A little exspansion on the military aspect of railroading would be nice. All major conflicts have made use of armored trains, railguns, rail portable shore defense batteries and anti-aircraft duty. Armored trains should have the ability to destroy tracks behind them. WWII eastern front is a good example. Also, the ability to build trestles over deep gorges and along steep canyon walls. - Dan Osborn, 7/28/2000 1:37:28 PM [Reply]
Greater detail on the engines and rolling stock, the ability to actually ride your railway as a passenger or driver or fire-man, the ability to cutomise your own railway i.e. build your own locos and colour code them to your own badge that you want. More freedom of choice and desighn with your railroad, perhapse building an Underground railway or Monorail. - Eliot Coles, 7/26/2000 7:02:33 PM [Reply]
It is a great idea to create a sequale to the best selling stratargy game but it should not be an addition on the two other existing games of Railway Tycoon 2. Railway Tycoon 3 must include all know engines past, present and maybe to invent new futuristic trains. What we would all hate to see is another expansion pack to RWT2. - Eliot Coles, 7/26/2000 6:56:33 PM [Reply]
TAKE 2 INTERACTIVE BUYS POPTOP: In terms of games, Take 2 will now have alot more say in what Poptop's next project is, and if it is as i suspect Poptop will be set to work on Rt3, or as Take 2 now owns the Railroad Tycoon licence, they may get anotehr development team/ company to create Railraod Tycoon 3. For more details visit the main page of Railroad Express - j stevens (webmaster), 7/25/2000 3:36:32 PM [URL][Reply]
Players should be able to build yards at station to gaver goods(coal or lumber for instance)and ship them to major demanding area.Lack of yards is one of the main drawback in rt2 and prevents to act as a real RR company - marc, 7/24/2000 8:43:20 PM [Reply]
Check out games like Sim City 3000, these creations have been given a new lease of life by allowing users to effectively customise their own games using skins editors and the like. Other things that would be good are multiple units, the ability to couple loco's to one another, and a zoom facility for the route editor window. - Anorak Boy, 7/24/2000 06:33:13 AM [Reply]
for rrt3 there should be a saved game where there is a prebuilt train and tracks of the five boroughs and the Staten Island Ferry in New York City - tyrone, 7/22/2000 8:45:21 PM [Reply]
An interesting commodity, ICE. Before the development of mechanical refrigeration, northern railroads off built branches to lakes. In late winter, the ice was harvested from the lake and stored in ice houses. It was then shipped to the reicing points for reefers as needed. - DonT, 7/21/2000 8:38:35 PM [Reply]
Here are some ideas. Get to select the color(s) of your rolling stock, and maybe even your trains. It looks unrealistic to have four or five different lines with the same color rolling stock and engines. Have the option of adding private cars to your trains as a way of adding some income. In the last century, anybody who was somebody had a private train car, and used them frequently. Have the option to build the real stations in the appropriate cities- Grand Central and Penn Station in New York, Union Station in Indianapolis, Victoria Station in London, and so on. Have the option to set up a railroad museum, and make money from the tourists who come to see them. - Martin, 7/20/2000 6:33:03 PM [Reply]
The idea of color coding the trains of the various RR's might be desirible to allow easilier identification, but it would not be 'realistic'. The classic red box car, was red for a reason, red was the cheapest paint color. That's why barns are often red. - DonT, 7/20/2000 9:40:37 PM [Reply]
The engines should be different colors - Rob Borg, 7/21/2000 12:11:39 AM [Reply]
Of course: tunnels are the most importent thing as well as more complex industries. For example: textiles, tools etc. instead of simply "goods". Same with food. Some other ideas: bridge-building over valleys and other tracks should be possible. What about cooling waggons for milk and other perishable food? Or first and second class for passengers? Newer loks like ICE! - Momo, 7/19/2000 5:38:54 PM [Reply]
More trains, that's my motto. I live in holland and we have also plenty of locomotives in the past. But still i would be nice if it could be arranged to use every locomotive ever built :) - Mental, 7/19/2000 1:06:41 PM [Reply]
Overpasses : The use of overpasses when 2 companies tracks cross would be realistic and helpful. - Glenn Lee Fasnacht, 7/19/2000 7:55:37 PM [Reply]
Continued form previous message, We need a museum, I am alway's sad to see the game pass into the modern era and the pasing of the steem era, it is not right to be forced to flog off my trusty Pacifics for scrap dont get me wrong I always welcome better hauwlage power and usually I settle for electric. - Rob Dreijer, 7/17/2000 01:16:14 AM [Reply]
True, in Holland and the UK, we've got lots of special museum-tracks that gives back the old feeling of the good old steam-days. - Mental, 7/19/2000 12:58:17 AM [Reply]
Double heading is a must in the early part of the game, I live not far from the Rimutaka incline which in it's hayday needed 5 yes five Fell locomotives to get her up the encline, long out of service and the tracks are gone however I have seen a old film with this team in action and it was AWSOME likewise it would be awsome to have a waystation at both ends of a mountain range in RT III to attach helper locos to a passing express. Perhaps PopTop dont realise that RT satisfies more than just the money making aspect of the game, I for one see the game as a huge and flexable train set, Also we need to be able to bould factories like in RT I build them up in value then sell them at a profit. - Rob Dreijer., 7/17/2000 01:06:02 AM [URL][Reply]
