Evil Genius at work

Discussion of Pop Top's last release of RRT.
User avatar
Just Crazy Jim
Dispatcher
Posts: 413
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:57 pm
Location: Coal Fields of WV

Evil Genius at work Unread post

Seeing that several of the buildings are available in 1800, I hacked the GMP of the Go West! campaign (after cloning and converting to a scenario map, no original files were harmed in this experiment) to have an optional start date in 1800. To my surprise, after forming a company, engines (default and custom) with a 1829 availability date were purchasable in 1800 with no file-hacking required. I ran the map until 1884 without any problems from the software, even when I was approaching 100 routes with an untold number of custom consists.

As an aside, I did notice the creeping crap-look of terrain from successive saves was quick to set in. By about the 10th save, the map had lost almost all of the smooth, pretty features of the original with a shore line that resembled nothing more than 20th century cubist artworks.

Back on track: In January 1800, there are no housing units on the map and no industries. Cities may have no civic buildings or, if the scenario data is above 100%, may have more than one might have guessed. As far as supply and demand economy in January 1800, there is none. However, that rapidly changes within a very few months. The city growth model has always been something of a mystery to me, all those commodities that houses demand were just a blackhole into which cargoes disappeared as far as I ever noticed. But from a dry start with no economy, it became very apparent that supplying those demands has a some times striking effect on city growth. With no hacks or event effects to modify anything in the economic model, by 1810, express cargo was generating more company cash than I've ever seen before in the game.

In fact, the AI seemed to be crippled by the sort of high-risk-high-gain enterprise a human player might take, so I was without any sort of competition for a good number of years. The length of time before the AI players started a company varied depending on which city-pair I started my company. I noted in unedited version of the campaign, the AI favors a Boston-nearby city link and a New York-Edison or Allentown link. In the New York pairs, always building a wreck of a bridge over the Hudson in the process which I always have to knock down and replace when I take over the AI company.

In the Go West! strategy thread, I had remarked that I'd always found the absence of oil in the scenario perplexing (early 19th Century New England = Whaling, after all). So I set about running several versions of the map with modified economies including oil from ports from 1800. The first and immediate surprise was that the game has no cargo wagon for oil in the A series and uses the automobile carrier as a placeholder. This drove home the fact that if I was serious about making a pre-steam (i.e. wagonways and gravity rail) or early steam (there were several pre-1829 attempts to use steam power) map, there would be considerable work ahead of me for both power (locomotive replacements) and cargo. There is one thoroughly derelict example of a gravity rail with stone gutter "rails" at a greenstone quarry in New England (I think in eastern Connecticut) dating to about 1810. It never became famous or had any famous people visit it for amusement, so it's mostly off the radar. Most of the system looks like a deer path these days and I found it only by accident trying to locate the ruins of an old bog iron works near Foster, Rhode Island - which I never found, but did find more than enough briars, brambles, twisted ankles, ticks and poison ivy to last me a lifetime.

Anyway, it seems to me that the easiest way to achieve this crazy idea of a 1800-1828 period setting is to use a first era mail van or passenger wagon as the "tender" and place a visible or invisible (team of) horse(s) in front of it as the "locomotive". My thinking for this pre-steam locomotive business is based on the notion that oil=horse food/changing teams, water/sand=water/hay. With most of the meta-settings for reliability and speed being the absolute worst in the choices. Also, maybe putting track-laying costs being 200-300% higher pre-industrial revolution and ideally making it so the power can haul a max of 3 cargo wagons on a 0-1%+ grade, 2 cargo wagons on 2-4%+ grade, and only 1 on anything above 4%+. No 40-mule teams in this era. To be completely honest, I have never been sure how the game handles negative grades. It always seemed to me to treat them like 0% in some instances and the same as positive grades in others. That whole part of the hex coding about power and climbing is pretty esoteric stuff, if you ask me.

Another aside: the byte at position 71 in the LCO file doesn't really seem to change the fuel economy, I copied the data from the fuel economy section of the Trans-Euro LCO ("outstanding") into the Planet LCO and the Planet remained "atrocious", so there must be something more to it.

Anyway, long story short (too late), My idea was start a cheap but profitable venture company with no outside investment, run it from 1800 to 1828 sans steam, then have enough money to start using steam, because the effort to reward ratio of horse-power vs. steam-power is a no-brainer. Then, and only then, start into the business of making fat wadges of cash, crippling competitors, hostile take-overs, etc.

