North America Thru the Ages

[Hawk]

The following text is a compilation of what was salvaged from the old Gathering Forum. It contains postings from several different people.
Thanks goes out to Wolverine for putting this all together.

Hawk

North America Thru the Centuries
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A new single player scenario using a modified Kraellin multi-player map is now available at exdx.net/rt3/ It is intended for those who want to run a railroad over a very long period of time under difficult economic conditions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the tip. Where is that website ? I tried everything and could only get an electrical company. Would you try writing out the entire link for us dummies. Not everyone knows what you're thinking.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the tip. I tried all I knew to find what you wrote as a link and all I could find was some electric company website. Would you please write out the entire link for us dummies. Not everyone knows what you're thinking.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for posting the website for me. I'm one of the dummies. I had great difficulty getting the map to some. The people at exdx made it easy, since all I had to do was to attach it to an e-mail. I'm enjoying their other maps, especially trans siberia which is quite difficult.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes its daft that the site tells its not been posted when it has so you get it 3 times I've played the scenario several times and I'm stuck and unable to make any progress at 1902. But its quite a fun game even though I don't usually like long ones.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Having taken some loans I'm now up to 1917 and reasonably near gold (except for taking the loans) BUT I've connected 86 towns out of 90 and I've only Reno Boise and Mexico City still to connect to - so where's the 90th? I'm always careful that when I build a station it says connected but could have made a mistake so 2 questions:
1. Are there 90 cities?
2. If there are is there a way of finding which other one is unconeccted?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I had that problem once in a different scenario and discovered after a long search that one of my cities was not connected - why - who knows. In this scenario it also happened once and after an even longer search I discovered that I never built a station to the small city south of Minneapolis the tracks just went right on by - I was planning to build it later since I ran out of cash - but then forgot all about it. Yes, there are 90 cities. Count the cities in your station listing -go by pages (15? per page) and subtract any freight stops. If you're in 1917, however, there's plenty of time to find the last city. Worry more about making money.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I just downloaded it and started to play.
What a shock it was to discover I couldn't use some of my normal tactics (buy industry, sell stock like a madman, etc.)
Guess I'll have to work at being Casey Jones and try to connect as many different lines together as I can to get some of the cross traffic.
I've never played a map that allows 15 computer users! This is going to be real interesting. But it'll make connecting to all 30 cities a bit easier.
Anybody have any tips on where to start, etc?
(I tried up by Chicago a few times but never really got any traction so now I'm starting in Miami and working my way north ever so slowly.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My favorite starting place is Chicago to Indianapolis and either Cinn or milwaukee, depending on what's there. Wash DC can work, too. I'd like to know how Miami works out and if you're getting anywhere with the competitors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I can keep things pretty much under control until around the turn of the century (1900) when all of a sudden it seems like I hemmorhage money.
Plus, if I try to keep enough funds up to get a connection to the west, the stockholders are going to vote themselves a special divident and take 5 mil away.
Ideas?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I usually built a line from El Paso going west. Usually, there's enough cargo to defray the huge upkeep costs. Somewhere in the 1960's is when I really had financial problems, since the I had to connect to the central rocky mts where i couldn't make much money. However, I actually increased cargo rates a little around then to help people finish (assuming they get that far).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I got a good start connecting Philadelphia and New York to start, then connected to Washington DC and on to Boston. Took a long time to get enought cash to expand though. After a while I got started in the Midwest and connected Indianapolis with Evansville and Nashville. Expanded from there to St. Louis, Chicago and Memphis. Just when I started making some money, the darn dividend thing kicked in if I had any cash left over at the end of the year. Took a big bite out of expansion until I figured out how to beat it.
The secret is to be in the red at the turn of the year, even if by only a few dollars. Here's what I've started to do, and haven't had to pay a dividend in many years: I let cash build up until November, saving the game throughout the month, until just before it goes into December. I use all the cash on hand to expand, spending every last penny on track expansion, stations and upgrading to double track in heavy traffic areas. Payments are made by the company at the start of December, so the company goes into the red. I then start saving games throughout December as cash starts coming in, getting a saved game right before the end of the year (and I mean RIGHT before). Sometimes I have to slow the game to a crawl to catch the revenue from the last train of the year and stop before the year turns. I then spend all of that money (if there is any) right down to the point of going into the red by a few thousand dollars. It's sometimes a little tricky to get into the red, but if you lay track just right, you can use the cash you have and go slightly into the red. More recently, I've found that if there's enough debt left from the beginning of December and one or two trains arriving late in the year tip the scales into a net profit, I stop the game, look for trains that are just about to arrive at their destinations, and stop them. That keeps me in the red and I don't have to pay the dividend. Of course, when the year turns, the gov't asks if I want any money and I say "No thanks" (I'm playing on expert and going for the gold, so no handouts are allowed for the medal), and restart the stopped trains.