I think there should be an option to build stations that have their own rail yards -- it is rather unrealistic for a station to only have one point and two tracks where trains can drop off cargo -- real stations have many tracks, there could be an option in the new game to have expanded trackage so that stations at large cities don't become choke points along busy lines - Phil, 7/17/2000 00:37:23 AM [Reply]
Allowing more than 2 tracks would help the choke points - Rob Borg, 7/21/2000 12:15:56 AM [Reply]
I think there should be more British Locomotives such as the Castle and Kings, The Southern regions pacifics and some of the big, heavy freight loco's such as the 9F, 8F and 7F. I would also like to see the N&W Y6b and the UP Challenger put on aswell. Plus Tunnels and double-heading - Bullied_Light_Pacific, 7/16/2000 4:13:01 PM [Reply]
Also i want to sell just a part of my track to another company or abandon them, thus later some enthousiast gonna run steam-loco's for tourists - Mental, 7/16/2000 2:16:21 PM [Reply]
In RRT3 i like to have real weather as in snow, rain, mist and above all, day and night. i don't need to run train every night, instead i have special nighttrains and on some track i only want coal-trains run at night. - Mental, 7/16/2000 2:14:02 PM [Reply]
Time advances too fast in the game for weather, but there certainly could be seasons. Winter reduces the amount an engine can haul. Maybe a blizzard could stop everything for a short period. Spring floods are bad news for bridges. But something else could also be at work. Certain commodities could only be available in certain seasons. For example, corn only in the fall harvest season. - DonT, 7/17/2000 8:24:26 PM [Reply]
One item that might be interesting is to allow players to build 'interlocking' towers at junctions, crossings, stations, and so on. One might think of them as traffic lights for trains. - DonT, 7/16/2000 09:58:53 AM [Reply]
For RRT3, please TUNNELS, the ability of using a station only as a waypoint (without stopping!) (or alternatively a mor practical management of routes : the current system of waypoints is unusable where the network is very dense, beacause you cant distinguish priciesely where you place the waypoint), the ability of making 4-ways paths (in dense areas). - Soslan, 7/16/2000 09:26:39 AM [Reply]
If by four way routes, you mean a crossing with connecting tracks, RRT II will allow you to have up to three already. - DonT, 7/16/2000 09:55:50 AM [Reply]
Having interchanges with other railroads would be great. It could be as simple as having a joint station with a competitor, and if I happen to serve many coal mines, and my competitor happens to serve several steel mills, I could carry the coal to the interchange and leave it there for the other railroad to decide which steel mills to deliver it to. Revenue would be split accordingly. This would make it possible to have bridge routes, vitally important in real life, but absolutely impossible to simulate in RRT2. - jerceg, 7/16/2000 01:10:28 AM [Reply]
Good point. Real rairoads usually interchange cars without transhipping the loads, but joint stations might be one way to simulate interchange - DonT, 7/16/2000 09:52:23 AM [Reply]
Instead or a USRA design light pacific they should use the K4. What pacific is more famous than a K4? - Chris Schanbacher, 7/16/2000 00:33:36 AM [Reply]
There should be train crew to drive your trains - ryan, 7/12/2000 04:33:41 AM [Reply]
Having players assign crews would probably become unworkable with a large number of trains. But what might work is something like this. Alow the player to select the pay rates on his road, say low to high. Low pay would generate 'bad will' and maybe result in strikes. Better pay would generate 'good will' and have some positive impact against accidents and breakdowns.. - DonT, 7/17/2000 8:30:49 PM [Reply]
I think there should be train crew to operate your trains - ryan, 7/12/2000 04:31:52 AM [Reply]
How about more personalization/customization options? I tried lots of non poptop maps that were great but they could be greater if users can create their identities as barons (upload pics). It would also be nice to add new cargo types in the map editor and set the value of the good (such as ginseng in china, found only in mountains and very expensive to procure). - jeejee, 7/11/2000 2:30:07 PM [Reply]
How about more personalization? - jeejee, 7/11/2000 2:25:47 PM [Reply]
NECESSARY: #1 An UNDO button as all of us have noted... #2 The ability to run more than 32 stations! - Goldrush, 7/09/2000 3:35:51 PM [Reply]
How about the ability to build narrow guage rather then standard guage. Cheaper first cost, but limited interchange. - DonT, 7/08/2000 3:12:27 PM [Reply]
when I worked for the railroad we often used two or three steamers at the same time to pull bigger loads. How about a provision for that? - casey jones, 7/08/2000 12:11:39 AM [Reply]
good idea, but it could go further--MUed diesels like an FT A-B-B-A would be nice - Dick Dilworth, 7/10/2000 02:07:49 AM [Reply]
How about rotary snow plows? Player choice, buy them or save money and hope it does snow much in the mountains. - DonT, 7/06/2000 7:38:58 PM [Reply]