Now, I must make and drink some coffee, then see how much more I can break in the game... *!*!*!
"We have no patience with other people's vanity because it is offensive to our own."
-- François de La Rochefoucauld. Réflexions ou sentences et maximes morales. 1665.
User avatar
RulerofRails
CEO
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2013 1:26 am

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

Interesting mod idea. I hope you don't encounter too many set-backs. Here's some info that may be helpful, or I might be repeating stuff that you already know. :-)
Just Crazy Jim wrote:With no hacks or event effects to modify anything in the economic model, by 1810, express cargo was generating more company cash than I've ever seen before in the game.
Passenger prices seemed to be hard-coded with a definite pattern of earlier year equals higher revenue. This doesn't surprise me at all. The way to control this is to use events in the map itself. In fact passengers, mail, and troops are the only cargoes for which the price can be increased or decreased without danger (freight cargoes should never be increased). I'm not sure but production might be higher as well. Also easy to change by event.
Just Crazy Jim wrote:As an aside, I did notice the creeping crap-look of terrain from successive saves was quick to set in. By about the 10th save, the map had lost almost all of the smooth, pretty features of the original with a shore line that resembled nothing more than 20th century cubist artworks.
RT3 has a problem with a lossy save formula. There is a way around this. Using the info that Wolverine provided, it's not too hard to take the graphics (bmp) info from the original and paste it into your latest work.
Just Crazy Jim wrote: That whole part of the hex coding about power and climbing is pretty esoteric stuff, if you ask me.
If you want to learn more about it, look into Gumboot's research.
Just Crazy Jim wrote:Another aside: the byte at position 71 in the LCO file doesn't really seem to change the fuel economy, I copied the data from the fuel economy section of the Trans-Euro LCO ("outstanding") into the Planet LCO and the Planet remained "atrocious", so there must be something more to it.
This surprises me. I did plenty of testing to determine how the fuel economy setting works. There's a definite problem with changing fuel economy and acceleration by event, but the changes in the LCO worked bullet-proof for me. Probably something simple is causing this problem for you. I would try restarting the game entirely and then start a new scenario.
User avatar
Just Crazy Jim
Dispatcher
Posts: 413
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:57 pm
Location: Coal Fields of WV

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

RulerofRails wrote:Probably something simple is causing this problem for you. I would try restarting the game entirely and then start a new scenario.
You are a genius. Some further testing confirmed that the culprit was Windows memory management and "fast start" routines causing persistent data strings in the Windows memory cache to be retained between gaming sessions. Data strings aren't being unloaded from RAM after a program is closed, however it was easy to solve, a system reboot and voila! The world is as it should be.

I'll add a more complete reply later when my brain settles back into its housing.
"We have no patience with other people's vanity because it is offensive to our own."
-- François de La Rochefoucauld. Réflexions ou sentences et maximes morales. 1665.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

The negative grades question is an interesting one. What I've found from observation is that negative (ie: downhill) grades vastly increase acceleration, but have no effect on top speed. IOW, if a top speed of 70 mph is set in the .lco file, the train will get up to that speed pretty quickly downhill but will never exceed it no matter how steep the grade.

I must admit I haven't done extensive testing on negative grades. It may be worth doing sometime. I suspect the formula for uphill grades will also apply to downhill ones.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

Aha. I had an idea that might be worth testing.

When RoR was testing acceleration ratings on flat terrain he found that, not surprisingly, they were directly related to how long the train took to reach its top speed for the load it is hauling. This can be equal to, or less than, the top speed set in the .lco file.

The way speeds are calculated uses exponential functions that are modified by several factors (pulling power, "free weight", locomotive weight, etc) to give the resulting speed. If the output of the formula is greater than the locomotive's top speed (set in the .lco file) then the speed is capped at the top speed. IOW, the theoretical top speed of the loco (ie: the output of the formula) under certain conditions can be much higher than the actual top speed it is artificially capped at (ie: the .lco value).

What I suspect may be happening on negative grades is that the game engine will calculate acceleration based on time to reach the theoretical (uncapped) output of the formula. This would give the observed faster acceleration to the .lco value.

This shouldn't be too hard to test. The main difficulty would be in setting up a consistent negative grade that was long enough to give good and repeatable results.

Edit: Come to think of it, this then raises the question of how acceleration up positive grades is handled. I suspect it will simply be based on time taken to reach the calculated top speed for that grade and load. That would make acceleration slower up grades, if the top speed for that load and grade is less than the top speed with the same load on a 0% grade.

I'm not into setting up and running all the required tests at the moment. We already have the spreadsheet for speeds on 0% and all relevant positive grades, and we have a fair idea how acceleration on grades behaves in qualitative terms. It should be possible to nail it down in quantitative terms, just as was done for speed, but I'm not sure how much use it would be.
Last edited by Gumboots on Tue Oct 18, 2016 6:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

RulerofRails wrote:In fact passengers, mail, and troops are the only cargoes for which the price can be increased or decreased without danger (freight cargoes should never be increased).
Hey RoR, have you ever noticed any price spiking (positive or negative) when freight prices are reduced by event?
User avatar
Cash on Wheels
Conductor
Posts: 248
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2016 12:15 pm
Location: Florida

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

Just Crazy Jim wrote:Back on track: In January 1800, there are no housing units on the map and no industries. Cities may have no civic buildings or, if the scenario data is above 100%, may have more than one might have guessed. As far as supply and demand economy in January 1800, there is none. However, that rapidly changes within a very few months. The city growth model has always been something of a mystery to me, all those commodities that houses demand were just a blackhole into which cargoes disappeared as far as I ever noticed. But from a dry start with no economy, it became very apparent that supplying those demands has a some times striking effect on city growth. With no hacks or event effects to modify anything in the economic model.