I'm in the mid 1870s now, and have about a million and a half in cash to expand in November each year. Haven't looked way out West yet, but have connected to Dallas, New Orleans, Omaha, Little Rock and will push up to Minneapolis soon. I had to restart the scenario several times to get a good seed for the Wash-Philly-NY corridor, but once that was going, I've been able to expand by using the strategy described above. Only wish I would have discovered it sooner, before having to pay out those $100K, $300K, $500K and $700K dividends at the end of a profitable year. I actually paid attention to the directive to keep enough cash around to pay dividends (what a sap I am ).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All good intentions go to waste. I guess I should not have allowed that. However, I must admit I do worse things sometimes, but only in other scenarios. Originally, cash was removed even if you had none, but I got into difficulties once and the dividend just didn't seem realistic if I had no cash. I probably should not have added the check cash condition. Any opinions or or comments?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Things were going along real well through the rest of the 1800s. I was able to build along the West coast from Seattle to San Diego and up to Las Vegas and Reno. Also expanded out across the Great Plains to Denver, N. Platte, and out to El Paso and Albequirque (sp) and all the little towns on the Plains. Things were going well until the turn of the century, when a recession followed by a depression pushed me deeper and deeper into the red. Finally about 1905 the economy recovered, but I was $13 Million in debt, and the interest on that debt ate up all my profits and then some, so I was not able to recover. May have to go back and rethink the expansion strategy so early in the game.
I like the idea of working in a tight money environment, but the penalties for building up cash seem a bit extreme. I don't see how you expect a company to succeed if all their profits are given away at the end of the year. I decided to not play with any AIs since there is no provision for buying up their stock for eventual merger. Since you're locked out of any stock transactions, you can't even see what their stock value is to be able to make a reasonable bid for takeover. Even if you do bid, since you don't own any stock, I think the chances of a successful takeover are minimal at best.
Just one more note, I noticed that Green Bay (the water, not the city) is sunken way below the level of Lake Michigan. Was this a defect in the original map you used, or did something happen during your scenario creation.
The overall growth rate seems pretty reasonable. Most of the cities I connected in the early stages of the game have grown adequately and most of the major ones are 4 stars now, but with so many of them connected, and a lot of trains running (over 150) the prices have evened out over the map, driving profits down on many of the runs. I did notice as I plunged into the abyss around the turn of the century that many trains were running at a loss for several years, and I may have been able to cut the losses by retiring some of the trains. I'm going to have another go at the mid- to late-1800s and see if a more conservative expansion strategy along with upgrading already-laid track to double where needed might lead to a better go of it.
I like a challenging scenario; many of the PopTop scenarios are too easy. I've also struggled with Guilded Age several times with no success, but that's a different story.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you want tight money, you can reduce cargo prices, though it will affect AI as well. Or you can reduce production. Or increase costs - like maintenance costs.
Remember that there are already shareholder attitudes built into the game. Plus if there is a dividend and you are a shareholder, you should get some of it. Dividends affect stock price. Stock growth affects your salary.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I first developed a difficult scenario for RRT2 because all of the scenarios were too easy. I was unaware of this or the RXDX site, so I never published it. When RRT3 came out, I knew that I would need to develop a similar difficult scenario, but due to all of the differences, it took me a very long time to figure out what to do. I had one working scenario when a new mod for RRT3 came out and then my scenario stopped working so I had to rethink the whole concept and that's when I finally bit the bullet and put in the dividend rules. (To think that I bought RRT3 and a new Dell within a week of the game becoming available!) In RRT2 I allowed industries - in fact - it was a must - rail lines became worthless when unpurchased industries disappeared and I didn't have enough money to fix the problem - thus, I had to restart or go back a decade and buy the industry and forgo other rail expansion. I never had that problem with this scenario, but since I still had nightmares about it, I built in stuff to let people keep plaing, even if they went in the hole by mega millions (the bundle of cash works but you just don't get any medals).
Actually, I added the negative cash modifier to the dividend and the bribe for mega cash when in one play test I overexpanded and got way in the hole like you did (too pig headed to take the $1 million) and didn't want to start over, since I love it when I finally get to the GP's.
I tried tighter money thru reduced prices and cargoes but it didn't work - too many routes became unprofitable with lower prices and less express cargo didn't seem to do anything. I think I maxed out on how low I could go.
I had a problem locating Green Bay, so perhaps it was me who messed up. I'm not a map maker like Kraellin, but I really appreciate his and all of the other wonderful maps out there. If I were better at the terain, I would have done something to the rockies as I can never find a decent route for the UP to get to SF. I did lower the hills around Harrisburg to make that route profitable (Horseshoe curve to Pittsburg).
I never ran more than 100 trains to get the gold and in the late game I dropped back to 60 or so. But, maybe I'm too conservative.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I added 15 AI's just so I could hook up to their cities and let them haul stuff over my tracks so I could make money.
I tried buying them out once, but you have to be careful because they may be somewhere like multiple millions in the hole. I just hated the thought of having to pay to use their lines, but in the end it's just easier to let them build up as well, and connect a couple of AI's together so you can milk them a bit.
If you're determined to snag an AI rail, you just have to select the "attempt merger" option and then offer double what the going price is.
However, as I said, you have to be careful of their financial state.
I tend to over-extend myself and next thing you know I'm deep in the hole, so it's backtrack and try again.
It's decidedly a brain buster.