also, there should be a feature where you can get a loco builder to make a loco for you. Like in 1941, the UP approached Alco, and asked for an engine that could do a job. Alco responded with the 4-8-8-4. the Big Boy. When the PRR asked baldwin for a loc - brad, 7/06/2000 7:38:17 PM [Reply]
Engine editor/maker needed. Unlimited number of wagons per train, only to the amount a loco can pull. So a Big Boy, can pull 250, while a 4-2-2 can pull 15. - brad, 7/06/2000 6:55:17 PM [Reply]
Restrictions on the placement of certain commodities in trains. A car of gasoline right behind a steam engine is not a good idea. - DonT, 7/05/2000 6:44:54 PM [Reply]
Well the FRA has regulations that says that loaded cars that are flammable can NOT be located right next to an occupied locomotive or caboose. So yes more realism here would be good. - Chris Schanbacher, 7/05/2000 10:28:03 PM [Reply]
Nearly forgot - a rescue l;ocomotive option would be handy for if (when) a train breaks down on the main line. I saw someone posting a request for a 200 ton crane further down, so I won't mention a 200 ton crane. D'oh! - Looney Goons :), 7/04/2000 11:34:08 AM [Reply]
Tunnels and cuttings, DMUs and EMUs, a building architect tool and some sort of skins editor for the rolling stock. And a coffee, white no sugar, thanks. - Looney Goons, 7/04/2000 11:28:50 AM [Reply]
An ability to change loco's on-route (like changing eletric loco to diesel loco where the electric track ends, leaving the loco waiting at station). Also there's a huge need for more European Loco's (it's rather unrealistic to have Dash 9's carrying lumber around siberia or something like that). Engine (or atleast Engine "skin" ) editor is a must. - Humiz, 7/02/2000 4:22:27 PM [URL][Reply]
Actually in the 'Golden age' of railroading, engines were assigned to 'divisions' of about 100 miles. That was about as far as an engine could run without requiring maintenance. DonT would suggest that the players assign their engines to divisions. The game would then choose the appropriate available engine to run each train over that division. Of course, the player could purchase heavier engines for hilly divisions. Clearly, for an electrified division, most of the engines would be electric. - DonT, 7/05/2000 6:55:23 PM [Reply]
Good idea! I was just on an Amtrak where they did just that today. Sounds like a good way to take advantage of capital investment (catenary) - AO, 7/03/2000 9:52:11 PM [Reply]
One could also require electric locomotives only in long tunnnels and in certain cities (smoke ordinances) - DonT, 7/05/2000 6:47:35 PM [Reply]
THe option to tune out the stock market and just run a railroad! - Andrew, 7/02/2000 02:40:12 AM [Reply]
Besides providing transportation, railroads are major consumers of certain comodities such as steel (rails), timber (ties), and gravel (ballest). When a player is attempting to build track, why not require him or her to deliver a certain number of cars of specified comodities to current the end of the track for each unit of track built. - DonT, 7/01/2000 7:28:20 PM [Reply]
200 ton cranes - ben, 6/30/2000 11:28:29 PM [Reply]
railroad tycoon should have more diesel locomotive and one's that have a lot of power like SD40 and SD90mac not the crappy GP9, F9,GP18, and other lovomotives that can't pull trains over the mountains you should be able to add more then just one engine to your train and add more trian cars too. So for like a coal train instead of 6 cars and one lovomotive you should be able to have 20 or 30 cars with two or three engines and building track over mountains is a pain it will make things better if you can get tunnels. thanx - Ryan, 6/30/2000 01:42:20 AM [Reply]
Moving back in time, how about the ability to double or triple head steam engines. - DonT, 6/30/2000 6:09:18 PM [Reply]
Personally I would like to see some Research and Devolopment. You can read about the person who invented the engine that ran on anthracite coal, but I would like to be the person who had a go at developing such modifications. Being able to design such things as better engines or fireboxes for example, an in the later years pouring ones hard earned monies into to some R&D for the mag lev train, now that would be fun. I would also like to see the sand box option being able to make money instead of just running trains, sometimes I don't want to do a specific goal, but just make money. anyway just my 2cents worth. - S.McGovern, 6/29/2000 11:10:29 AM [Reply]
Buy lines from bankrupt railroad. Once a railroad is shut down the tracks remain. Let us buy some of the segments to operate. - Tony P., 6/28/2000 10:44:18 AM [Reply]
Not always. It depends on what will raise the most money for the creditors. They can choose to run under new namagement, sell it to another railroad (in whole or in parts), or to scrape it. Allowing players to bid on the parts they want would be an interesting concept. Also, once the line is brought, it will need a good deal of maintanence. - DonT, 6/28/2000 8:06:06 PM [Reply]
I like that idea of a stock market that covers everything. Like a commodities market. I think that RT3 needs to get more modern cars. I think that theyshould do modern refrigerated cars for "food". Also tunnels would definately be a nice touch. I think also the option for "BIG" bridges something that could cross a slight valley or something. Maybe by puttin two or three normal bridges together in order to get a longer one but having them connected - Chris Schanbacher, 6/27/2000 11:24:15 PM [Reply]
