What if engine stats kept changing?

  • Howdy railway tycoons!


    Here's a topic/game idea originated from another forum, and I thought this would make a great discussion!


    What if round after round, the engine stats would change randomly? When you start a new round, your favorite engine from last round might not be the best anymore. The engines would still remain faithful to their era.


    How much could each stat change?
    Should the engines be in the same research order?
    How about pricing?
    Should the upgrade (engine parts) stats change or the engines?
    Should the random changes happen only on certain servers while other servers kept the original stats?

    What if stats were kept the same but each engine would get one more research/upgrade slot that is always random?


    I'm sure there are many more questions to consider and ways to make the hauling business more interesting, but this is a really fun topic worthy of discussion - even if the discussion would not lead anywhere :whistling:

    :engine1: Choo-Choo :engine1:

  • A. Generally, yes, that sounds like a fun idea. It challenges to more thinking, which engine to pick or which upgrade to research.


    B. But also another general idea: there are so many players who are railroad enthusiasts,others even are enging drivers in RL, and they often tell, that they are unlucky about technical details of the RN engines that totally differ from their real data.

    For me, an essential part of all graphic focussing internet stuff is the rule "form follows function", which aims in the same direction: even in a game, the technical data of engines we are playing with should be (almost) realistic.

    One example is the latest skin of the Medusa, that blue engine, which looks like a blue brick, like a tram/streetcar ... but to imagine this engine to run 240 km/h ... impossible! I like that skin, really, but it should have been given to a much slower engine.


    How much could each stat change?


    Not too much. They should make a difference, but not differ too much from something that would be possible for a build like that. And the other way too: if its an engine looking like a speed train, it should not be the slowest in that era.


    Should the engines be in the same research order?


    Again: look at the forms. The research order goes from old to modern in each era. The engines develop in size and detail. Switching two engines will work, but if the order looks very unrealistic, some fun will go.


    How about pricing?


    I would think, some little changes in pricing should be done, if the engind becomes more effective or less effective.


    Should the upgrade (engine parts) stats change or the engines?


    According to the form follows function idea (B) little changes should happen for the engines themselves. Top speed might change, but still in realistic steps. Bigger changes might happen on acceleration, maintenance and waggon count.


    Should the random changes happen only on certain servers while other servers kept the original stats?


    Not every player likes maths. Also, new players should learn the game first, which is quite complex already without these new challenges. For those players there should be servers on which engines do not change.

    See idea A: some like additional maths challenges, some will dislike them.

    So, yes, random changes should only happen on certain servers.


    What if stats were kept the same but each engine would get one more research/upgrade slot that is always random?


    This might be another good idea. Keep the main stats (or just change 1 or 2 for each engine) and add another slot, which might be totally new (quicker loading/waggon switching time, more safety which gives extra money or prestige on delivery, ...). But again, only on special servers and in a realistic way.


    And a side note:

    Please do the migration to HTML5 first, then plan these new ideas to be on the schedule.

    Homo forensis, der gemeine Forenuser ... eine erstaunliche Spezies.

  • Please do the migration to HTML5 first, then plan these new ideas to be on the schedule.

    Luckily those two things are entirely independent. But even with that being the case, random stat changes would be something we could to a bit further in the future, not right now. So either way, those two things will not impede each other.

    To add to the things Samisu already said:
    My personal idea about this suggestion right now is to let the stats fluctuate around the values we have right now. So the trains would still be similar to how they are right now, with random fluctuations (of maybe 0-20%) around their original values.
    And I would neither roll it out on all servers nor create an entirely new scenario for all regions, but instead just use individual international (temporary?) servers for this.
    And I also thought about making the "random" factor a bit fun. We could have polls about how strong the random fluctuations should be, we could let our office dogs deicde the values somehow, we could let the players select one era that is protected from changes etc.

    What do you think?

    _________________________________________

    Found?DU5gLUo.png

  • While I love this idea (being a math lover and all), and find this an interesting way of making multi-cultural servers a more attractive thing, I wonder how much success this would have long term.


    I realise day after day that I'm one of the lucky few that can do a conversation in two languages (english + mother tongue), and that this is not the case of most players. I'm not sure an international server would be viable long-term for all those people that are not fully fluent in english.