[Eb Zane]

Trying this for the first time, only on ez to get the feel of the game.

Started Dallas/OKC/Springfield/KC/Stlo and connected to AI's in Ohio.

End of year is only showing connections to two cities when I'm above twenty.Whats up? Yes all stations are showing connected

[HerrPanzer]

same problem as above; have connected 10 cities but only shows 2 as connected in the victory ledger.

[HerrPanzer]

I hope I figured it out. I think it has something to do with Ai companies. I started a new game and used a cheat to give myself 10mil. I connected 5 cities and the victory ledger says 5. I ran the game a bit and when the first Ai company sets up, my total on the victory ledger went down to 2. When I merged with the Ai, my victory ledger total went up to 7 (my cities + the 2 the Ai had connected to). So hopefully it just means that I will have to merge with all the Ai companies to win.

[HerrPanzer]

Well it seems that although you can play the scenario with 15 Ais which sounds like it might turn out interestingly, unforunately because bankruptcies are turned off almost all the Ai companies get so deep into the hole that they present nothing but messy rail systems to build around and buying them out means taking on hundreds of millions of debt even in the 1860's. Do not play this with Ai companies unless you edit the scenario to allow bankruptcies. Otherwise a pretty good game for slow and careful expansion. Too bad I have put way too much time into it to start over without Ais (might use the cash cheat so that I can buy out the Ais and wipe out the debt as well)