They should do cars for certain eras. It just doesn't look right for a 4-4-0 to be pulling modern boxcars and covered hoppers. They should have old fashioned cars, classic steam era, then modern cars and for modern passenger cars they should use Superliners. I'm sure the people at Pop Top could do it. Also instead of just the locomotive for some highspeed train you should be able to get a complete trainset for it or have an option for just the power car. - Chris Schanbacher, 6/30/2000 11:30:44 PM [Reply]
One thing that would make things more interesting and realistic is to allow cars to handle multiple commodities instead of having a type of car for each commodity. - DonT, 6/28/2000 8:10:50 PM [Reply]
RRT I has a nice why of handling tunnels, the cost depends on the length. Maybe the cost of bridges should depend on their length and what is being crossed. - DonT, 6/28/2000 8:00:09 PM [Reply]
For America, maybe replace the E60CP with the Acela Express or HHL-8 electrics. Also maybe an electric MU (such as the NJ Transit Arrow). Also maybe consider replacing the AMD103 with P42BWH (more HP=better on hills, no change of graphic needed), and the SD90MAC/AC600CW...a 6,000 Horsepower unit would be nice. - AO, 6/27/2000 11:02:26 PM [URL][Reply]
Engine up grades or overhaul. If you buy an engine like an SD 40 to up grade a few years later to an SD 40-2 or buy the SD 40-2 which would perform better. When engines are old instead of replacing offer an overhaul option. This might cost half or more the price of buying it new but would allow the company’s to keep the GP 9’s or F3 around even after they are no longer available to buy new. - Tom S., 6/27/2000 4:51:52 PM [Reply]
Have the computer company’s merging. I have yet to see that happen and I have never been asked by a computer controlled company if I would be interested in merging with them or to vote on a merger between two computer company’s that I have stock in. - Tom S., 6/27/2000 4:51:35 PM [Reply]
Leveling out - Once track is built to go back and with the bulldozer, or some other icon, pay so much to bring the grade down 1% or 0.5% each time in that grid square. - Tom S., 6/27/2000 4:51:07 PM [Reply]
at the other station the helper will automatically move to that station to help. - Tom S., 6/27/2000 4:50:46 PM [Reply]
Helper districts - A little more tricky. A company would have to build at lease a small station on each side of the district along with the maintenance items (water, sand, roundhouse) in one of the stations. You have to buy a locomotive that would operate (or be restricted) only in that area between the stations, helping other trains and hauling zero cargo. Operation could be - highlight track and hit a button for helper area. Build the stations and buy the locomotive. The regular trains automatically stop when it comes to the helper station (doesn’t have to be on station list), Then the helper loco hooks on and the train can proceed at a faster speed over the grade to the other helper station. If the loco is helping and another train stops - Tom S., 6/27/2000 4:50:13 PM [Reply]
Good idea, but don't forget that the helpers must return to the bottom of the hill before reuse. That should add to conjestion on the route - DonT, 6/30/2000 6:14:00 PM [Reply]
Help in the Mountains. In the form of Tunnels, helper areas or paying more to level out the grade in the grid square by 1%. Tunnels - should be limited to length. No more then three grid squares and very expensive to build and maintain. Maybe a maintenance fee each year. - Tom S., 6/27/2000 4:49:39 PM [Reply]
The ability to bring a manufacturing industry into your area. The company would have the ability to invest so much each year in the “hope” of luring a certain type of industry to build along his tracks. Let the formula be something along the lines of Money needed to get the industry to locate (based on value of industrial purchase i.e. steel mills lots of money to locate or cannery not so much money) = Company good will+ company financial standing grade (bond rating A,B etc.) + serving towns that supply the raw goods (i.e. coal & iron, cotton farms, livestock yards, lumber camps, etc.) - Tom S., 6/27/2000 4:48:45 PM [Reply]
RRT 1 allowed you to build industry. Also, why not allow building mines? The map builder could determine places that certain raw materials exist, and the cost for that area to cover extra expenses in different areas. - Rob Borg, 7/21/2000 12:33:12 AM [Reply]
Need to add that it would be limited to manufacturing industries. You can't bring in a coal mine or things like that. Once it locates along your tracks you would still have to buy if you wish. - Tom S., 6/27/2000 4:58:08 PM [Reply]
Regional Ports. Ports demand and supple different things in different areas of the country. Ports in the Midwest along the great lakes might demand iron and grain and supply fertilizer and goods. Northern Ports (Seattle or Halifax) might demand lumber and paper and supply food and goods. You get the idea. Maybe set up the coast line areas like territories. - Tom S., 6/27/2000 4:46:57 PM [Reply]
YARDS! Be able to build small - limited to three cars, Medium - limited to six cars and Large yards - limited to nine cars. Work just like a station, only drop off the cars and other trains can pick them up. This would allow us to run more realistic trains like way freights from an industry to a yard and then have a through freight pick it up this would lower the congestion in the large city areas. - Tom S., 6/27/2000 4:46:25 PM [Reply]
