Posts by iMarius

    Post suggestions below. I go first.

    Master different scenarios 1

    Get top10 in two different scenarios (Classic, American dream, Steam over Europe). Event servers count as classic.

    Master different scenarios 2

    Win two different scenarios (Classic, American dream, Steam over Europe). Event servers count as classic.

    Master different scenarios 3

    Win all scenarios.

    It has been some weeks since I played RN, and as usual I feel a growing need for playing another round again. This time I promised myself to wait until some sort of new event appeared though.

    Anyways, while I wait I allow myself to think of possible new features that could bring some new fun strategies to this game. Maybe suggestions for a future Platform X?

    I feel that there should be some sort of mechanics that helps assos to control a city - other than mass investing in industries around it. So here is my suggestions that could alter the way we gain control of cities:

    #1: Investing should only give you half of the advantage of today. The other half should be gained from actual hauling power from assos. Hauling should give bonus on wt after each daily reset. If asso have hauled above 50% of the total hauling power in an industry for the last 24h, asso members get 12,5% reduced wt the next 24h. If asso have investment majority in the industry you get 12,5% reduced wt until you lose the majority. Rivaled asso gets +12,5% wt.

    #2: The asso with most hauling power to a city the past 24h gets 25% more prestige on deliveries from daily reset to the next. A friendlied asso get 12,5% more prestige. A rivaled asso get 12,5% less prestige on deliveries in that city. There must be some sort of statistics on who is in the lead for getting the bonus next daily reset.

    #3: The asso that delivers most PAX to a city the past 24h gets 25% less wt on PAX from daily reset to the next. Friendlied asso gets 12,5% less wt and rivaled get +12,5% wt. The 50% reduced wt investment for 2 hours should stand, but it only gives 50% reduced wt to the asso that invest and to the asso with the most hauling power to the city (all RGs in total). The others get 25% reduced wt.

    #4: The asso with best hauling power in city until a levelup gets one point. The top3 assos with most points before EG gets a bonus on EG delivieries in that city. Friendlied assos get half of the delivery bonus. At least 50% of asso members must have set the city as main city to get the asso bonus point.

    #5: In EG all industry majorities reset and investing does not count in EG. All assos compete on equal grounds waittime wise and they all get the benefits of the level on the industry.

    #6: A small asso with 15 members or less get added hauling power of a friendlied asso of 10 players or less.

    I just got an excellent idea (in my head at least) about how to reward the ones with empty/limited pockets versus those with ~infinite gold.

    What if you change the formula for getting the pollux upgrades depended on how much gold spent in the game? Lets say you spend less than 500 gold per era (except the gold for plus and era packs), you get a chance of a 2nd upgrade on your pollux per day that era, until you have spent above 500 gold. If you spend above 500 gold-limit for the era by day 3, you miss the opportunity to get that 2nd upgrade. But when its era change, the gold limit for 2nd video resets, and you can use upto 500 gold again on era 2 before 2nd upgrade dissappears.

    I think it will feel more fair for those who do not spend gold, and maybe its rewarding too? If you get your Pollux maxed out by end of era 6, with 300km/h speed etc, you will passively tell others that you actually used a limited amount of gold for the whole round (max 500 gold x 6 = 3000 gold).

    So, if you are an active gold spender, you will still be able to upgrade Pollux, but it wont be as upgraded as the Pollux used by a player with less heavy pockets.

    Whats your thoughts? And to devs: is it doable to implement?

    I've seen it done on Classic and US. Spread out and farm daily city prestige, load up on licenses of the six most hauled goods that day. invest in every factory that leveled since last logged in. Stay up during EG.

    Yep, I can confirm that. Ive heared some people that are active in starting eras, then just login a few times a day after that. The halve waiting time button is heavily used by those who spend a lot of gold in classic servers. You dont even need a good asso to get #1 if you just run PAX, invest in industries and halve waittime. On US servers its enough to spread out your trains on some key cities. Let them haul there and get tons of pp from it. Schedule trains a few times a day is all thats needed. Money isnt a problem for those having deep pockets, so connecting to enough cities wont be much of a problem with a semi-active approach.

    I will try to do a analysis on playstyle with 3 different hardcore player scenarios:

    #1. Hardcore player has 30000+ gold to spend in a round

    #2. Hardcore player has <5000 gold to spend in a round

    #3. Hardcore player has less than 1000 gold to spend in a round

    #1 hardcore player will most likely spend a lot of gold on station in the start. Getting much better trains and income. When reaching 1000 pp, its time to spend gold on tickets and maybe stop when all BTs of the era has been won. No videos needed to watch. The gameplay is potential 100% ad free. All vouchers and needed discounts can be bought via tickets.

    #2 hardcore player will most likely spend a little gold here and there. Maybe fast track a few station upgrades and buy a 10-ticket pack or two. Then the race for getting as much videos as possible is on. Need to win as many vouchers as possible and buy some of those discounted tickets. 1000pp is reached and hopefully a BT will be in one of the saved tickets. Player wont be able to buy many full prize tickets, and have to rely on videos.

