Compensation for increasing engine costs

[Optimizer]

Great to see that there is still a strong gamer community for RT3! I have been hanging around this webpage for about a year, and felt it was about time to register.

Though a great game, there are some flaws that make the game unbalanced. One obvious example is the ever-increasing engine costs. The Planet 2-2-0, released in 1829, costs $10K, while the DD 080-X, released in 2015, costs $1.2M. Though a newer train can often do the work of several older ones, it does not at all correspond to a cost increase of 120 times. The increasing car size makes this difference even stronger.

In early scenarios (starting before 1850), engines cost close to nothing, so the player can build dozens of them, and does not need to bother about crashes. Track and stations must be placed with extreme care to give sufficient rail traffic.

In 21st century scenarios, the player is dependent on one single million-dollar engine for many years. Though this engine can serve many stations, the player stands and falls with it. If it crashes, the scenario is essentially lost. Even a breakdown can ruin a year's revenue. The large amounts of money also make players careless about track laying.

Would you agree that the engine cost should be adjusted by game year?

My suggestion is setting it to 200% before 1850, 150% from 1850-1899, 100% from 1900-1950, 75% from 1950-1999, and 50% from year 2000. This would make sense because industrial development and expired patents make old engine models cheaper to build.

[Gandar]

Would you agree that the engine cost should be adjusted by game year?

My suggestion is setting it to 200% before 1850, 150% from 1850-1899, 100% from 1900-1950, 75% from 1950-1999, and 50% from year 2000. This would make sense because industrial development and expired patents make old engine models cheaper to build.

I disagree, part of the game is deciding if you need that flash 1.2 mill engine to go at 150 mph or do you use the 400k heavy hauler that is much better value for money when you are hauling freight. The wisest option for the best return on capital is quite often an older engine.The very expensive trains are even more expensive when you realise that you have to reroute to get track with low grades otherwise you cant run more than two cars.

[Optimizer]

Well, since all engines would become cheaper at each half-decade, the price ratio between new and old ones would always be the same, so the older ones would still be a decent option.

[OilCan]

The Planet 2-2-0, released in 1829, costs $10K, while the DD 080-X, released in 2015, costs $1.2M. Though a newer train can often do the work of several older ones, it does not at all correspond to a cost increase of 120 times.

This is an interesting point. I looked this up on the internet and got some real prices for real trains.
1832 Atlantic - $4,500 ($20,000-40,000 in RT3 for comparable engine)
1934 GG-1 - $250,000 ($310,000 in RT3)
2008 Singe AC locomotive - $2,300,000 ($1.2M maximum for any engine in RT3)

From 1832 to 2008, that's a cost increase of over 500 times for real trains. I'm not sure what this means, except that the price increase over time in RT3 is less severe than it has been in real life.

[Pat in the desert]

I don't think there's anything wrong with the pricing of the engines in RT3. It more or less reflects reality. But the reality of the economic costs is one of the reasons it is less "fun" to run a rail map for a time line of the 1960s onwards. The fast expensive locos only make sense on certain selected routes, just as in the 'real world'.
However if there is one thing that I wish for in the game, it would be a pricing structure for passengers, mail and fast freight that is higher for the modern era. It needs some kind on an indexing to reflect the higher value of carrying these cargoes, especially on the 100 mph trains.

[Optimizer]

In the real world, the cost of locomotives has increased because of inflation.

But there is no inflation in RT3. All prices are roughly the same throughout the years, with the exception of locomotives.

[Pat in the desert]

But there is no inflation in RT3. All things cost roughly the same throughout the years, with the exception of locomotives.

You have a point there. In the RT3 world a 10-ton carload of passengers in 1840 can be worth like 100K. And an 80-ton carload of passengers in 2000 is worth about the same thing even though the money has been inflated. Maybe this needs to be a Trainmaster suggestion. Because I don't know if anyone plans any further mods to RT3.
Possibly a really clever set of events could increase passenger and freight cargo values, where like every 10 years the prices could be raised 25%. This sounds like a scenario idea.

[WPandP]

There sort of is inflation, in that cargo size increases while cost stays the same. In other words, 10 tons of widgets in 1840 has the same value (in terms of revenue to the railroad) as 80 tons in 1990, more or less. Except that this is backwards from how you'd expect inflation to work! The point, as far as the game is concerned, is to have some reason for the bigger, better engines. I started a mod (or uber-mod I guess) that I never quite finished, which would expound on this and really make things like DDA-40X's and multiple-unit diesels worthwhile. It would do two things: 1. Increase the weights of freight cars at more of a steady pace over the years, rather than just doubling at 50-yr. breakpoints, and 2. Make the freight cars weigh as much as 2 or 3 cars each, to really tax the later heavy engines. The icing on this cake was that I figured out how to hex-edit 3DP's so that I could visually represent cuts of 2 or 3 cars per each of the 8 car slots available, such that train lengths of 16 to 24 cars were possible. Two diesels in front of 7 cars and a caboose doesn't look all that realistic; two diesels in front of 14 cars plus caboose starts to look plausible.

From my testing, the super-heavy cars did have a slowing effect on an engine, but not as drastic as would be expected. So, such a mod would not break the game; rather, it would just give some room at the top for the articulated steam and the more expensive engines to show their worth.

The problem was just that I got away from making RT3 mods, and left this task unfinished. Maybe I'll dive back in someday soon. I do at least have it all planned out, in terms of which freight cars will weigh how much, when they increase in weight, how many cars per cut, etc. If you are interested in helping out, I can give you an assignment!

[Optimizer]

The main problem is that strategic depth is broken before 1850 and after 1999. A tycoon game should mainly be about choice of investment. No-brainer choices make the game more shallow.

In early 19th century scenarios, the winning strategy consists of building double track, and fitting in as many engines as you can. There is no strategic choice between investing in track or engines.

This strategic choice is ruined in the 21st century, but the other way around. For the first years, you can only choose between buying one engine, or no engine at all.