Good idea. Many times the Des Moines area has 3 or more grain elevators. Sometimes I wish I could have a train that would only run from there to Des Moines and drop off cars for the bakery at the station and then drop off more at a yard that could be picked up by a another train that runs food from the bakery to Milwakke. If I could add grain cars from the yard I could add more milk from Milwakke in my return trip. This would cut down on one extra train on tracks heading to Milwakke and a more proffitable train. - RyanJohn, 6/28/2000 11:04:14 AM [Reply]
In general I think most of the suggests here are wrong headed - everybody wants to make Gameplay more complicated! I think Gameplay should be simplified (or at least the complications should be OPTIONAL). Personally I already find it tedious to manage the consist of 100 trains! However the scenario editor should be more sophisticated - creating scenarios is optional! NB if Pop Top made RT2 as complicated as us hard core fans (I include myself) would like it to be, IT WOULD NOT SELL to ordinary (healthy?) people which would mean no more improvements to RT ever! - Richard , 6/25/2000 06:17:34 AM [Reply]
Many Trains--too many to manage: here's an idea for managing many trains. After multiple trains are bought, and are used on identical routes, the "manage train" screen should be changed to a "manage lane" screen, which would provide a condensed outline of all trains with those itineraries (from there, you'd be able to manage indicvidual trains). - AO, 6/27/2000 10:57:39 PM [URL][Reply]
The point about managing the consists of a 100 trains identifies a fault in the basic design of both RRT I & II. In real life the shipper determines where the shipment is to go, not the railroad. The player should not be assigning cars to trains directly. He or she should be managing the assets such as routes, engine availability, car availability, and so on. If they are managed well, he or she should make a profit. Otherwise.... - DonT, 6/25/2000 6:16:03 PM [Reply]
The idea of allowing the player to select options to tailor the game to his or her level of complication/realism probably is a critical point. - DonT, 6/25/2000 6:09:44 PM [Reply]
This is the best of the best. How do you get a response from the Co. I would like to find out if anyone from the Co ever looks at this website???? - John J Neville, 7/14/2000 7:09:54 PM [Reply]
Maximum station size in scenarios. In a map of a large densely populated area large stations are unrealistic e.g. in a map of the British Isles it is laughable to be able to cover the whole London region with one station. - Richard , 6/25/2000 06:17:12 AM [Reply]
If that happens, then double count of cargo's gotta stop too--if 2 stations cover the same area, and share an industry, they shouldn't both get it (like they do in RT2) - Dick Dilworth, 7/10/2000 02:17:59 AM [Reply]
Also in the station pop-up screan: fly-overs and dive-unders.) - Joost O, 6/27/2000 1:50:30 PM [Reply]
No maximum size, but special windows for unlimited stationbuilding. The station depicted on the main screan (buildings AND trackwork AND platforms) should have a maximum, symbolic, standard size. (Like small, medium, big, MEGA, but not showing the 10 or more tracks and platforms you have actually built in the station pop-up screan.) - Joost O, 6/27/2000 1:49:09 PM [Reply]
More control in scenarios over Industries (RT2, understandably, reflects a US economy) Examples: (1) the demand for lumber is much to high for Europe where stone and brick construction is much more common, (2) the domestic demand for coal is much too low for countries like England where wood burning was rare by the end of C19 (historical note: the Midland railway from Derby to London was 4 tracked because the vast numbers of coal trains headed for London needed a track of their own), (3) why can't I have troops available earlier for a Civil War scenario and Steel available later in a Third World scenario. - Richard , 6/25/2000 06:16:43 AM [Reply]
Port rules per Territory would be a huge improvement in realistic scenario design e.g. a scenario of the British Isles in which Irelands imports/exports were different to Englands, or where Coal could be exported from Newcastle and imported to London. Ideally things like Robbers and the Economy would also be Territorial. - Richard , 6/25/2000 06:16:17 AM [Reply]
Scenario printing, especially of event lists. Creating interesting and realistic scenarios that work is made much more difficult by having to keep hand written notes of what variables are used where. Auditing (debugging) scenarios is also made much more difficult by only being able to view one event at a time. I notice that many of the scenarios provided with the game have 'bugs' in them that the PopTop programmers might have spotted if they could print out events (in particular the scenario briefing and the win/lose events are often out of sync. - Richard , 6/25/2000 06:15:46 AM [Reply]
Printing. I would like to be able to print out the lists of stations and trains - at the moment if I have, say, 50 stations and 100 trains I often have to write out these details in order to be able to plan efficient routes and consists. - Richard , 6/25/2000 06:15:16 AM [Reply]
Delegating to the Manager/AI. If the scenario calls for the player to be heavily involved in share trading and/or route building and/or buying industry the game would be a lot less work and a lot more fun if one could delegate consist management to the Manager/AI. - Richard , 6/25/2000 06:14:32 AM [Reply]
