpkin]

Have you tried TM? Ned has added quite a few demands to most of the municipal buildings. These, the agricultural communities that replace farms, the necessity to supply specific cargoes to agricultural communities, logging camps, and mines to get a decent output, and the much more complicated supply chains that change much more frequently are the main differences to game-play that I have found.

I know enough about TM to admire it, but have yet to play a game. I have to be honest, it looks too complicated; too many plates to keep spinning so to speak. I might be wrong because I've never tried it. I have studied the supply chain guide with great interest and looked at it again today. Ned's brilliance shows in the ways he has crafted and woven the cargos together to produce a very multi faceted economy.

This venture would do well to copy some of his ideas.

TM is more complicated, but not too complicated. It's not so much a case of too many plates spinning as everyone wants your stuff. The supply chain tries to mimick real life more that RT3 or 1.06 do, and part of that is that your cargo is demanded by more than just you. So you have to compete for your cargo more. A lot of the municipal buildings do this.

Copying TM ideas into 1.06 is going full circle since TM eveolved out of 1.06.

Hemp in TM represents all plants that produce fibre that is used in textiles. It is also a component in medicine because a few of those are used for pharma, not just hemp. In fact quite a few plants are used in the pharmaceutical industry. Flax, rye, wheat etc. However, TM does have a lavender farm that produces medicine. It's even purple, however, to replicate that would impact other farms.There is also a vineyard supplying alcohol. Keep in mind the TM supply chain was well researched.

While some peoplemay think that TM is dead due to lack of maps, they fail to realize that TM was always designed as a perpetual project that would allow for development for a long time. It'ss full potential has never been realized because it takes a long time to do maps, look at the China map, it took years, and I have some maps that I have been working on just as long. The fact is, there aren't very many map makers left. That includes TM and 1.06. The other thing is that there aren't very many new ideas left for making maps, and they are at risk of becoming variations of one another. By changing the supply chain to be more realistic, TM opens new possibilities for maps, but there is a learning curve.

So keep in mind that new changes that reult in a new version of RT3 will require maps, and there has been a long habit of people making mods for RT3 and then moving on...1.06 suffered from that. The difference with TM is that I don't play any other games, so when I play a computer game, it is a Railroad Tycoon game.

jmo

[Gumboots]

rubber an additional use in a wire factory.

That one I don't get. Where/How do they use rubber to make wire?
What kind of wire are you talking about?

Take a look at an old extension cord.

TM is more complicated, but not too complicated.

This is subjective.

While some people may think that TM is dead due to lack of maps, they fail to realize that TM was always designed as a perpetual project that would allow for development for a long time. It's full potential has never been realized because it takes a long time to do maps, look at the China map, it took years, and I have some maps that I have been working on just as long.

The problem is that most people aren't interested in spending years to make one scenario. This is why TM has hardly any maps made for it, while RT3 has heaps. It's full potential may be awesome in theory, but when it comes to implementing it in practice there seems to be a feeling that it's too much work for not enough reward. Your answer to everything seems to be TM, but what bothers me is that it's not an answer that seems to appeal to many people.

[Hawk]

That one I don't get. Where/How do they use rubber to make wire?
What kind of wire are you talking about?

Take a look at an old extension cord.

In that case, the demand for the wire company would have to change at some date from rubber to plastic.
I don't think they used rubber much past the mid 50's, if even that late.
And if you're going to do that, you would have to have the wire company demand cloth along with rubber in the early days.

Your answer to everything seems to be TM, but what bothers me is that it's not an answer that seems to appeal to many people.

Strange. I don't see that. He does mention TM a lot, but generally in reference to what you guys are doing.
To me that's not saying TM is the answer to everything. It's just referencing it in relation to a discussion.

[Blackhawk]

Rubber would be as an insulator for wire, but because of its deterioration over time as it dries out, wire now uses a plastic vinyl insulator. The question is always how realistic should the game be. Sure rubber isn't used much for insulation anymore. For RT3 purposes does it matter? Should there be an production chain for aluminum as well? Considering aluminum wire has its own uses and was popular in the 60s and 70s for houses, although it was blamed for some house fires. Or when the knob and tube installation method was common, should ceramics be used as well?

I think it all goes to how realistic of a game should it be? If it becomes too realistic and there may be a frequently changing industry recipe, people may no longer enjoy it as a game.

[Hawk]

I agree BH. I don't think we need a wire manufacturer demanding rubber.
As an electrician, I can say I don't think rubber is used at all anymore for electrical wire. At least not that i came across in my 25 years, and that's in residential, commercial and industrial.
Really, the only place you see aluminum wire anymore is in service entrance wire. If I'm not mistaken, aluminum wire has been banned by the NEC for anything but service entrance wire.
They can't even use it in mobile homes anymore.