[HerrPanzer]

playing with 1.06 iirc and was wondering if anyone has beat this recently (gold)? I was doing pretty well up until the car weight increase ~1950 then everything went to heck in a handbasket. Even reloading a few years before the car weight increase to upgrade my trains to the latest diesel didn't prevent the loss. The decreased speed of the trains + increased cost of fuel simply wiped out the meagre profits I was having before. I had everything connected east of Denver but the decreased profits of freight and especially passengers along with the inevitable evening out of cargo demands made even a total reorganisation of my 80 trains get me to break even during booming times not counting the interest payments for the dip into debt already incurred. It's gotten to the point where I even have a few hubs where passengers will only pay $1 to go to the next hub and passengers from New York will only pay $20 for a ride to Dallas

[HerrPanzer]

I'm thinking of going back a few years and destroying my railway and starting over but I have a few questions first. When using a hub system, let's say Detroit, Chicago, and Memphis are hubs. Pittsburgh is a non-hub feeding into the Detroit hub. Passengers wanting to go from Pittsburgh to Memphis load up on the Pittsburgh-Detroit train no problem. But when it drops off its load in Detroit, the Detroit-Memphis Express sits waiting for passengers. Is this normal, or does the train going from Pittsburgh to Detroit also then have to go itself to Memphis to get the passengers there or is there something wrong with my game? This was my 2nd attempt at this scenario and its been playing out pretty weird. I didn't get a steel mill anywhere until 1903! I only just got a 2nd one on the map in 1950. Note that industry building is disabled in this scenario. Hubs like Memphis I have had hooked up for almost a hundred years haven't grown beyond 1 star, but cities off the main routes with virtually no industry or train demand are 5 stars. Not a single car factory has showed up and a tire factory only just opened up.

I was thinking of going back to a save from a few years before and destroying all my lines and reorganising my network. I am spending a huge amount on track maintenance each year, it is my #1 expense. The only way I got around the car size increase ~1900 was to go electric. Do you think it would be worthwhile to destroy all my track and go with regular rails and stay with diesel/steam trains? It is a pretty hardcore idea but I go from profits of $1-2 million/year to loses of $1-2 million at the train car size switch in 1950 with no train changes. I can make it almost to the break even point micromanaging my lines.

Anyone have any suggestions? I have been playing this map for months and would really hate to start over without hearing from the experts on this first.

[RulerofRails]

HerrPanzer, I noticed nobody replied to your question yet. I downloaded this map and was hoping to get a chance to check it out. Problem is that I haven't had time. I don't know when I will get a chance to play it. In the meantime,

Somewhere in the 1960's is when I really had financial problems, since the I had to connect to the central rocky mts where i couldn't make much money. However, I actually increased cargo rates a little around then to help people finish (assuming they get that far).

This is from the middle of the huge post bringing in many quotes from an old site. I believe this is by the creator (goes by Orange 46 here). If you can survive until the 60s sounds like things get a bit better.

[RulerofRails]

Reply directed at PieLam from the locked thread: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=3884

I loaded this one up to check it, since I still haven't gotten a good chance to play it. What I see is that at the beginning the access rights for both Canada and Mexico can be purchased for 100M each. There are events which will eventually reduce this cost to 1M for Canada independence in 1867 and in 1994 NAFTA for Mexico. These events appear to be set up correctly from what I can see. I don't know why you seem to be something different. Remember that if you purchase the rights before these events it will count against your CBV. Can't advise strategy on this one as I am yet to try it. This map wasn't designed for 1.06. The extra engines in 1.06 likely make it easier.

---

Admin Edit: I figured I'd add the link to the locked thread for future reference.