    #3 hardcore player will have to decide if gold should be used on starter pack or plus-account. If doing both, it costs almost 300 gold. Videos needs to be watched, so a plus account will probably be the best choice. Cant buy many discounted tickets from videos and have to rely on winning gold competitions.

    #1 hardcore player does not need to attend any gold competitions, but sometime still do, as he is a hardcore player that want to win everything. Easy to win, as all BTs are in train fleet. Wins oftencomps without timing them (better trains, more BTs, boosters etc).

    #2 hardcore player attend more of those gold comps, as the gold reserves are not infinite. The player are able to win many of the comps, but lose mostly to the hardcore #1 player. #2 have a few BTs, maybe all of them, if watched enough videos and won some gold comps.

    #3 hardcore player attend all the gold comps he finds. Its hard to win against #1 and #2 hardcore player, but wins once in a while. The lack of gold increases, and its unsure if another plus-account can be bought any time soon.

    With video limit, #1 hardcore player will probably not notice at all, as the buy new ticket button is still there.

    #2 hardcore player will probably be the one losing most, as he rely on getting as much tickets from his gold as possible, and get lots of free vouchers to be able to compete against #1 hardcore player. #3 hardcore player will have a lot less vouchers, but the amount of tickets will be around the same, as he cant buy many of those discounted tickets anyways.

    So, it will be easier for #1 hardcore player to win, as he do not depend on videos at all. #2 hardcore player will be less able to compete against #1 hardcore player, but will probably still beat most of the less experienced heavy gold spenders. #3 hardcore player will most likely have to fight even harder to be able to buy that next plus account with gold won from comps.

    I am curious about how RN devs thought this would be in terms of reactions. That a BT would help satisfact the active ad-watchers?

    I have a proposal, and this might og might not be doable. But what if the game "punished" the gold purchasers a bit? Lets say once you have spent 1000 gold in one era, you lose Pollox? Making Pollox an "advantage" for the players that cant or wont spend that much gold on the game? Pollox could be an acheivement too. If your Pollox survives a whole round, meaning you havent used more than 1000 gold per era, you get an acheivement for it. Meaning you get some CE points too.

    Gold spenders wont likely miss the Pollox, as they probably will have a few other BTs the other players cant afford anyways.

    AND, this is an important one, do not limit the amount of ad-videos for those still having Pollox. That way, those players unable to spend much gold, actually could compete. Gold spenders can still win the rounds by spending A LOT of gold, but they wont have the Pollox, and they get a limitation on ad-videos.

    I think its a more fair way to do it, but it might not be easy to implement..

    Hi there, how so? How does the introduction of Pollux make it 'almost impossible' to get era bonus trains?

    Pollux is not an era spesific BT. I use to watch enormous amounts of videoes to get the chance to get all the BTs in the game. And I do buy gold. But, I do not buy BTs for 2500 gold (its insane). Without many BTs, you have far less chance in getting good pp in EG for example, when every ton counts and 100t can be the difference between 1st place on a RG and 10th.

    And for the competitions in cities, it will be a nightmare for non-gold spenders to get #1 and maybe get those 20 gold.

    But hey, I get that RN have to get the money from somewhere. But, this move will probably scare off some players that have been playing this for years.

    Also, the players in countries with low income, will be the ones that feel the downside of this the most. It will be harder to compete against the players with deeper pockets. $10 is a day of income for some people.

    I know there are alot of players from eastern Europe in this game. Not saying that all of the players there have low income, but the average wage is lower for sure.

    Yes, this is what I love the most! Totally the best part of the game.

    Not only do they take longer to start.... 10 seconds +, but after half an advert it swaps to showing a different one from scratch as often as not....

    Anyone would think we have nothing better to do than hang around for RN to actually DO things, OH, and refresh every 10 mins....
    And NEVER to we get any sense of when, or even IF, things like this will be addressed

    We want longer ads! And we LOVE the new feature that makes it longer before ad-video starts. It makes our day much better. Thank you RN <3

    It's just simple. You are not allowed to play Rail Nation with more than 1 account per server. What your intent might be, good or bad. And in my opinion there is no good reason to play with more than 1 account per server. You agreed with the Game Rules and Terms & Conditions when you created your Rail Nation account.

    When you use more accounts per server and you get caught you have to deal with the consequenses by violating the game rules.

    I agree with you fully. It is possible to win fair and square without using multible accounts. If organized enough, you can easily levelup multible cities a day. My team has done it regularly, and we are good at it. Many teams might have a multible account or two that most do not know of, but if someone builds a team with several multible accounts, it is not fair at all.

    I seem to lose winter coins when buying the 40 coin-pack and get combo sledge and mittens. That should not be possible, as sledge is prized 19 coins and mittens 22 at the moment. I should get +1 on that combo. Instead I get -1.

    Just out of curiosity: Whats the average age of the players in RN? It is surely higher than many of the popular games like Fortnite.. The oldest Ive been in asso with so far, is 92 years old. I am often one of the youngest in asso, and I am almost 40!

    I dont remember if we had to insert our birthyear when signing up to this game, but if we have to, there must be some sort of statistics on average age?