Neighbors

[Rage]

So I don't live in the best part of town.

pic

And my neighbors like to pick fights.

pics

Fortunately I'm a bit smarter than them.

pics

whole factory

whole map max zoom

[ratchetfreak]

You can flatten the corner (making 2 45° corners instead of a single 90° one) so the spitters can't gang up on a single turret like that

[Rage]

You can flatten the corner (making 2 45° corners instead of a single 90° one) so the spitters can't gang up on a single turret like that

I double up on the turrets in the corners to deal with he ganging. I just don't like rounding the corners mostly cause it doesn't fit right with the power poles. I'm OCD about random things.

[Xterminator]

Ah common man they just wanted to come over for an afternoon barbecue... Little did they know they would be the ones getting barbecued.

Nice base though!

[MadZuri]

Ah, the all-too-common loop-based rail system. I disapprove.

[Gouada]

Ah, the all-too-common loop-based rail system. I disapprove.

Personally, while I consider it overused it is a really convenient and simple system to use until the new train logic and signals in 0.12...
You need to have a far greater understanding of trains to do one 2-way track with bypass points when using a large rail network.

[Rage]

Ah, the all-too-common loop-based rail system. I disapprove.

I don't like bogging my trains down with rear facing engines, I'll do pull in back out stations when the trains are smart enough to back up only as much as they need to.
Big thing I'm trying with this map, now that I've got most of the research done, is to have a train network with multiple lanes going each way on the main trunks so that I can handle a variety of train sizes. Already using 1-3s and 1-4s with the base receiving station capable of handling 1-6s, I plan to use even bigger trains once I get way out there.

[MadZuri]

Personally, while I consider it overused it is a really convenient and simple system to use until the new train logic and signals in 0.12...
You need to have a far greater understanding of trains to do one 2-way track with bypass points when using a large rail network.

What? 2-way track is a terrible design, why would you assume that double-ended trains need large sections of 2-way track? The only 2-way track should be loading and unloading stations, all other track should be 2-lane system. I have tried both systems, and the double-headed rail system is by far the easier and more convenient. It is very modular. You generate a handful of blueprints, and you can make very compact and efficient jam-free rail systems.

[Takezu]

Well the only real difference is that instead of building a second lokomotive, i build some more tracks for a circle.
Don't now whats dissapprove worthy in that?

[ratchetfreak]

I think he's griping more about the turnaround points at the intersections (the loops he refers to) than the turnarounds at the stations.

[Rage]

I think he's griping more about the turnaround points at the intersections (the loops he refers to) than the turnarounds at the stations.

I designing this network with the hard rule of no station lines crossing trunk lines ever. The merging in through use of the access lane is fine, but I don't want to full on cross to be able to go to or from the other side, so I'm using the inner lane turn around section. The big thing now is that I gotta figure out how I want to handle trunk intersections, the current T is just a prototype, then I gotta figure out the 4-way.
My big goal with this is maximum capacity especially in regards to multiple train types(lengths). I've already got trains passing each other using the lanes, especially my 1-2 construction train.

[MadZuri]

The rail footprint is absolutely insane in your design, and intersections will be an outright headache. I really should just do a post about better rail networks, as nobody else that knows how to will. There are very few, and we all hide out on twitch.

edit: I'll just crosslink a previous reply of mine here for now.

[Tallinu]

The fact that single-headed trains require turnaround loops at stations is a separate issue from the large amount of track in this rail system.

It's certainly a design I've never seen before - apparently he wanted trains to be able to turn around at various points along the track, instead of only at stations. It looks like this was to keep trains leaving a station from having to cut across to the other side. That's not necessarily a bad thing - consider that "one minute rocket defense" map. It does use more than twice as much rail as a simple system using only two lanes, but that's mostly because he has four lanes, two going each way. And comparing that with some of what I've seen in ColonelWill's base... well... If he has faster trains passing slower trains, clearly the design is doing what he wants it to.

I'd like a better look at his T junctions, especially the signaling, but the loops in the trunk and the loops at the stations are two different issues. He could be using double-headed trains backing out of the stations and still have the main lines designed the way they are now instead of using junctions that cross the main line, just like one could (and often does) see single-headed trains that simply perform a turnaround loop in order to leave their loading or unloading stations, but then get back onto a two-track main line, constructed just like your rail network, via the same intersection they exited into the outpost from (or, in more interesting unloading stations with waiting areas - the "Stacker" in Will's base, for example - potentially exiting the station via a different intersection... which effectively results in a loop, even for double-headed trains).

I've been using double-headed trains almost exclusively since figuring out how to do them correctly from you and Will, because it allows for much easier and smaller outpost loading station footprint, but a hard and fast "loops are bad" attitude isn't necessarily accurate or helpful, as there are certain benefits to loops when they're done well (such as potentially improved traffic flow if multiple trains are trying to visit the same stop - again, see "stackers" and that one minute rocket defense map). I've recently converted my main base's receiving area to include something similar to Will's stackers, with trains having the option of reversing out back to the entry junction via a track reserved for that purpose, or continuing in the same direction to exit via a different junction, depending on the shortest path to the outpost they're bound for next. It seems to be working great so far, and with the way the blocks are set up, the moment one train clears the unloading area, the next is free to pull in before the other has even left the base.

It is easy to do loops poorly. But then, it's easy to do any kind of train system poorly. Loops can't be blamed for all that ails them.

[OBAMA MCLAMA]

Ive recently just beforr v12 came iut went through a old save of mine..... just to remove loop junctions.

Do what I did, play mp with a guy who does junctions with a diuble headed train, and use his method.

Or just use both.methods in 2 sessions using rso v1.0.3 for 30 hours plus. You decide what you like better.
Even with bad signaling on your double headed, probably will have more deadlocks on loop based junctions.

Decide for yourself like I did.