Rainy Days in British North America

[RulerofRails]

Hawk, that's fine. Sugus, thanks!

[Hawk]

OK! I got it added.

It can be found in the North America section.

[Stoneman]

Thank you all for posting these comments. I am enjoying playing this scenario.

I too discovered that investing in the industries (Montreal and Quebec) was the key to early success.

I have not, however, reached The End yet, so am not sure if I shall be victorious.\\

Thanks again to all.

Cheers

Ed

[Shamough]

Rainy Days in BNA

Variables: Are inconsistant with the EVENT names.
EVENT names are Co V 1, Co v 2, Co V 3 but the programmer used GV1 - GV3. CONDITIONS should also include: Force test against Territories
-----------------

EVENT: Random Weather
Random rolls:
Random 1 to 100 >= 1 <This test will always be TRUE>
Random 1 to 100 <= 12

The first random roll is not necessary.
------------------
As the random weather rolls will work as written I'll give this a go.

Hans

[Shamough]

I was able to get my GOLD in 1873 ... would have had it sooner but I still had 4.5M in debt ... BONDS.

Hans

[Cliff]

Rainy Days in BNA

Variables: Are inconsistant with the EVENT names.
EVENT names are Co V 1, Co v 2, Co V 3 but the programmer used GV1 - GV3. CONDITIONS should also include: Force test against Territories
-----------------

EVENT: Random Weather
Random rolls:
Random 1 to 100 >= 1 <This test will always be TRUE>
Random 1 to 100 <= 12

The first random roll is not necessary.
------------------
As the random weather rolls will work as written I'll give this a go.

Hans

I wish you hadn't posted this. I went in and changed the event effects to reflect Company Variables 1, 2, 3 -- but stupidly forgot to check the WIN event, which relied on Game Variables 1, 2, 3.

So, anyway, I coulda' shoulda' woulda' had Expert Gold with 3-4 years to spare if I hadn't messed with the editor. Oh well, at least I know how to lay the track up to St. John's in case I ever want to try it again.

[Shamough]

Rainy Days in BNA

Variables: Are inconsistant with the EVENT names.
EVENT names are Co V 1, Co v 2, Co V 3 but the programmer used GV1 - GV3. CONDITIONS should also include: Force test against Territories
-----------------

EVENT: Random Weather
Random rolls:
Random 1 to 100 >= 1 <This test will always be TRUE>
Random 1 to 100 <= 12

The first random roll is not necessary.
------------------
As the random weather rolls will work as written I'll give this a go.

Hans

I wish you hadn't posted this. I went in and changed the event effects to reflect Company Variables 1, 2, 3 -- but stupidly forgot to check the WIN event, which relied on Game Variables 1, 2, 3.

So, anyway, I coulda' shoulda' woulda' had Expert Gold with 3-4 years to spare if I hadn't messed with the editor. Oh well, at least I know how to lay the track up to St. John's in case I ever want to try it again.

The name of the EVENTS should be changes not the EVENTS themselves.

[Cliff]

... The name of the EVENTS should be changes not the EVENTS themselves.

Well, yeah .... I did figure this out after I didn't get the expected gold medal. I then went back to the editor & saw my dumb mistake --- would have been much better to just not mess with the editor when everything was already working just fine.

So, anyway --- just finished the scenario again and only got Expert Silver. Dang! There just wasn't enough coal on the map this time; I was hauling every lump of coal I could find all the way out to St. John's, mostly by twosies & threesies, and still came up about 4 loads short at the end of the 35 years.

[RulerofRails]

Cliff, how many Coal mines were on the map in your play, and how many of those were running in an area with enough demand to be profitable? Only profitable ones will produce at full output and deep in red price zones they may be running at only half capacity. I am asking because it seems strange that I did this one in 1856 and didn't have a problem with finding the Coal. Maybe over the longer time period (after 20 or so years) some unprofitable ones had disappeared from the map?

I am curious what kind of start you guys are doing on this one also, if you care to share. About the events, I am of the opinion that if it isn't broken it doesn't need to be changed. The scripting in the game isn't an exact science and there are some workarounds. As long as the effects are applied right and triggers correct, stuff like the names shouldn't matter. I doubt this is true in this case, but in some cases I believe creators have purposely tried to give confusing names to some events to hinder those players who use the Shift+E to optimize their strategy. Personally, I don't ever look in the editor until I have won the scenario unless I find a major bug that makes it unplayable. Many scenarios I have never been into the editor, when testing, however, one needs to know what should happen to observe against.