In the Go West! strategy thread, I had remarked no oil in 1800
So in 1800 no building at all? Just as I suspected, the game starts to seed In 1800 regardless of when the senerio starts.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

Ya reckon? But that makes it hard to explain how you get small cities at the start, and reasonable growth rates, when the start is much later than 1800. I think there must be other factors.

Sure, you can set the initial size of a city in the editor easily enough, and you can set its growth rate, but if all cities were going to start seeding in 1800 then a small city at a 2000 start date would have to have an incredibly low growth rate, and this doesn't seem to be a requirement in practice.
User avatar
RulerofRails
CEO
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2013 1:26 am

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

Gumboots wrote:Hey RoR, have you ever noticed any price spiking (positive or negative) when freight prices are reduced by event?
Never. Orange46's North America RR Sim makes extensive use of them. 150+ years should be enough time to notice a bug like this.

In regards to acceleration downhill. You're probably right. Surely a setup for testing uphill grades can be safely reversed for the downhill test? I only did my acceleration testing on flat ground. The important number is maximum speed possible for the train for its load as determined by the formula you discovered. Then it's just the time required to reach that speed. I suspect that uphill acceleration works the same way. Basically, when playing the game it's better to have trains accelerate a short way on flattish ground before tackling a mountain. This way they can travel up the hill at the maximum speed for that terrain. This is assuming a consistent grade of course. Also momentum can enable trains to climb shorter hills above this "maximum speed". (Now wouldn't momentum be a hard one to quantify?).

Because I view this as a minor thing, and because there is no "bug" that I know of that I'm determined to workaround, I'm not really eager to test it. However, if someone comes up with a great reason to do it, I might be persuaded.
User avatar
Just Crazy Jim
Dispatcher
Posts: 413
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:57 pm
Location: Coal Fields of WV

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

My thinking is that the game begins seeding at Start Date -29 or -30 (years). Starting a scenario in 1800 simply places the player in a seeding cycle, since the game engine very likely wasn't coded for dates prior to 1829.

On the matter of lossy GMP map saving in x64, I think there must be a direct link to the economic grids, because the chunky map I am viewing now has the coast conforming perfectly to the 4x4 grids of each economic cell. if a map TGA is always 1024x1024, it follows that the economic cell data on that map TGA is always 256x256. It's possible (not sure how) that the x64 OS is mistakenly seeing the format as 256x256 because some string is resident in memory that the map data is 256x256.
Lossy saved file map
Lossy saved file map
"We have no patience with other people's vanity because it is offensive to our own."
-- François de La Rochefoucauld. Réflexions ou sentences et maximes morales. 1665.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

@RoR: Yeah, momentum would be fun. I just know the formula behind it will be fairly simple, but I really can't be bothered trying to reverse engineer it.

I never had much of a setup for testing speed up grades. As you found out when you did some testing, the track shown as 3% (for example) can vary over the range of 2.5 > 3.5% and is just rounded off in the game interface. There's no way of correcting for that if you want accurate tests, since you could have a stretch at 2.75% and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. IOW, testing speed up grades live would be too noisy to get useful data.

What I did was use various tests to nail down the formula on 0%, then use the generated loco stats for the existing roster (and the 1000 mph test model) to figure out how speed was affected by grade. Doing it this way was much easier and more accurate.

Anyway, this means that testing acceleration up and down grades would be a much trickier proposition, because it would have to be done with only the (possibly) noisy observed outputs from the game. You'd then have to try and remove any possible noise by rejigging the numbers and hoping you got it right, then doing a lot more testing.

TBH, that way lies madness. *!*!*!

Anyway it's good that price reductions are fine. That's useful. I've been thinking about this stuff lately. The current dynamics of global energy markets are quite fascinating.
User avatar
Just Crazy Jim
Dispatcher
Posts: 413
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:57 pm
Location: Coal Fields of WV

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

I've been thinking about the economy I'm seeing in this mad setting. I am pretty handy with a 3D editor for low poly models like we see in RRT3, so making new cargo wagons and power isn't an issue, And I know how to bang around on Photoshop until I get what I want, so texturing whatever models might get made is covered as well. Or I could just use default game models for goods for Oil A or even one of Michael (WP&P) Rountree's already made models (which are just gorgeous), probably the Goods Box Car.

