RulerofRails wrote:What I did for the rot factor test, was to place the game on slow time so I could count how many 12-hour shifts (half-days) it took for the price to degrade one (k). For example, the time between when a load of passengers first hit 15k to the time price degraded to 14k took 58 12-hour shifts. All counts were done on trains stopped as soon as they started loading. For Milk and Livestock I started off with one (k) increments and then after 10 or so occurrences I switched to 5k and then later to 10k increments. I didn't think that rounding should be a big deal with this method. Do you think so?
Given how simplistic all the other formulae have proven to be, I really can't see this one applying different rot rates depending on cargo price. That's why I think any apparent variation in rot rate when you change cargo price is probably just rounding error. If it isn't, then for some reason the devs must have devoted a lot more sophistication and code to this one little formula in an obscure corner of the game. It's possible, but I'd find it very surprising.
You're right. I got the fuel cost level change the wrong way round. Oops. As far as the faster train traveling further in a year, that's true. But, fuel cost will simply be proportionate to the amount of work the train does. A slow train will still burn as much overall, it will just take it longer.
Which means it will travel less distance over the course of the scenario, so will burn less fuel purely because of that. It's a pretty major factor, IMO.
If the engine stats for fuel economy, acceleration, reliability and passenger appeal are equal including the combined engine and tender weights, a faster train is better because you get less rot factor.
It will also just plain haul more loads, rot or no rot, so will make more money regardless of rot rate (as long as cargo supply is adequate).
My "vision", if you will, for a re-balance is to get all the locos in a particular class and era within a certain economic performance window (A.) so that there aren't any majorly useless locos, and (B.) to encourage the use of a much more varied roster with those locos that are slightly better at one thing able to be used for their strength in a particular role. The way I figure, the average player wants to use a variety of locos. I don't think the economic advantages of any current loco are indispensable. For the strategy-minded player, "knowing" what the best locos in the game are and always using them isn't as fun as being able to use the full range of locos as you find a use for their individual talents.
I agree with this vision.
Drastically fudging the weights promises to be the best way to make any economic adjustment regarding fuel cost a reality. Free weight will be really handy in this endeavor. Especially as a negative value to add fake weight. It will be interesting to see how to adjust the fuel cost ratio amongst the classes. I am thinking that Mixed should have highest fuel cost, Express should be lower (depending on average engine and tender weight), but I suspect the heaviest Freights might need to be lowest of all. (Another idea: have the passenger appeal classes such that they identify the class of the loco seeing each class will have specific levels.)
I agree we'll end up fudging weights to some extent, although I doubt we'll need drastic or wild variations there. In fact I'd be wondering what we'd done wrong if we needed weights all over the place.
I also can't see how negative free weight is going to be any use. I regard it as being of a theoretical interest only. The only reason you'd use negative free weight is is you wanted to totally cripple a loco's hauling power on flat terrain, and I can't see how that would ever be something you'd need to do. Bear in mind that all free weight does is allow hauling more weight on the flat before speed starts dropping. It's the flat terrain equivalent of pulling power. If you use negative free weight, speed will start dropping drastically as soon as you add any consist at all. Pulling power is completely separate, and only affects hauling up grades.
What you see in comparison with the Kriegslok and Class 01 or Mallard is most likely down to the Kriegslok being a level higher (25% cheaper as you corrected me above) in fuel economy and lightest late era steamer at 115 tons. The Class 01 is 180 tons. The Mallard is 215. Using Poptop stats. Pretty easy to see what's going to be cheaper to run.
It's also a distance thing. They're both a lot faster than the Kriegslok, so cover a lot more distance in a year. They also tend to be given priority over the Kreigsloks, so stop less often, which adds more to the distance travelled.
Express generation being random and regulated often via event by the scenario's author one will find that it's not uncommon for good Express trains to run at 4 cars or less. I find that in order to really get passengers moving on a map I must cater to a supply of 3 or even only 2 cars worth.Therefore, the fuel cost per load goes up even more. Using a heavy express steamer will likely spell doom in the 20th century. When re-balancing this can be avoided with better fuel economy ratings and light engine and tender weights. (I think of fuel economy ratings as coarse adjustments and engine and tender weights the fine adjustments.)
See I'm not the slightest bit interested in running 2 or 3 cars on express. If that's all the game is capable of, you might as well just say dedicated express is permanently borked and stick with running mixed consists, in which case we might as well forget about changing cargo weights and appeal ratings. I can put up with 2 or 3 cars when things are starting up, but with a developed system I'd be wanting the larger express locos to regularly (not invariably) haul 6 or more cars at up to 100 mph or whatever they were capable of, with moderate sized express locos like the Schools hauling 4 or 5 at up to 80 mph. Bear in mind I'm thinking of them having stats that allow them to do this, rather than the current situation where most of them are useless as soon as one pigeon perches on the roof.
Although speaking of milk, that often used to be included in real life express consists, for obvious reasons: high value cargo with a fast rot time. So that's maybe something else we should consider. Keep the cargo weight for milk fairly low, so it can give a profit boost to express trains sometimes.
Anyway I agree that economy ratings for coarse adjustments and weight variations for fine adjustments is the way to go.