[Cliff]

I think there were 4 or 5 coal mines total, and all separated by long distances. On my first play-through there were plenty of coal mines, and I was able to carry many full coal-trains up to St. John's. There was also a bit of a problem with food in my 2nd play-through, but I managed to get 40 loads to Boston just in the nick of time -- although I had connected with Boston quite early, even before we got the Fairleigh (sp? -- the loco with good pulling power in hills).

In both my games I started with industry -- both times with a lumber mill in Montreal. I also bought textile mills there both times. Someone posted here that a dairy farm popped for him right next to Montreal at the beginning of the 3rd year, and he was able to get it as a baby for only $400K. I kept looking for this plum dairy farm, and in my first game a dairy did appear -- but in the USA near Flint -- at the beginning of the 3rd year. I didn't catch it for a month or so, and by then it was $500K -- a bargain nonetheless. I had just enough credit to raise $1 million, which I did and bought USA access and then the dairy.

So, anyway, in both games I started laying rail in about the 4th year. in the first game I started in Montreal and built track to Ottawa; in the 2nd game I started in Toronto. In both games I got early access to the USA and managed to link all the cities all around Lake Erie. I eventually had 70-80 trains, and had double-tracked all the main lines, even those to Halifax and Boston.

Yeah, about the editor: I had read these game preview posts prior to downloading the game, and took the editor advice as necessary for the game to work right. Turns out those suggestions were all merely cosmetic. Like you I hardly ever touch the editor. I guess if I had remembered Shift+E I could have made corrections (i.e., undid my editor mistakes) to the map that I had won before the time ran out.

[RulerofRails]

That's about half as many as you should have. Just now I tried a few different seeds, and out of five, all had 9 Coal Mines, except one which had 10. (I made sure to completely exit the game each time to avoid the potential for some of the industries to carry over when the game is re-started from the Main Menu. These days I am careful about this. It is easy to forget to exit completely and then think you are having an easy time at the game when the seeding is really "enhanced".) The play I posted about had 10 to start, with 2 new ones appearing during the 17 years I was playing. Were you using dedicated stations to catch the Coal from the mines or just trying to pick it up in city-stations like I was?

The newest engine I had available while playing was the 0-4-0 Baldwin. I was using it to pull 6-cars for most of the haul goals as can be seen in the screenshot I posted. I managed to keep grades at 3% over the majority of the map with only 2 or 3 short sections that went above this when I couldn't help it. I did a nice curving S-bend over the Northern Appalachians to make the connection to the US coast. I saw the way Sugus connected which seems like a more level route, but I wanted to make the connection to Halifax as direct as possible. I did a little smoothing to a few sections of the map in the latest version (in the archive), but this remains a pretty rough map where careful track-laying is a must. Interesting that you used the Fairlie, I wouldn't have made that call based on the low top speed. It's a long way to St. John's and there is plenty of level track on the way that I suspect will make the Fairlie slower over the total distance.

I got that cheap Dairy Farm. The tip I hope others get from that is: if there isn't a Dairy Farm seeded at game start in that vicinity, you might get an opportunity to buy a fresh one there. I didn't mean that this is something that will happen that often. Glad you snagged one in America! I am curious about whether or not with the early game production decrease and factoring in the cost of access to America (1M), (assuming you issued bonds at around 10% interest), did that investment actually make money initially? Or would we say the purpose of that farm could be to pay off the interest for the access to America (free access)? A good call nonetheless.

PS: I removed the corrected map I posted, as it is in the archives now.

[Cliff]

... I got that cheap Dairy Farm. The tip I hope others get from that is: if there isn't a Dairy Farm seeded at game start in that vicinity, you might get an opportunity to buy a fresh one there. I didn't mean that this is something that will happen that often. Glad you snagged one in America! I am curious about whether or not with the early game production decrease and factoring in the cost of access to America (1M), (assuming you issued bonds at around 10% interest), did that investment actually make money initially? Or would we say the purpose of that farm could be to pay off the interest for the access to America (free access)? A good call nonetheless.

Access to America was only $500K, so it was a little over $1 million total to buy access and get the dairy farm. So, yeah, the dairy paid off over $200K the first year and paid off big time thereafter.