maybe a separate list for the passenger trains - Doug Tomlinson, 6/25/2000 00:07:58 AM [Reply]
Obviously tunnels, but with the addition of tunnels also offer the option of building a cog section of track - less expensive than a tunnel, but slower. Of course, you'd have to make sure that the locomotive was equipped properly. . . - Bill Bounds, 6/23/2000 1:44:36 PM [Reply]
TH PIONEER ZEPHER - BOBO, 6/21/2000 10:39:03 AM [Reply]
I think it would be great if you, the player, could buy industries. This would allow you to create a personal monopoly on a certain industry. Also, you could direct you trains to YOUR personal industrial sites, thus making you more money. - Chris Thiry, 6/20/2000 3:15:22 PM [Reply]
Maybe, but that practice should become illegal at some point in the game. If you are a shipper making widgets, how would you like it if your transportation provider starting making widgets. Guess who would get the best rates. Some indirect way is needed for a player to get an industry build where it is needed. Maybe acting as banker instead of owner. - DonT, 6/24/2000 9:16:15 PM [Reply]
I bought RRT Gold Ed. a month ago, so pardon me if my comments seem naive. I think it would be way cool if we NAME ALL OF OUR TRAINS--call certain trains the "Lumber Express" or the "Mississippi River Limited". I agree that an UNDO button is necessary. I have built many a station or section of track in the wrong place. Finally (and I think the game does this already, but I am not sure), if you give a station a YELLOW FLAG, and the cargo is NOT sold but remains on the train to be sold at a later station, the train configuration will indicate this. So if a stop A, I pick up 2 loads of coal. At stop B, I pick up two loads of iron but do NOT want to sell the coal. So, after going thru stop B, the train will have 4 cars, not 2. - chris_thiry, 6/20/2000 2:55:15 PM [Reply]
Name Trains - why not! Also number them like in real life with a number that does not change when another train crashes (it is really annoying when you have handwriten notes on what 150 trains are doing and then the numbers of half of them change! - Richard , 6/24/2000 07:37:02 AM [Reply]
I use a second computer for that! - Tiddo, 7/16/2000 7:21:02 PM [Reply]
Break out of Goods and Food. Turn Textiles to clothes and Cannery products to Canned foods. Too many times have I wanted to haul cotton and wool to a textile mill but all of my cities are tired of the goods I have sent them via a T&D factory. The cotton and wool are ata demand level of 7; which is pretty good. I don't want to loose that revenue when turning it into goods because nobody wants them. Food is the same way. - Superchief to California, 6/12/2000 3:12:13 PM [Reply]
This would certainly be a big help when creating realistic scenarios e.g. a country ought to be able to import meat food and export grain food - Richard , 6/24/2000 07:39:47 AM [Reply]
DonT would argue that if one desires faster turn around times, one should have to build a 'yard' as in RRT I. Requiring turntable where trains reverse direction would be a nice touch. - DonT, 6/12/2000 8:26:50 PM [Reply]
Instant turnaround when trains reverse directions in stations like in Transport Tycoon - MNW, 6/12/2000 09:33:01 AM [Reply]
RR3 SHOULD BE MORE REALISTIC WITH THE TIMES, TRAIN ROBBERIES, WARS, LABOR STRIKES ARE ALL VIABLE OPTION ALSO COMPANIES SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO OPERATED THEIR OWN SECURITY FORCE TO DEAL WITH WITH THESE ISSUES AND THE PLAYER TO BE ABLE TO WITNESS THE ENCOUNTER IN REAL TIME AND ISSUE ORDERS TO THEIR SECURTY FORCE - BOB , 6/11/2000 11:51:37 AM [Reply]
A good game should force the player to choose between numerous demands for limited resources. For example, when a player builds a new route, he or she should be able to build it cheap or go first class. Going cheap will mean higher operating costs and limited capacity. Later the player should have to balance the needs to upgrade their existing routes against building new routes. - Dont, 6/11/2000 11:15:33 AM [Reply]
This is one of the best. It could be used with my idea of the upgradeing the rails. One of the best of the lot. Let me know what you think of upgradeing the rails. - John J Neville, 6/19/2000 7:42:23 PM [Reply]
The ability to edit/modify the economy to add/delete commodities. Ability to edit/modify engines. In short, allow the player to tailor the game to their likes - DonT, 6/10/2000 8:09:07 PM [Reply]
In scenarios it would be nice to be able to modify when industries become available or cease. At present every economy is assumed to be in sync with the USA! - Richard , 6/24/2000 08:04:36 AM [Reply]
I would like to see more liveries for trains. Different user colours available as well as pre-loaded liveries. How about EMUs and DMUs? I would also like to see traction that is specific to each country i.e HSTs in UK, TGVs in France. Everybody has mentioned tunnels, I can't belive they were left out last time! In an ideal world I would also like to see a drivers-eye view option! - Steve Scott, 6/10/2000 12:32:39 AM [Reply]
DMU'S AND EMU'S: VERY GOOD IDEA!!! And with a choice in lenght. - Joost O, 6/13/2000 08:11:07 AM [Reply]
Let small cities be able to pop up over time. Let us build our own industries. Let the cities change in looks because of size, like a small town would have little houses like it does now, while a big megapolits would have skyscrapers & the like. - high-sky, 6/08/2000 1:03:24 PM [Reply]
