I can't see how else to make the tunnel. In my last screenshot the tunnel area is completely unchanged from the version (423) you sent me and appears the same as the version in the archives (357).
If you have some screenshots of what you mean, this would be helpful.
JSS wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2019 7:50 amOne way to avoid the Merritt connection might be that if there is a connection made to the mines there will not be sufficient rail to connect to Petain in time. This could be perhaps done by first making a strong suggestion to complete the Petain connection before anything else and if the player disregards this warning to have many washouts or construction mishaps around the Coquihalla Pass to lose rail material (a not unlike probability since it was a difficult stretch of construction) until there is not sufficient rail left for the connection. Just one idea.
Ok great, thanks. Again, very useful info. Maybe I should consider using set GV4 for each of the main construction projects (if I want to get really tricky I can store the unused for later use). What is happening at the moment is there is a little excess from each project (Midway, Penticton, then Petain). In combination it's about 600-800 units, more than enough to reach Merrit without encountering the emergency rail supplies purchase. I might make the emergency measure more expensive too, so that it would be uneconomical to just keep supplies topped via that. But "problems" with the connection sounds interesting as well.
As I said, I did put a warehouse near Agassiz to represent off-map for CPR. It supplies Corn and Grain. Maybe that should be replaced with a port at Yale? For the KVR though, surely the focus more was on traffic in-out of Petain for exchange onto the river or the CPR? If there's a port at Yale, the player will obviously have an incentive to connect there and that wouldn't be a historical connection.
I'm thinking some sort of haulage to make the route over the Coquihilla pass more significant. Perhaps a target of hauling Goods to Petain could be used? I would swap out the warehouse there (currently a default conversion Lumber->Coal, Livestock->Meat, Steel->Goods) for one that demands Goods, and possibly a small volume trading conversion Goods->Cheese (I realize not totally sensible, but only Cheese and Furniture are higher price than Goods and current Cheese supply is low compared to Furniture). Then the player could either ship in Steel to Hope and convert there (default conversion port there) or source Goods from Penticton, or if they really want Robson. . . . What do you think? Maybe for each 50 loads you deliver you get a Tycoon point?
At what stage of the game did you want to suggest the Coquihalla bypass route? The tunnel is about 100 sections long. It's currently impossible to build with the current 75 unit per month maximum. It will need a special coding to allow that, which wont be a problem, just a matter of deciding what is the best way to set it.
Also, if you have more details about the impact/timing/etc. of problems for the Coquihilla pass, let me know.
ETA: The starting play when you know things are tighter is upgrades to Trail station and Trail Smelter station (for better Steel pick-up), then new large stations in Rossland, Castlegar, and Robson + some Hotels. This helps a little with Coal and Iron gathering but a bigger reason is to get coverage of all houses in those towns.
A little info about station usage in general:
With this game, the small station is not very useful except as a drop-off-only depot. Cargo moves without our help. In a pickup situation, we want to capture the stream from that resource/factory. A Large station obviously will gather from a longer section of the stream. It's possible to use a Medium station for capturing overland streams if train frequency is better than average, but anywhere cargo is on a river needs a large station.
In a distribution situation, such as Goods delivery to nearby cities, the game relies on re-hauling. That means cargo is dropped off in City A. As time passes the price there falls. Eventually the price will fall enough to allow cargo transport to City B. During the passing of time the cargo will drift towards the houses in City A, that can be 2-3 cells and without a large station a portion of cargo will probably be left behind. If less than 0.5 goods are left in City ! the price there will soon start to rise again, repeating the cycle. Medium stations are inefficiency in the cycle, resulting in lower rail ROI.
Not everything applies to the starting station area in SCBC (I don't setup to allow distribution for example). However, the efficiency of the Large stations and extra express traffic thanks to covering all houses is more than enough to justify building a second station then ignoring the placed stations in Rossland and Robson.
I went into detail about the stations because I feel that if you absolutely want to prevent them being built solid mechanisms would need to be put in place. Otherwise if the regular play is to build them anyway, I'm a bit considering setting up Rossland and Robson, large to start with and reducing a little starting cash to match (or provide room to let them be upgradeable). The feel of double-ups is of lesser quality in my opinion. (Off-topic: the AI railways do a lot better using large stations as well, even though they aren't smart enough to normally build them). It's just a feel thing, maybe it's just me, I wont tweak it if you don't agree.
![Smile :-)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)