[RulerofRails]

Sorry, my bad memory, adding in a dose of carelessness.

[Cliff]

... This is what I managed this time, the last Coal train is about to arrive in St. John. ...

Man, 17 years!? You must have had 17 years of nothing but boom times! I just tried this one again, had a decent start -- 8 coals which quickly mushroomed to 12, decent lumber mill in Montreal, but the textile mill there was already priced at over $2 million at game start.

So, anyway, I ran this for 7 or 8 years, the last 4 of which were recession-depression-recession so that I couldn't do a bloomin' thing constructive. The last straw was when 3 of the 5 cattle ranches supplying my expensive upgraded meat processor in Toronto just up & disappeared. So I did a typical ragequit and decided to find another map to download that won't be so frustrating.

[Shamough]

I just tried this one again, had a decent start -- 8 coals which quickly mushroomed to 12, decent lumber mill in Montreal, but the textile mill there was already priced at over $2 million at game start.

If the Textile Mill was upgraded $2M is a good price ... IF not then look to where the wool/cotton is coming from and place your own Textile Mill between the resources and the other Textile Mill. ... RT3 doesn't have contracts ... first come first served.

Hans

[RulerofRails]

Man, 17 years!?

Just recently when Sugus corrected the events in this one he extended the time limit to 35 years. It originally had a 25 year time limit (you can read about it near the start of the thread). I was motivated to test for difficulty on this one to show that the map was definitely possible in the 25 years originally given. This map is an excellent challenge and in the end I understand why Sugus extended the limit (he still was unable to obtain the Expert Gold in 35 years). By this sort of play I hope I proved that there is enough room to get the medals that seeding and economic state will not make the game unwinnable in 25 years.

No, my game wasn't always in boom times. What I did that gave me a little advantage while my network was small (10 or less stations) is use the demand on the map and the initial (1st year) station revenue bonus (20%). I end up hauling the same cargo a few times with this strategy, waiting for the price at the leading edge of my expansion to drop and then making the new connection and re-hauling this cargo at the same time as hauling new cargo from the source into the leading edge of my expansion. I view this as legal because the game does this re-hauling eventually anyway, I am streamlining the process to satisfy the demand on more of the map and making use of the station revenue bonuses. I also stayed very focused on the goals expanding track before I had used up all industry options. Also foregoing some late game in order to pay off the bonds.

FYI, I didn't use the trick Shamough mentioned of building an industry to intercept and existing resource stream. From my save in 1852 when I had just completed the connection to St. John's, my industry list has 10 industries in it, none of which I built. I never purchased the Textile Mill in Montreal.

That's interesting that you got a seeding with 5 Ranches near Toronto. Sorry they disappeared. Were they running at a profit? I tend to avoid Meat Packing Plants as a good way to make money (ROI is pretty average) except when I can build them on top of a couple of Ranches that are in a orange/red zone (or the map has an abundance of Ranches which is not the case here). This way the Meat Packing Plant can make gobs of money, initial 800-900k in the first year (good for a start strategy on some maps which also have higher starting cash), but profit will die off and this is substituted by the income from the Ranches which I also purchase. Hopefully they don't disappear before they become profitable (late game I will buy them straight away). Part of the reason for their average ROI is likely because the Meat demand is very sensitive so in order to get a decent ROI over time they need to be in a town with a rail connection or demand will tank. I would look for, or build, a Tool and Die instead. Should give more money for less investment. The Iron->Goods chain is one of the more profitable in 1.05. Comparable to Logs->Lumber, but needs less resources to make the same amount of money. I suppose you probably made good use of this already though?

[Shamough]

LOL ! RoR, we have a different philosophy re game dymanics. I'm the SLIMY RR TYCOON who'll stop at nothing to make a profit. I have my GOONS scouring the country looking for existing high profit industries that I can either take over or UNDERCUT. Why hell I've even been known to start an industry hub when there is no city close enough ... Lumber Mill(s), Paper Mill(s) and Furnature Factor(y/ies), then a few years later a nice shiny set of rails will appear and a station built and a new HUFF-N-PUFF to maximize profits. Before the existing resources become profitable I will do almost anything to buy them. I especially love Cattle Ranches that are off in the wild and doing poorly ... BIG Profit gains there. The ROI on existing industries that are NOT at $XXXB is always about 10 years. Those that are way over priced I (cover your eyes kiddies) SCREW OVER ROYALLY.