Why stop at planting industries? I'd love to just plop down a whole TOWN at my whim (with a name to match of course!) - Dick Dilworth, 7/10/2000 02:23:02 AM [Reply]
Hi. In RRT3 I would like to see a better diversity of engines. There are many european diesel and electric engines that are not incorporated in the game. Also, some engines are way to expensive. Take the brenner for example ... why would you ever want to have that engine in your company? It is far too expensive. Something else I would like to see is the inclusion of tunnels in the game. In some scenarios, the high heels and steep railroads are somewhat unrealistic. None of the engines is capable of pulling a car set decently on a 6+% hill. For the rest, great job you guys did at poptop. Excellent game! Keep up the good work. Shane - ShaneParish, 6/08/2000 08:38:54 AM [Reply]
As for locomotives.........WHY IN GOD'S GOOD NAME DID THEY FORGET THE SD40-2??????????? I think they, as well as the SD70s, 60s, 50s, 80MACs, and the SD90MACs, should be in there. Also they should have the GP40-2 and the F40PH. As for a new electric they SHOULD put in the AEM7. - Chris Schanbacher, 6/27/2000 10:26:46 AM [URL][Reply]
And dont forget the RF-16 "Sharknose". The thing about it is, since we all have our own pet loco's, RT3 should have the ability to import loco's in over the web, like buildings in SimCity 3K. - Dick Dilworth, 7/10/2000 02:27:13 AM [Reply]
Hi. In RRT3 I would like to see a better diversity of engines. There are many european diesel and electric engines that are not incorporated in the game. Also, some engines are way to expensive. Take the brenner for example ... why would you ever want to have that engine in your company? It is far too expensive. Something else I would like to see is the inclusion of tunnels in the game. In some scenarios, the high heels and steep railroads are somewhat unrealistic. None of the engines is capable of pulling a car set decently on a 6+% hill. For the rest, great job you guys did at poptop. Excellent game! Keep up the good work. Shane - ShaneParish, 6/08/2000 08:34:14 AM [Reply]
I would like to see 2 more realistic features in RRT3. FIrst of all there should be a choice between types of electrification - overhead wires or third rail? Diesel and Electric Multiple unit trains which carry passengers and mail without needing a seperate engine would make the game more realistic after about 1930. This would make the Metra games far more relaisitc as would the ability to build the metra lines underground or elevated. - Kevin Tennent, 6/07/2000 11:33:26 AM [Reply]
Game mode without scenario. Just like RRT I - Joost O, 6/06/2000 10:08:46 AM [Reply]
They ought to put underwater tunnels in or ferries. I find those big bridges stupid. - J.B., 6/05/2000 6:40:40 PM [Reply]
In this game, countries should change, like when the USSR broke up into 15 other countries, or if there is a war, cities should be wrecked. - J.B., 6/05/2000 6:39:44 PM [Reply]
Yeah it would be cool to see little bombers or tanks rolling toward your railroad. Then they should have some sort of military demand to ship troops and materials there. So you can function as a front line railroad and actually help to defend yourself. - Chris Schanbacher, 6/27/2000 10:29:59 AM [URL][Reply]
Could there be a new section that would have derailments? In order to stop derailments a player could change the rails from iron to steel. As the scenario goes on, the derailments reappear because of wear and tear of the track. In order to stop derailments this time you would change the weighe of the rails from 40 lbs to 60 lbs, from 60 lbs to 80 lbs,and from 80 lbs depending on the length of the game. If this could be worked into the game it would be one step closer to the real thing. - John J Neville, 6/05/2000 3:40:19 PM [Reply]
No good: too detaillistic. Is not something you would want to waste your time on when managing your multibillion dollar empire. - Joost O, 6/06/2000 10:04:31 AM [Reply]
It would not be a wast of time.It would be a new challenge.One more thing to keep track of. - John J Neville, 6/09/2000 4:21:39 PM [Reply]
Hey nomore "challenges" goddammit! i've gotten tired of rrt2 just becouse it get's too complicated at later in the game with too many things to keep track of... - Humiz, 7/02/2000 4:04:08 PM [URL][Reply]
Hey nomore "challenges" goddammit! i've gotten tired of rrt2 just becouse it get's too complicated at later in the game with too many things to keep track of... - Humiz, 7/02/2000 4:04:04 PM [URL][Reply]
On the next RRTIII a scenario with a very long time frame and with the player's ability to update a few cars. Old boxcars with a load 50 tons updated to 80 tons. Old oil cars with a load of 50 tons updated to 80 tons I don't think all the cars need to be updated,just the cars that are in that scenario. The timing when you update, to win the game, could be a real challenge. - John J Neville, 6/05/2000 3:28:51 PM [Reply]
New on R.R.T. III I would like to see in the next RRT III a scenario that wound start with your railroad very deep in debt and also with a lot of outstanding stock. In order to win the game you must eliminate all the debt and buy back all the stock. Now that would be a switch. - John J Neville, 6/05/2000 3:18:53 PM [Reply]
Sure. We could call it "The Wreck of the Penn Central".... But I'd love to see if I could untangle that unholy mess!! - Dick Dilworth, 7/10/2000 02:30:53 AM [Reply]
New on R.R.T. III - John J Neville, 6/05/2000 3:12:07 PM [Reply]