[RulerofRails]

I started playing this one in the west using the Goods the ports supplied to have a real good start. I could just manage a San Francisco to Sacramento run. I used a medium station in Sacramento and some nasty grades to do this. Using a couple more small stations for initial expansion and timing the deliveries I had 10M profits mid-way through 1840. Unfortunately I lost interest mainly because of the terrible terrain in the western part of the map. I used some wooden bridges to keep traffic off some of it, but I got to the point that it wasn't fun to expand to Los Angeles and Las Vegas. Will leave this to others to play. Hotels should be a good way to store some of the CBV without incurring ridiculous costs. Their profits aren't dependent on the price of passengers, so they should stay profitable as long as some passengers are being hauled. The various penalty events and taxes make having 100M cash to buy either of the access rights a tough task. I don't say it's impossible, I was intending to try it, the map just wouldn't hold my interest over such a long time period. It's far easier to be less careful aiming for consistent profits and play until you are granted rights to Mexico in 1994. If you want the game to be even easier you could start a new company. Using the profits from Goods in the west I could have started a company with the full 4M of outside investment during the 4th year of the game. Even if it takes you longer to get a good reputation, the strategy of starting in the west on a seed with a few ports and then switching to the east with a newly-formed company would make this one pretty easy.

[PieLam]

Reply directed at PieLam from the locked thread: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=3884

Hi GumBoots & RulerofRails,

I'm not sure what a "locked thread" is exactly, but I now think I know. Thanks to Hawk for pointing me to this thread! (I didn't know this thread existed...)

I've been waiting (all this time,) for a reply to my original post (via Email notification)... I guess when a thread is locked, these notifications don't occur???

Just so happens, this morning I received a notification to a different thread (that I'm also subscribed to). I decided to login here for the 1st time since my "plea-post" about territories. Out of curiosity, I checked "my posts" which eventually led me to this thread, which has been very inciteful.

Since my original post, I've looked at the events, in this map, several times & eventually found two events that are about the 2 territories. (Canada & Mexico)

What's puzzling me now, (and cannot find in any event) is how the restrictions on these 2 territories even exist??? Clues? Ideas?

PS
I've gotten a little more comfortable using the editor now. The original map is now my "adjusted" version which more than likely y'all wouldn't like, but I do.

[Hawk]

I'm not sure what a "locked thread" is exactly, but I now think I know. Thanks to Hawk for pointing me to this thread! (I didn't know this thread existed...)

It just means that a locked thread can no longer have new posts added to it.

I've been waiting (all this time,) for a reply to my original post (via Email notification)... I guess when a thread is locked, these notifications don't occur???

Since the locked thread can not have new posts added to it, there would no notification of new posts, but you should receive email notifications of new posts in this thread.

[RulerofRails]

Since my original post, I've looked at the events, in this map, several times & eventually found two events that are about the 2 territories. (Canada & Mexico)

What's puzzling me now, (and cannot find in any event) is how the restrictions on these 2 territories even exist??? Clues? Ideas?

PS
I've gotten a little more comfortable using the editor now. The original map is now my "adjusted" version which more than likely y'all wouldn't like, but I do.

I'm more of a player than a map maker, but I will try to explain a little more of what I understand about the territories.

The editor has a page for territories. This contains a list of all the territories allowed (24) including unused ones which are gray (inactive). For each territory the map maker can select a switch for "Limited Access". What this does is close a territory to the player at game start but allow a player to buy access later for a price that can be specified beneath the activated switch. On this map the price for Canada and Mexico is 100M each. The events which you see that mention territories are historic events that greatly reduce this cost. One for Mexico, another for Canada. Problem is that what you are describing, a problem of "your company cannot purchase rights to this territory" shouldn't be seen in this map unless you did some extra coding. This is really puzzling.

One way that map makers can make a map that doesn't allow the player to purchase access to a territory is by leaving the aforementioned "Limited Access" switch unticked, but writing an event that forbids a certain company access at the start of the game. Then additional events can be written that are triggered when a task or objective is reached that give the player access later in the game. Better map makers could give more insight about peculiarities of this system, but this should give a general idea. For example, I don't think the two systems can be mixed, but I didn't pay close attention. I know that the second method allows a map maker more options to use territories strategically. As I said before, there are none of this type events in the map. I would try an unedited version if you continue to not be able to purchase the rights at any cost.