I see you as a SNEAKY PETE who'll have his MINIONS change the paper work for a train enroute to maximize his profits. ( I actually see this as a game flaw and don't go out of my way to use it. I would like to see a new set of commands: YTD/LTD Comp movess ITEM from Terr./City [Terr./City #] to Terr./City) [Terr./City #].

IN the end we both enjoy drinks, a good meal and a cigar in the Railroader's lounge, while our minions work their little butts off for pennies.

Hans

[RulerofRails]

Yes, I agree, different philosophies. I build industries in the countryside also, but I hate the whole undermine thing. When I see a nicely supplied working industry my first thought is to use the cargo it is producing to make rail profits, or to a supply a subsequent industry, for example Lumber for a Furniture Factory. Even though this sometimes gives me less possible opportunities for industry investment, I rarely run out, and if the goal is a huge number of CBV for example, late in the game I will end up coming back through and buying up all those industries I aided earlier on. I have no idea how close you build "undermine" industries, but resources may cost you a little more due to the combined demand from both industries. Still will make good money though. I don't care if you use this strategy. If you like it, why not.

I think you misunderstood. A Terr. to Terr. test would be awesome. I always make sure that I make the haul goals honestly. I don't re-haul for those, in fact I hate that. It's one of the most serious bugs in the game, IMO. I am also NOT changing the routing of trains en-route to make more money. In some of the early patches of the game there was an exploit that you could make money by changing the destination of an express train. Wait for it to load, and pull a little way out if the station and immediately you could send it back to the very same station for a great profit. Thankfully, that was fixed either with Coast to Coast or the 1.05 patch. If I re-purpose a train for a new route I tend to always do it while the train is running empty or unloading in the station. Switching a train while it is loading or traveling with a load of cars will most often result in, A, the complete loss of express revenues, B, the loss of any first and second year station revenue bonuses, and, C, almost unavoidable loss of revenue, even if, after attempting a change you decide to put it back on the original route as the supply/demand has re-balanced and the price at the source station has likely risen now that there isn't a (or as great) supply of those types of cargo there. I am yet to find a reliable strategy that requires switching a train en-route for a profit advantage.

What I am talking about is different, planning expansion to optimize rail revenues. What normally happens is prices stabilize in cities where there is no nearby supply of that cargo, this means that trains will carry a little of this or a little of that back and forth all around the map, but revenues will be low. When you make a new connection, if that new city has no supply of that cargo it will pay full price no matter how far away the cargo is at the moment. This new city will be the best demand in a small direct-line (no branches) rail network. Given some time (3 to 6 months sitting in the station), the cargo in the previous station you connected to on your line will want to go to this station, as well as any cargo that is at the city with the industry or port source. This strategy is technical and there are adjustments to make it work best for the given circumstances. As with all strategies, I probably tend to give it more credit than it should get. Probably more effective on almost every scenario is the ability to for-see to some degree (I am not psychic) how new industries and connections will affect the price map for the various cargoes and, how to for-see to some degree what actual ROI will be over the course of the entire scenario (comes back down to the demand question, initial ROI is easier to calculate) both for rails and industry. That stuff mainly takes practice. Finding the best possible mix of industry investments and rails at the start to unlock bonds is important also. Growth is exponential, the sooner you get on that ride the higher it will take you.

[Cliff]

I just tried this one again, had a decent start -- 8 coals which quickly mushroomed to 12, decent lumber mill in Montreal, but the textile mill there was already priced at over $2 million at game start.

If the Textile Mill was upgraded $2M is a good price ... IF not then look to where the wool/cotton is coming from and place your own Textile Mill between the resources and the other Textile Mill. ... RT3 doesn't have contracts ... first come first served.

Hans

Yeah, but who has $2 million? As far as building my own textile mill -- not allowed in this scenario. One of the little things that makes the map disgusting (er... I mean challenging).

[RulerofRails]

I forgot about this also. When we made corrections to the map we changed the conditions so they matched the briefing. The briefing says that industry building isn't allowed, but in the old version you still could build them. So in the current version you get 10 extra years, but industry building is off. When I played it I was using the previous version before the changes were made, but I restricted myself to never build new industries. When I was looking over my saved game recently, I saw that industry building was on, hence my confusing input. Thanks, for setting us straight!