The problem is that cash runs at you faster than I have ever seen it happen before. It's like someone broke the cash pipes and you're in a raging flood of money. By 1802 there's usually enough housing in any two 1-star cities to made it worthwhile to start a company, then what I am seeing is that by 1810 you can afford in one jab to run a line with tunnels and bridges all the way to Buffalo from Boston without damaging the company coffers.

If I tamper with the LCO files and make the power worse than anything currently in the game, the money still keeps coming so fast you probably never really need to connect to a 3rd city before 1829 on the existing Go West! version of New England. The profits from 4-wagon express-only consists traveling from Providence to Boston very often exceeds 1 full bar of gold coins. The same consist running from New York to Boston is 2, sometimes 3, full bars of coins. The peak for express profit per mile is about 1810, then it begins to decrease over the next 10 years - enough that it's noticeable. If there were enough housing units on the map in 1800, that would likely be even more profitable. But, by 1820, the freight has picked up and the money just changes which hand to comes from.

I think it comes down to the static values built into the economic model: Period A wagons weigh less, but give the same cash return during period A as B versions in period B, etc. Locomotives cost more, but they pull more and faster, so the money still comes at the same rate. No real price inflation. What drives the cash at you in later periods is the map becoming saturated with commodities and finished goods. In the pre-1829 setting, it's the lopsided passenger revenues and the over-all scarcity of things. In one run of the map, New York came ready-made in 1800 with 10 retail buildings and no housing, so right from the start the green and yellow for goods was rushing across the map. Another run of the map, there were so many bakeries and so evenly spread that from the start the whole map was green or yellow for grain and sugar by 1810. Same thing with tool & die shops in another run - iron prices were sky high before I even formed a corporation. When that happens, the game's AI doesn't know which way to walk the resources to market and that iron and coal on the western edge of the Go West! map just sits there until you bother to spend 20 million dollars worth of rail, tunnels and bridges right to the mine and plop a small station up against it. By then, you have the money to do it, but why?

I tried setting the base building saturation to 400% and that was worse. I tried setting it to 5% and the wait was longer, but the money ran at me anyway. There's probably some way to put a clamp on the economy that doesn't break the economic model, but it's eluding me at this moment. Watching the way the pricing migrates across the map, it seems to me that if I used a custom map of a smaller portion of New England with more distance between depots that 1800 to 1829 might not be long enough to make it worth the effort of adding the extra years to a map. On the unaltered Go West! map, it takes a full in-game year to travel from Boston to New York with the Planet providing power. A man could walk there faster. So 20 or so one-way trips between Boston and New York later, it's 1829.

So I tried tinkering with the power and speed, thinking that I might squeeze more years into the play time by having the scenario meant to be played on the slowest setting. It proved to be a genuinely bad idea. I am consistently seeing 100 million+ in company cash by 1820 with that idea in force. I tried the same approach on a huge map with great distances between cities and then the low reliability began to overtake things, it was taking a year to travel from A to B and nothing had been gained. I tried adding terrain features on a small map to act as choke points on the pricing creep, but then those same features cause so many breakdowns and crashes that I was back to square one. Let it be known: More miles = More breakdowns/crashes and More grade = More breakdowns/crashes.

Every way I turn this idea, it keeps smelling worse.

All this trouble because I wanted to add oil earlier. Defective genius at work. *!*!*!
"We have no patience with other people's vanity because it is offensive to our own."
-- François de La Rochefoucauld. Réflexions ou sentences et maximes morales. 1665.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

Just Crazy Jim wrote:I've been thinking about the economy I'm seeing in this mad setting. I am pretty handy with a 3D editor for low poly models like we see in RRT3, so making new cargo wagons and power isn't an issue, And I know how to bang around on Photoshop until I get what I want, so texturing whatever models might get made is covered as well. Or I could just use default game models for goods for Oil A or even one of Michael (WP&P) Rountree's already made models (which are just gorgeous), probably the Goods Box Car.
We have a custom export script that will import RT3 .3dp files to Blender, and export from Blender's native .blend format to .3dp as well. That makes custom modelling easy.

Let it be known: More miles = More breakdowns/crashes and More grade = More breakdowns/crashes.
Yeah we knew that already. We even quantified the increase in breakdown chance for a given load and reliability rating.
User avatar
RulerofRails
CEO
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2013 1:26 am

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

Just a question, are you using events to restore the balance in the game? Because the game isn't designed for this period, it makes sense to me that some events will be needed.

There are quite a few things that can be done with events (not everything, but RT3 has a good range of events on the overall). For example, reduction in the price/production of passengers could scale up to the peak in 1810 and then slowly recede in increments of your choice, the size of the increment depending on whether they are applied yearly/monthly/weekly. In 1.06 you can do math in the events, with this version the effect could be scaled dependent on how much revenue the player makes. (Freight haulage in 1.06 is better with the exe fix that Cash on Wheels recommended.)