    And we have seen recently that an international server where everybody can speak his own language somehow loses some of this closeness between people. Because half the town doesn't understand each other.

  • No.

    I am happy if you want to play in a server where every era random stuff is thrown at you, create your own scenario and I will happily stay far away from it.


    This idea feels like someone is bored and need to spice up things, it wouldn't, because in the end the nerds would grab the data, analyse it and a couple of hours later we'd know exactly what's what.


    Wanting to know what we're dealing with is the nature of the beast as this game comes with long term strategies, takes planning, if you make a mistake you can't restart the game.

    Currently playing on:

    M1.201 Scandinavia

  • People in the asso I play are still asking all the time what is the best train after the pioneers update and changes to trains.

    Some are still using the "old" best trains


    Changing stats every round sounds like to much hassle for most players. what I would like is to have more destinctive differences.. so that is worth buying multiple type of trains instead of just picking the best average train for the era.


    What I would like also as a new feature on trains is that there is a fifth slot to research that is flexible.

    On that slot you can pick any of the 4 available upgrades but only 1 can be in effect to add 1 wagon or 10% extra speed or 2 accellaration points or 20% reliability and you can change your choice after each hourly recalculation.

    how much is added could vary per train.

    That way you have some influence on creating the perfect train for the job. put a higher topspeed if you are doning a 5 track good.

    add some accellaration if you are doing short haul or supply runs. or add an extra wagon if you are pushing levelup and better reliability might be the best pick for overnight hauling

    choice you make for the extra slot applies to all trains of that type. so that is will make it more inviting to run several types of trains and setting them up differently. to do all needed tasks


    There could also be some negative effect.

    if you add 1 extra wagon then accelleration drops a few points

    if you apply top speed or accelleration the reliability wil drop faster

    if you apply reliability the topspeed drops a bit


    those are the type of changes that are both realistic and easy to manage for most players.

  • Lots of good ideas that can be added to Samisu's suggestion. I like it, when a discussion developes, pros and cons are collected and new ideas get added. Together we might create some really new and challenging fun.


    Luckily those two things are entirely independent. But even with that being the case, random stat changes would be something we could to a bit further in the future, not right now. So either way, those two things will not impede each other.

    I have never seen a successful migration project, when the teams were separated, or when it was meant to be independent. (remember lately Lidl trying to migrate to SAP) The more the teams are mixed and flexible, the more they interact and support each other ... the quicker they both are, the less old bugs will be reborn and the more the migrated version will start with an acceptable quality. That's why I asked for priority being set to migration, so those who know the running version get some free time to give information and support to the migrating team. However, this thread is about new ideas on engine research.

    Homo forensis, der gemeine Forenuser ... eine erstaunliche Spezies.

  • Okay, so - so far we have people who would like to see random stats and people who would not.


    If something like that would ever be added as a feature, safest and best route might be to add the randomness to just some servers as a special feature.


    Changes on all servers would indeed be a hassle for those who want to go with the stats they know from previous rounds and plan their game strategy with those stats.


    Extra research slot that adds either randomness or is flexible (pick one of many options what to add to your engine stats) - these both sound fun and safe way to test randomness or flexibility with engines. With flexibility especially, it makes me feel like I'm making decisions about my engines, will I keep them well maintained for longer periods of time or do I want them to accelerate etc.


    What if this additional slot gave two options that affect other stats - for example:
    +1 waggon, -1 acceleration
    +1 acceleration, -5% reliability

  • May I ask why you dislike this? If it only runs on a specific server and you can simply decide to not to play on that server, how does it affect you?

    _________________________________________

    Found?DU5gLUo.png

  • The laboratory research change will be applied not to all servers?

    Only a special server?


    If yes, then I shut up, as suggested by the person above.

    (edit to add * having worked with customer service and communication for years, I would advise not insinuating to a paying customer that they should just shut up and not express their opinion)


    I will happily not join this server.

    頑張ります!

    The post was edited 1 time, last by ★YUKI★ ().

  • First of all: None of this will be applied, for now. This is just a brainstorming, we are just discussing ideas. It is not at all set in stone that we are doing any of this.

    But yes, at least my personal idea would be to have specific servers for this kind of changes.