It would be handy to be able to dictate the route a train takes, without having to schedule it through stations you don't want it to call at (when you have more then one route between two stations). And another routing window i badly needed. Those big stars really make it difficult to rout a train on a densely stationed network. And why can one run the mag-lev train on ordinairy track. A completely new and special monorail system would truely make this a new way of transport. It would make them faster and they could be built on high poles above houses in the cities. - Joost O, 6/05/2000 1:05:54 PM [Reply]
TUNNELS!!!!, also on gradients. No speedrestrictions on STEEL bridges (unrealistic). Today most stone bridges are speedrestricted because of their age. Unrestricted bridges should be of steel and CONCRETE. Complex stations with possibility to lay the crossovers and sidings yourself (e.g. in a special zoom-in screen, or a subgame of stationmanaging/- building, maybe optional at the start of each game).More variants in architecture. Scanings of real buildings. Would be great to have Grand Central Terminal in Amsterdam!! Also FLY-OVERS/ DIVE-UNDERS!! Very realistic and beneficial for operations. Trainnaming (also when it is not a speedrecordbreaker, but the amount of extra revenue should decrease whene you inflate the number of names.) - Joost O, 6/05/2000 12:27:27 AM [Reply]
More British and European locos, particularly late 19th century early 20th century - Peter N, 6/05/2000 04:45:09 AM [Reply]
An "intelligent" stock broker who would tell me when Stock x is at or above (below) price y. - Mike, 6/05/2000 01:28:00 AM [Reply]
Yes please! I am useless at stocks - they always go down after I buy and up after I sell. For players like me who are always wasted by Hudson or Nehru it would be a huge relief to have the option to delegate share dealing to the AI - Richard , 6/24/2000 07:42:43 AM [Reply]
Conditional Consists would make big railroad easier to manage. ie. pickup 4 cars of either passengers or mail. or pickup up to 5 cars of grain etc. - Reade Bricker, 6/04/2000 7:30:43 PM [Reply]
I don't think this is quite the right approach. I think we should have the option to delegate consists to the AI. When you have 50 or 100 trains on the go it is boring and exhausting to pause the game every time a train reaches a station so that you can check the consist and the computer run trains never leave a station with only empty cars when there were lots of cargos that could have been loaded - Richard , 6/24/2000 07:47:06 AM [Reply]
I think that a company should have cars and have to buy them, pick colors, etc - J.B., 6/04/2000 12:00:51 AM [Reply]
1) I would like to create a central "distribution" center. A new "type" of station called a "rail yard". The station doesn't really have demand, but trains can drop off their cargo and their cargo would "instantly" appear in the supply for the station. It would be easier to distribute different types of cargo to different cities. 2) It is difficult to manage a huge company, allow trains to be placed into divisions and appoint computer division managers to run sections of your business. - John Tremback, 6/01/2000 12:41:32 AM [Reply]
2) Divisional Managers might be too complicated - I think a simpler solution to managing large railways would be the ability to delegate consist management to the manager/AI - Richard , 6/24/2000 07:52:57 AM [Reply]
1) Distribution Centres: Surely you can do this already (in TSC). If you build a small station with nothing in it's catchment area it will have no demand. - Richard , 6/24/2000 07:50:57 AM [Reply]
Hooray... If it isn't included, then it will show that the developers aren't really listening. - Braald, 6/13/2000 01:43:37 AM [Reply]
This is a real dandy. Take heed top pop - John J Neville, 6/05/2000 3:47:59 PM [Reply]
That has to be one of the best\if not the best idea's i have saw on this wishlist!!!!! GENIOUS!!!!!!!! - r\r dued, 6/01/2000 6:33:26 PM [Reply]
Maybe it is not really something for rr3, but why isn't there a game like SimStation, where you can simulate a large station? - 456, 5/31/2000 3:27:54 PM [Reply]
I would like to see even more industries. Also, the cities need to evolve with the times. Like in the year 2000 the larger Megalopolises don't need those homely looking houses. It needs to be like skyscrapers and stuff. It don't look real like the way it is now. Also smaller cities should be able to pop up along rails and stuff through the game. Like instead of just haveing the large cites, have smaller ones that just pop-up. - r\r dude2, 5/30/2000 10:06:25 AM [Reply]
We need more control over the development of the cities. Like the Railroad Companies buying things to improve the cities. That way they can grow more and then the companies can make more money. Such as the way you could in Industy Giant. Tunnels are a MUST!!!!! - r\r dude, 5/29/2000 9:12:51 PM [Reply]
If it is too difficult to have one person be able to control two companies, how about a button that allows majority share holders to "freeze" routes, construction, etc. while the boss is away. I would also like to see a new industry: Locomotive manufacture. - Mike, 5/29/2000 8:32:38 PM [Reply]
Very good and logic idea: Locomotive industry. But wouldn't railcar industries not also be wanted? - Joost, 6/05/2000 12:07:34 AM [Reply]
provision for upgrading locomotives/ retiring superfluous trains. This feature appeared in original Railroad Tycoon but not in Railroad Tycoon 2. - Tom Shaffer, 5/28/2000 10:35:31 PM [Reply]