Custom Locomotive planner

[WPandP]

I did a little bit of analysis of the engines available in the default game (plus the 1.06 engines), based on the stats sheet that you can download here. I wanted to come up with a useful tool for planning out engine stats such that we don't end up creating an over-the-top superlative engine that renders all others obsolete.

I based everything on the premise that engines should be worth more points, according to when they first become available. Then, I assigned a 0-9 point scale for all of the variables one can assign. I threw in a weight or importance factor, and then calculated out how many points the given locos are, at weighted values. By tweaking the weights, I got it to work out where the actual point values are pretty close to what they "should" be to reflect linear point growth tied to year of availability.

This told me that the whole concept of assigning a total points pool could be a viable way to develop new engines. I set up a worksheet in the Excel file, where all you have to do is furnish the info in bold, mostly by choosing from drop-down menus. Since there is a limit to the number of engines the game can handle, this might not be all that useful a tool... however, one thing I have been considering is doing a "total North America" mod, in which all of the European/World only engines are removed to free up slots for bonus NA types (and all the cars have custom skins, and the architecture styles get changed somewhat, etc.). This tool would help greatly in that case, to help keep all the new engines within a good range.

So, if you want to take a look at it, and especially if you want to suggest ways to improve the weightings and calculations such that the deviation is not so pronounced, go ahead and take a look at it:
http://wpandp.com/RRT3/RT3%20Locomotive%20List-MRR.xls

[Hawk]

Nice work but you left out grade climbing ability.

[WPandP]

I used the stats that are recorded in the RT3 Loco Lists compiled here. I don't think grade climbing is a separate stat... I think the combo of Free Weight and Pulling Power is what determines grade climbing.

[Hawk]

Oh! OK! I guess that makes sense.

[bombardiere]

This is interesting and hopefully can be used with the new project. I have been always afraid to create super engines. Sometimes I want to create bad engines, which are good in some particular aspect.

BTW Have you seen this Chris' old post. He was able to calculate the formula which Poptop used for pulling power #2.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=561

There is a sligth error in the formula. Instead dividing driver diameter with 375, you should multiple it by 375.

[WPandP]

This is interesting and hopefully can be used with the new project. I have been always afraid to create super engines. Sometimes I want to create bad engines, which are good in some particular aspect.

I got into this just by thinking about what a more open-ended engine designing tool might look like. I used to play a lot of Battletech, designing Mechs by allocating tons (points) to various weapons and armor systems, and I thought that maybe a similar approach could work here. So, I wanted to test whether the existing engines fit into any particular model, and see if I could craft a worksheet that would produce reasonable new engines.

Yes, this can be adapted to a new game, though we might want to use different parameters to describe our engines, or different scales, etc. Perhaps the new game engine could just examine the engine's stats according to a similar formula, to determine whether or not it is a compliant or viable engine... and otherwise, engine mod creators have free hand in setting engine specs to anything they wish.

The interesting thing I discovered by doing this, though, is that what I thought would stand out as super engines (esp. the P2) really did not! The GG1 does stand out, as I expected, but then the super-cheap Shay and Fairlie also stand out... possibly revealing a weighting issue.