    If yes, then I shut up, as suggested by the person above.

    Who what are you referring to? I don't see anyone telling you to shut up, neither directly nor indirectly.
    You represent an important player group in this discussions: The players who do not want any changes (at least not these changes).

    _________________________________________

    Found?DU5gLUo.png

  • What if this additional slot gave two options that affect other stats - for example:
    +1 waggon, -1 acceleration
    +1 acceleration, -5% reliability

    I think that is sensible - up to each person to decide which is most important to them, but is it changeable? Maybe you would normally go for the extra accceleration but, if you know you will be offline for a while, maybe reliability is best so you may wish to switch between them.

  • Hey Samisu


    I would prefer a extra thing for Asso, that would put even more focus on TEAM play, and also help small asso against PP hunters and make EG faster, what could that be ?


    A system like HQ where 80 % of the asso need to donate money or Resarch point or maybe Half wait time to gain a Team advantage.

    1) Donate money = Extra HQ building ( maybe 10 LvL - very expensive) helping Asso trains = reduce wt in "own" RG with 5% on each LvL

    2) Resarch point = Asso Lab who will donate Resarch Point to e. g the 4 weakest player in Asso

    3) Half Wait time = Wait time Asso Bank - Donate half Wait time and build a buffer to End game where U can reduce wait time


    This will reduce EG haul time and U will get a more intense fight where people can schedule to be online - today an EG take between 20-60 hours not smart/ or funny.


    Cheers Rype

    The post was edited 2 times, last by Rype ().

  • Associations are actually another big topic we are brainstorming right now and there was a lucky coincidence with this topic coming up internally at the same time when a German player opened a whole series of threads about various ideas for associations that look quite promising.
    I can not say if and when we are going to work on associations, but it's definitely a very interesting area for at least a brainstorming.

    However I would suggest to discuss associations in a separate thread and keep this thread about the orginal idea: Randomly(?) changing train stats.

    _________________________________________

    Found?DU5gLUo.png

  • I agree with stubaski or however he spelled his name, there will be excel sheets, people will enter the data and have the best locomotives show for whatever tracklength and WTs they think are relevant.


    When the pioneers thing came, people who had played test or something were spreading excel sheets right and left within the first hour of the new servers.


    So the only thing I see happening here is widening the gap between experienced players and new players.



    What I would much rather see is a *soft* rebalance of a few engines.

    Era 2 Bat (swap stats with panther or give it some acceleration, let new era 2 players have a little less uphill battle...)

    Era 3 Hercules should at least be as good as the elephant (both traction giants)

    Era 6 ... Did you really have to slaughter the Lindworm? It used to at least be debatable whether lindworm of oly was best for low WT routes... Now it's just Oly crush all 99% of the time, use only oly, end of story.

    Now excuse me, I've got a train line to run!

  • I think this solution has been proposed time and again; many like it as it offer some flexibility without the need to change the whole lot of engines.


    Simple example:

    Europe map
    I have my Whales hauling to the Landmark, it is finally full, I can switch them to deliver intercity and I choose to sacrifice 1 acceleration for 5 speed as I'm going the distance.

    You can't realistically have 2 sets of pax nor you can buy and sell to switch in between uses, so a slider allowing me to tweak my engine comes handy.


    I would be careful about what you touch tough, for example, I wouldn't offer a reliability change at all, not in any way shape or form as it would be a clear advantage to heavy gold users.


    If I was already using gold to buy mechanichs and save myself the money of maintenance I wouldn't think about it twice, anything that lowers reliability and raises anything else is my first pick, to the expenses of those that only use the odd voucher gotten in the lottery and even more so to those that don't even buy lottery tickets.

    If I remember correctly there was also some comment about not offering traction at all in the first era, maybe even the second. When you only have 3/4 wagons on short and/or chained routes, +1 traction beats anything, no contest. Might have even been you saying it.

    Currently playing on:

    M1.201 Scandinavia

  • I like the idea of Samisu.


    I can not wait to try it on the PTR3 test server.


    Have fun and succes! :)


    PS.: Please do not keep in mind the Like I gave above to Stubaski's commentary of May 17, 2019. I do not know how to delete it ... Thank you. :)