A tip for editing maps is to save with a new name each time and in total as few times as possible. The game has a lossy save formula so it loses some detail on each save. Some people notice this far sooner than others, mainly depending on their machines.

If you are smoothing the terrain, that's something that I see the need for. Did you find the map rough in the west?

[PieLam]

If you are smoothing the terrain, that's something that I see the need for. Did you find the map rough in the west?

Yes, I'm smoothing (sorry, map author). Yes, I found this map to be very rough compared to others I've smoothed.

PS
Thanx for all the insightful info!! I think it'll provide lots of needed help figuring this out... Can't wait to try all this out!

[PieLam]

I'm more of a player than a map maker, but I will try to explain a little more of what I understand about the territories.

Thanx for that post! It has helped a lot, if just to confirm my guesses!

Problem is that what you are describing, a problem of "your company cannot purchase rights to this territory" shouldn't be seen in this map unless you did some extra coding. This is really puzzling.

Yes, this is puzzling to me too... I have done "other coding", but I wouldn't have thought that my "other coding" could affect territories, maybe so... You also mentioned that this map could be misbehaving because of the version I'm using. I think that that's the more likely culprit??? Who knows?

One way that map makers can make a map that doesn't allow the player to purchase access to a territory is by leaving the aforementioned "Limited Access" switch unticked,

That's how they were, unticked. When I changed it, I was then able to set the amount it takes to access each particular territory, which I set for a ridiculously low amount ($10).

In any case, doing that solved the territory problem which has been plaguing me for weeks! (I've started over 3 times after thinking I had fixed the territory problem.

I would try an unedited version if you continue to not be able to purchase the rights at any cost.

I do keep unedited versions just for such occasions. So far, knock on wood, I haven't had to go back (surprising, given how inexperienced I am at map making).

The game has a lossy save formula so it loses some detail on each save. Some people notice this far sooner than others, mainly depending on their machines.

Fortunately, I haven't noticed any of this...

[Hawk]

A tip for editing maps is to save with a new name each time and in total as few times as possible. The game has a lossy save formula so it loses some detail on each save. Some people notice this far sooner than others, mainly depending on their machines.

Just to clarify, he's talking about terrain color degradation.

[PieLam]

Just to clarify, he's talking about terrain color degradation.

Ahhh! I was wondering... I doubt if I'd ever notice that!

[RulerofRails]

Hawk, thanks for adding that important detail I omitted.

PieLam, I am interested how your smoothing turns out. If you end up doing most of the map, I wouldn't mind taking a look. Zip the scenario file up and attach it if you like.

[PieLam]

PieLam, I am interested how your smoothing turns out. Zip the scenario file up and attach it if you like.

I didn't do the complete map, but I did do most of it At first, I ignored Mexico completely then later, I focused smoothing mostly the Eastern part since that is where the only city in Mexico is.

Yesterday while playing, I discovered these very tall cone shaped cylinders that surrounded Mexico city.

When I tried to place a station where the cones are, the station's "cache" is red. Luckily, I could place the station just outside the city, but still "connected". So that's where I placed the station. I still had to lay track on a grade to get to the city's station, but not near as bad as it would've been without any smoothing.

The only thing I can figure about the cones, it was the map author's attempt to guard against smoothing. Well, it worked, in a way. I didn't know the cones even existed until I seen them when I zoomed in to place a station & lay track!

Be forewarned that there are quite a few "other" mods I made to this map aside from the smoothing. A lot of it was from my feeble attempts at thwarting the territories restrictions, also to thwart the yearly $5M-$10M dividend that I despised. And admittedly, some things were done in my attempts to gain an advantage...