Adjusting train reliability by event is easy too. If trains break too much, just increase their reliability. Also, if you up-scale to longer distances there's handy features to reduce water, sand, and oil consumption. Reliability is affected significantly by current oil level. Engine cost is fair game as well, and is the only setting that can be adjusted by event for each specific loco. The other adjustments are by loco type, steam, diesel, electric, or all three.

If you want to try something really crazy, put the map in "Slow date" mode, with the switch in the editor under Special Conditions. Each year becomes 12-hours. Although, imbalance would probably need to be adjusted more.

If you are realizing that this will never be the way you imagined it, I'm not trying to push for it, just to provide some options for balancing. :-)

ETA: Thinking about this some more. Every game has a pre-seed period of 3 years by default. There's good reason for this as it sorts out the cargo economy (at your own risk can be reduced in the debug setting available in 1.06). Basically all seeded buildings are built 3 years before the actual game start date.

Anyway, I suspect that's the problem you are having with the 1800 start. If you start the game in 1803 it will probably seed up normally. So, to get a real 1800 start would probably take setting all the values of "1800" in the files to something pre-1797. That should work unless it breaks some of the game's hidden formulas. Fingers-crossed.
User avatar
Just Crazy Jim
Dispatcher
Posts: 413
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:57 pm
Location: Coal Fields of WV

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

So, some thoughts on the possible power from 1800 until 1829:

Some sort of horse-powered power unit, to be certain, but what else?

By 1828, there were enough people already familiar enough with the idea of steam locomotives that when they had the competition at Rainhill, there was no shortage of competitors. Then, as now, one has to assume that not every person with an idea made it to the final round. Although, I have to wonder about the sanity of the committee allowing Mr. Brandreth of Liverpool with his entry of the horse-powered treadmill....

That infers that prior to the competition at Rainhill, there were already engineers in the business of making steam-powered locomotives and capable of crafting one capable of meeting the demands of the judging committee. What I am seeing as I crawl through references is a general pattern, that in addition to straight forward industrial engineering needs, there was also a sort of locomotive-building craze during the era. I am guessing that most of them ended on the scrap heap before anyone took notice, more than a few probably killed their creators before the "big day". Americans were not immune to the craze, but it wasn't until the "Grasshopper" (1832) that an entirely American-built locomotive became cheaper than horses and one assumes also cheaper than importing a British-made locomotive.

In RRT2, Trevithick's "Pen-y-Darren" 0-4-0 is the first locomotive available, 1804, next up was the Rocket 0-2-2 in 1829 - in the gap there might have been added Trevithick's "Catch Me Who Can" (1808), Hedley's "Puffing Billy" (1814), Stephenson's "Blücher" (1816), and probably a dozen others that are known to modern historians, as well as an unknown number of forgotten models. Then there were others that might have been, like John Fitch's concept for a steam-powered land vehicle intended to run on a track (1793 or 1794 <-- this date may be important)

There was plenty of incentive to come up with something more cost effective than horses. The land unit "acre" is the size and shape it is because of the limitations of animal power for ploughing. Then there's this to consider: In pre-automobile New York City (~1900), every day there were about 100 dead horses left laying in the streets. In hot weather, as many as 1,000 a day. Cleaning the volumes of dead horses and accumulated horse poop from the streets was sometimes the largest part of the 5 boroughs' budgets. I know that stage coaches had to change horses about every 20 miles, then those horses had to rest for 2-3 days before being used again or they would fall over dead. Same limit for the famed Pony Express. I imagine the horses used in colliery tramways had the same issue. Then there were the feeding and stabling costs on top of the limitations.

From what I have seen in period illustrations and late 19th century photographs, it took a team of 4 horses to draw 5 or more wagons of 2 tons of coal on a nearly perfect flat grade. And they aren't pedigree racing horses, they are skags of animals, so i doubt their drivers were getting a textbook unit of Hp from them.

So, I'm imagining Joe Robberbaron, owner of an iron foundry (tool and die) in New England hears of Trevithick's various brain-waves-made-reality and gets busy with trying to haul iron ore to his workshop with a succession of prototypes, each one built on the failure of the previous prototype.
Thus the player gets 1 (and only 1) engine until it breaks and the next becomes available. Thus, limiting the insane cash flood from multiple routes. Achieving that "player may have only 1 locomotive" limit with an event is the next challenge. Obviously setting up an event with an effect to set company cash to 0, but that's a bit harsh.

Next idea, limited track building with the number of sections set according to map size to keep the player from grabbing the whole map. Or a really small map, or a valley, or something, anything to prevent the sort of thing I consistently get (see attached image).
Just madness
Just madness
RulerofRails wrote:Just a question, are you using events to restore the balance in the game? Because the game isn't designed for this period, it makes sense to me that some events will be needed.

