Rails through farms

[OilCan]

Does running a rail through a crop farm on the map decrease the production of that farm?

Recently I had to plop down a station and run rain through three adjacent grain farms to capture the flow of iron from a cluster of mines. Major portions of the three farms disappeared on the map due to the rail and station (and water tower). I wondered afterward if this cut the production of those farms down. This could be a critical consideration if the farms were 'scarce' on the map and their resource was badly needed (and/or if I owned the farms).

Has anyone tested the production of a farm before and after a rail line runs through it?

[WPandP]

I am fairly certain that there is no decrease in farm production; the game engine doesn't work that way. Farms aren't productive based on soil fertility or any other geographic factors; rather, they either produce 2 per year, or if supplied with fertilizer, 3 per year. The game actually has no way to take into account the condition of the land around the farm, aside from checking that there is enough clear space to place the building initially.

[Wolverine@MSU]

Just to add a bit, RT3 handles it differently than RT2, where running tracks across farms does decrease production.

[proudcanadian]

I thought that in RRT2 you couldn't even build through farms. The rails always went around, and if you tried to demolish the crops, then the entire farm would disappear.

[nedfumpkin]

The crops in farms are actually just trees. There is no effect on the production since the system perceives the building as the industry.

[OilCan]

I did a simple test on this and there is no decrease in farm production when the 'farmland' is removed at a farm.

I used a scenario I was playing and from a save point selected 6 rice farms. I recorded their productions for 3 years. Then I obliterated 3 of the farmlands (leaving the farm house intact). I used rail, stations and post offices to completely remove any sign of a green rice field around the three farm houses. Then I watched how the 6 farms produced for 3 more years. There was no decrease in production by the heavily impacted (treated) farms compared to the untouched (control) farms. None what so ever. Two of the impacted farms did a tad bit better in production after being covered over with rails, stations and post offices. I'm guessing that they started delivering goods to the stations on their land and thus bumped up their production a little.

This little test makes me feel better. In the course of a game, I would lay rail through dozens of farms and I wondered if this was a negative thing to do. Now I know it has no effect.