You may think, "if the map is so difficult and in need of so much modding, then why even play it?" I too thought that, I just liked the map overall despite the many little things I didn't like. Besides, I wouldn't know how to begin making a map from scratch! (not counting what I've read about the tremendous amount of time it takes to create)

PS
In my string of the many maps that I've modded, I never figured out how to modify the map's start year. I seen where the default year, as well as the allowed range of years was set, and thought that was it, but the map would still always start at some other designated year. Any ideas on this?

[RulerofRails]

I took a look at your saved game. I can see that you have basically flattened the mountains completely. That's fine. I am encouraged to see that while not liking the hard difficulty so much you are discovering how to make the ports work correctly (they often need a conversion that multiplies such as 1 Weapons is traded for 4 Rice, which can be combined with a demand only to help absorb cargo while preventing consumption) and learning about the game's economic system. In order for the industries in the game to produce well, they must have a good difference in price between the input and output cargoes. Once a map has events to reduce prices (that's always map-wide) those differences become much smaller. This further hinders any port conversions, even those that are balanced properly. Please note that the economic cycles adjust the going rate so that in Depression the gap between prices ends up being less. Some tolerance is needed for this.

I am not sure how the cones formed. With care I can remove them with the leveling tools. With patience almost anything is possible with those. You need to keep the red (X) over the vertex of the particular cell you are lowering while using a small-sized tool. Hold Shift down as well if you need a bigger/faster effect. Have you tried hitting the yellow "OTHER" button on the top right of the terrain modification tools (raise/lower/smooth etc.)? If you don't care to keep the relative mountainous areas exact, it's pretty easy to start with the original map and flatten down a couple of times using the "Reduce Terrain Uniformly by 50%" option, then with the map zoomed fully out and the largest smoothing tool, run-over the whole map slowly while holding Shift down for increased effect. This will give a fairly smooth map in a couple of minutes. It will lose a fair bit of detail though, and the mountains will shrink inwards from the edges, but you may like the result better than a completely smooth map (your call).

Tip: When using the height tools a circular motion can spread the effect more evenly. Also, using the free-form camera for better angles can help.

Now for the bad news. Brace yourself. My guess for the reason you can't see the start date change is that you are using "Shift+E" to enter the editor from a map that you originally started as a scenario to play from the "Load a Scenario" option in the main menu. Switching in and out of the editor to make changes as you played. That's fine for learning about the game, but to do it properly you must do edits to a map loaded from within the editor or via the Editor available from the Extras page accessed from the main menu. An easy way to tell if you are in the right mode is to check that the game hasn't been seeded yet. This is the random generation of the industries and houses at weighted percentages for regions and cities that happens when you "Load a Scenario" but not when you load a map via the editor. This process will only happen once, and is likely the worst consequence of working in the editor on a loaded scenario, which (to confuse everyone ) can actually still be saved as a scenario that will start at right start year (or range of years) if the save is done from within the editor mode. You could also note that the editor will save maps (gmp file format) while a saved "scenario" has a gms file format which is what you uploaded.

So the changes you made aren't going to be good for other players. That doesn't have to stop you experimenting as that is by far the best way to learn about the game. I have learned the majority of what I know by experimenting. Managing the economy can get quite involved as there is lots of advantage to find by placements of industries/stations and timing at least the initial impacts of your trains at satisfying the demand available on a map using the cargo you are collecting via proper routing and station placement. Possibly from the industries you own or at least managing the flow of resources to and from them for maximum collectible (by your network) production that can often be distributed very profitably to a newly connected city with unsatisfied demand. The scope for re-hauling in RT3 is quite high and the game automatically uses "loops" (hauling the same cargo back and forth) as pricing rises and falls by smalls amounts between cities (changes between their station's demands). By using strategies that wait for the difference in the demands between the cities to be greater the profits of these re-hauls can be much higher, and almost any map can seem easy. Good luck with the game, hope you enjoy learning more! BTW, if you want a copy of your saved game with the cones removed, or a quickly flattened map (done by opening the map from within the editor) with much more manageable mountains, or more questions, just ask.