There are quite a few things that can be done with events (not everything, but RT3 has a good range of events on the overall). For example, reduction in the price/production of passengers could scale up to the peak in 1810 and then slowly recede in increments of your choice, the size of the increment depending on whether they are applied yearly/monthly/weekly. In 1.06 you can do math in the events, with this version the effect could be scaled dependent on how much revenue the player makes. (Freight haulage in 1.06 is better with the exe fix that Cash on Wheels recommended.)
I am experimenting with events to control the profits, but it seems to be a real bug hunt finding all the little things that control the economy at so early a stage.

I am figuring my way through the supply and demand vs the hard coded factors like express traffic being through the roof early game, even when there are only 3 or 4 houses on the map. I spammed Providence and Boston with various buildings to see which ones might be removed to slow things down, but the needle is so deep into red line, that no civic/retail structures at all is about the same as having all of them present. I made over a million from Boston-Providence with only 3 houses and a church present in Boston and one house and a church present in Providence.
RulerofRails wrote:Adjusting train reliability by event is easy too. If trains break too much, just increase their reliability. Also, if you up-scale to longer distances there's handy features to reduce water, sand, and oil consumption. Reliability is affected significantly by current oil level. Engine cost is fair game as well, and is the only setting that can be adjusted by event for each specific loco. The other adjustments are by loco type, steam, diesel, electric, or all three.
Heh, I have OilCan's Event writing guide printed out and in front of me as I type this reply :D
RulerofRails wrote:If you want to try something really crazy, put the map in "Slow date" mode, with the switch in the editor under Special Conditions. Each year becomes 12-hours. Although, imbalance would probably need to be adjusted more.

If you are realizing that this will never be the way you imagined it, I'm not trying to push for it, just to provide some options for balancing. :-)
I will try slow date on my next set of tests.

Oh, no worries, friend. I just wanted it to be "easy", but nothing worth doing ever is, is it?
RulerofRails wrote:ETA: Thinking about this some more. Every game has a pre-seed period of 3 years by default. There's good reason for this as it sorts out the cargo economy (at your own risk can be reduced in the debug setting available in 1.06). Basically all seeded buildings are built 3 years before the actual game start date.

Anyway, I suspect that's the problem you are having with the 1800 start. If you start the game in 1803 it will probably seed up normally. So, to get a real 1800 start would probably take setting all the values of "1800" in the files to something pre-1797. That should work unless it breaks some of the game's hidden formulas. Fingers-crossed.
This is good news. I've been considering just that. Certainly, since 1800 is (08), then (in theory) the byte for the date can handle years as early as 1793 (00), but that's a lot of files to hack. It may be worth it to no longer have to escape my way through 20 or so "first appears" pop-ups. :lol:

But this date byte 1800 (08), being 4 years before Trevithick's "Pen-y-Darren", and 1793 (00) being the year of John Fitch's locomotive concept. I wonder if there was a point that the devs planned to include very early steam locomotives like those of Fitch and Trevithick or if the numbers are mere coincidence.

I had an email exchange with one of the developers about the change of locomotive availability in RRT3 from that in RRT2 some time before the release of CTC. I even begged for a SAR class GEA to be added, offering to make the model for the expansion. Nothing came of that though. In his reply, he mentioned the seeding taking place from over a period of years prior to "start", but he left me with the impression that it was 30 years, not 3. I do recall he never mentioned when the bugs kicked in or what they were. But he did tell me that the 1829 cut-off was a sort of padding to avoid problems. I suspect what I am seeing with runaway profits may be one of those "problems".

There is certainly very little joy to be had from making money so easily in a game about making money :D
"We have no patience with other people's vanity because it is offensive to our own."
-- François de La Rochefoucauld. Réflexions ou sentences et maximes morales. 1665.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

Some cool ideas you have there.

Limiting the player to one locomotive is tricky to arrange. I don't think you can test for the number of company locos. The editor allows you to test for zillions of things that are absolutely no use, but doesn't allow testing for several things which would really open up scenario scripting. :roll:
I am figuring my way through the supply and demand vs the hard coded factors like express traffic being through the roof early game, even when there are only 3 or 4 houses on the map.
You can cut passenger production by event. That should fix it.
User avatar
RulerofRails
CEO
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2013 1:26 am

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

Re: Limiting the locos, workaround ideas
If you forbid access to all locos, the game will randomly pick one loco for you. In your case, if you have the horse-drawn carriage as a loco that will take care of this. Otherwise you could use an electric which will be useless since no electric can be built in the 19th century, or use a loco that is so insanely expensive that the player will never be able to afford to buy it.

There is a map (Kick-Me Elmo) which has an inactive company (didn't pay close attention to how that was done) which had a short bit of track with some Red Devils on it (map is set around 1900). By event, after completing a task these locos and the short piece of track was transferred to the player.

If you make the map in 1.06 when setting the map up in the editor you can time travel (cheat code: Wolverine@MSU) and pre-buy the locos in the right years. This way, the player wont be awarded a 10 or 20 year old loco. The worse the reliability, the more critical engine age is. The first 3 years of engine age are the heavy hitters for reliability.

A different idea (might be messier)
Oilcan's "Gilligan Isle - Beta" uses cash controls to prevent the player from purchasing more than one loco per month. In 1.06, one could save the current company cash to a variable, then set cash to a level that would allow only one loco to be purchased (allowing bonds or stock issues might be a problem.) Depending on how much the loco costs, a train arrival or some industry profit might give extra capital and thwart this plan. An event could slow trains by 99% (1mph max) and drop industrial production for your company (industries you own) by 99%. This should prevent most in-coming revenue. The duration can be for one week. Give the player the ultimatum, buy it or lose it! Then afterwards, events to return engine speeds and production to normal, and "restore" company cash to the previous level.
User avatar
Wolverine@MSU
CEO
Posts: 1166
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 2:14 pm
Location: East Lansing, MI

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

If someone skilled at using Blender were so inclined, I'm sure a custom "loco" could be coded that consisted of a team of 4 horses, complete with moving legs.
User avatar
Just Crazy Jim
Dispatcher
Posts: 413
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:57 pm
Location: Coal Fields of WV

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

Gumboots wrote:Yeah we knew that already. We even quantified the increase in breakdown chance for a given load and reliability rating.
Indeed. I read the thread and my brain stood at the trough of knowledge and asked for a beer. :lol:
Gumboots wrote:You can cut passenger production by event. That should fix it.
Noted, Gumboots! I'm getting closer to getting the economy under control with events. (see below)

I'm working out the events now, it seems the game counts years and months a wee bit off from how I might. Jan 1800 isn't counted in the first event, so I had an overlap in event effects. locomotives in-play at that time became bugged and shot to 50% chance of breakdown, even if brand new. Upgrading them was the only effective means to getting rid of the double effects. That mostly worked. Mostly. It was rather surprising to see 6 of the 7 locomotives I had in-play breakdown at the same time.

I haven't seen a thread on making custom locomotives yet, mostly because I haven't looked. But I foresee that I will be looking into that relatively soon. I guessing it can be as simple as cloning and re-skinning an existing engine, like Tim (Itsa Timmy) Gabel's "Dorchester" and Kimmo (bombardiere) Jaske's "South African Rwy Class 25". With the difficulty scaling up to Gumboots' "Suburban Tank Double Header" and "Shay Double Header".

For now, I am using events to scale back the Planet (since that's what I've got to work with) into prototype phases:

Phase 1:
Period: beginning of 1800-end of 1809
Power: -50%
Speed: -75%
Reliability: no change *
Oil use: +200% **
Fuel cost: Already atrocious, so no need to mess about here
Track laying cost: +200% ***
Track maintenance cost: +500% ***
Passenger production: -50%

Phase 2:
Period: beginning of 1810-end of 1819
Power: -25%
Speed: -50%
Reliability: -1
Oil use: +100% **
Fuel cost: Already atrocious, so no need to mess about here
Track laying cost: +100% ***
Track maintenance cost: +250% ***
Passenger production: -33%

Phase 3:
Period: beginning of 1820-end of 1828
Power: -10%
Speed: -25%
Reliability: -1
Oil use: +50% **
Fuel cost: Already atrocious, so no need to mess about here
Track laying cost: +50% ***
Track maintenance cost: +100% ***
Passenger production: -25%

* what's the basement on Reliability? The Planet is coded at 02 in the 59th byte. PJay's note on LCO files lists 2 as the bottom of the scale. I saw the post about experimenting with the various LCO figues, but is a locomotive with the Reliability value set at 01 appreciably worse than one with the value set at 02?

** used in lieu of changing reliability.

*** not really demonstrating much of an impact.

So far it's starting show positive results... mostly. The learning curve for making hex-hacks is a bit uncharitable. Getting buildings on the map led to getting freight wagons for the product onto the rails, which led to fixing the broken economy by adding docks/warehouses to eat excess freight so there would be loads to haul on those tracks and profit to be made.

I'm also seeing that the AI players won't do anything if there's not smack you in the face obvious money to be made, so if they don't form a corporation by the 6th year, odds are they won't ever form their own corporation. Just buy stock and keep you from having complete ownership. Parasites....
Wolverine@MSU wrote:If someone skilled at using Blender were so inclined, I'm sure a custom "loco" could be coded that consisted of a team of 4 horses, complete with moving legs.
If this starts to look promising, I will get to work on making custom content locomotives for the prototypes. A team of horses as a locomotive will be the closing phase of this madness. I've never done much with Blender, mostly because the interface gives me a tendency to cuss the paint off the wall. I've worked with MilkShape 3D, since it had import/export plug-ins for the games I played. But if Blender is the tool that must be used, then Blender it will be. Besides, Eadweard Muybridge already did most of the work for me :lol:

Some thoughts on the horse team locomotive. Obviously it's the bar by which success or failure is measured for development, so I'm thinking that during Phase 1, the horse team should be better than the Phase 1 prototype. The Phase 2 prototype about equal. The Phase 3 prototype just slightly better.

When I get to that stage, I am thinking the Phase 1 prototype should look like Trevithick's "Pen-y-Darren" 0-4-0. Maybe becoming available in 1805.

The Phase 2 maybe looking like Hedley's "Puffing Billy" (the 0-8-0 version) or Chapman and Buddle's "Steam Elephant" 0-6-0, becoming available in 1815.

The Phase 3 maybe looking like Phineas Davis' "Grasshopper" 0-4-0, just because...

If there was a Passenger Appeal 0, say, along the lines of "Looks like a steam-powered coffin", the prototypes should have that *!*!*!

----------------------------------------

Edit: Just had a strange effect changing a an event trigger - in the process, discovered that YYYYMM triggers cannot be set before 180912! a temp offset is generated each month-test and compounds the effects, so my freshly made company was economically crippled within 5 months.

P = Passenger production, the backbone of the early economy. By March 1800, there had been 6 offsets generated, why 2 each month instead of 1? Dunno. Anyway, by March 1800 we're looking at 0.5 ( 0.5 ( 0.5 ( 0.5 ( 0.5 ( 0.5 * P)))))) or 0.015625 * P, a 98.5% reduction of passenger production, instead of the intended 50%. The effects were also compounding for track maintenance costs, etc... I will try a straight year condition for the event and see what happens.

Nope, a Year test causes the same issue. before 1810, the only safe trigger for the calendar is looking like "start of scenario".

--------------------------------------------

Edit (again): Okay, it seems that the YYYYMM test set for 180001 breaks the game's code for events enough that it requires closing out the game to get it up and working again. Very likely this is one of the "problems" with years before 1829 the dev mentioned to me.

--------------------------------------------

Edit (again): Ran a 3rd test with a YYYYMM trigger set at 180005, this performed without a problem. Feeling lucky, I tried again with 180001, 2 times failed, one time worked. Nothing changed in the event setup, so I wonder what is the issue?
"We have no patience with other people's vanity because it is offensive to our own."
-- François de La Rochefoucauld. Réflexions ou sentences et maximes morales. 1665.
User avatar
RulerofRails
CEO
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2013 1:26 am

Re: Evil Genius at work Unread post

Just Crazy Jim wrote:* what's the basement on Reliability? The Planet is coded at 02 in the 59th byte. PJay's note on LCO files lists 2 as the bottom of the scale. I saw the post about experimenting with the various LCO figues, but is a locomotive with the Reliability value set at 01 appreciably worse than one with the value set at 02?
There are two lower values available:
01 (Extremely Poor), base level 12.6%
00 (Atrocious), base level 18.9%.
Link to chart with other values for comparison.

Just Crazy Jim wrote:If there was a Passenger Appeal 0, say, along the lines of "Looks like a steam-powered coffin", the prototypes should have that
Check this out. Just a warning that events wont effect this during the game.

Just Crazy Jim wrote:Edit: Just had a strange effect changing a an event trigger - in the process, discovered that YYYYMM triggers cannot be set before 180912! a temp offset is generated each month-test and compounds the effects, so my freshly made company was economically crippled within 5 months.
Are you using a temporary effects? These can work well, but there are a few niggles with them.
Just Crazy Jim wrote: P = Passenger production, the backbone of the early economy. By March 1800, there had been 6 offsets generated, why 2 each month instead of 1? Dunno. Anyway, by March 1800 we're looking at 0.5 ( 0.5 ( 0.5 ( 0.5 ( 0.5 ( 0.5 * P)))))) or 0.015625 * P, a 98.5% reduction of passenger production, instead of the intended 50%. The effects were also compounding for track maintenance costs, etc... I will try a straight year condition for the event and see what happens.
Well, if the game is bugged to fire once per month, why not just halve your effect?

Also, the game's "percentages" aren't really percentages but "levels" of the base. See this.

Just Crazy Jim wrote:Nope, a Year test causes the same issue. before 1810, the only safe trigger for the calendar is looking like "start of scenario".
Does the Status event work? What about the test for "When track or station is placed"?


PS. Because things aren't working right it may be useless in the earliest time frame, but here's an idea of a system I might use.
If I don't need random timing, I tend to pre-plan events. So for example use one event to drop passenger production by 90% ( that would be -90%) at the start of the game, then have another event that fires yearly (if that works in this experimental early time-frame) to wear off this effect by maybe 2% (that would be +2%) per year. If you want the production to increase faster after 1819 let's say 4% per year, make another event and add triggers to check for year to both events. That would be "Current Game Year" <1820, and "Current Game Year" >=1820.
Post Reply