[ Post a Message | Railroad Express ]

• More engines! Provide car sets for modern locos such as the TGV, the Thalys, the Shinkansen, the Maglev, and the Eurostar. Oh, and more cheats..... - jjtan, 12/22/2000 7:8:33 [Reply]
• More animation when people are bringing cargo to, picking up cargo at the station. At ports this could be cool. Show the industries processing the goods. - Gregg Murray, 12/20/2000 19:20:21 [Reply]
• The ability to move your manager(s) around the map to do special things. For example, if he is a "security" expert, he should reduce roberries in the radius around where he is. If he lowers track building costs, he has to be near where the construction is. You have to have a cabbose on your train to move your manager around, and if the train is robbed he dies! And Multiple Managers! - Gregg Murray, 12/20/2000 19:19:0 [Reply]
• Where did the fare wars go? I loved those things from RRT1. Bring back the City Council Votes and fare wars! - Gregg Murray, 12/20/2000 19:18:29 [Reply]
• I disagree with the whole track expansion thing. I think a major part of the game is working within the traffic limitations. - Gregg Murray, 12/20/2000 19:18:12 [Reply]
• MORE Averages in the charts, so you can compare new routes with old routes, esp ones who's cargo cycle takes them more than 12 months. It is so frustrating not having lifetime averages instead of lifetime totals. You should be able to set the date range for your averages. - Gregg Murray, 12/20/2000 19:17:54 [Reply]
• I like having multiple windows on a configurable screen, like Rollercoaster Tycoon, so you could have a stock market window, 3 windows on each of your trains, and supply and demand info on another resizable window. That would be cool. - Gregg Murray, 12/20/2000 19:17:34 [Reply]
• Resources (coal, iron, etc) should be fixed by the map but players should be able to buy and place industries in cites. Passenger output of cities would then be dependent on your ability to supply needed cargoes and the number of industries in the city. - Anonymous, 12/20/2000 10:43:39 [Reply]
• MULTIPLAYER games where more than one person controls a company. In BIG MAPS, many MORE PEOPLE able to play in the same multiplayer game. - Steven B., 12/20/2000 0:7:2 [Reply]
• Adding a political aspect to the game, the Railroad manager should be allowed to buy/fund local politicians who support their railroad. - JEF6160, 12/17/2000 19:25:26 [Reply]
  • That's a wonderful prototypical idea. But the ability to bribe should diminish over chronological time - Chris Harding, 12/20/2000 14:43:31 [Reply]
• We should be able to fund and start new industries in town when they are not available. - JEF6160, 12/17/2000 19:23:37 [Reply]
• Players should be able to buy property and buildings to build up or build new cities... - JEF6160, 12/17/2000 19:21:57 [Reply]
• LONGER TRAINS!!! It would be ideal if we could have trains with 12 cars. - JEF6160, 12/17/2000 19:20:22 [Reply]
• We should be allowed to buy up stations and tracks from liquidated companies. - JEF6160, 12/17/2000 19:19:3 [Reply]
• In RT3, we should be allowed to strike deals with the competiton when traveling on their tracks and/or to their stations. - JEF6160, 12/17/2000 19:17:31 [Reply]
• In Railroad Tycoon 3 it most be tunnels and much bigger maps. Better graphic too, but not 3D. The bridges should be easier to make, and when you purchase a TGV for example and make a passenger train with the engine, the coaches should turn into TGV coaches. - Kriss, 12/16/2000 15:44:24 [Reply]
• The railcars themselves should be purchased. Then you have to make an investment to haul a different cargo. - Steve, 12/12/2000 15:18:20 [Reply]
• Being allowed to personal own industries (steel mills, iron mines, coal mines, etc) to have an additional source of income. Holding companies that own railroads and other industries without being chairman. These would also allow game play without building a Railroad (I know "What no Railroad!") - David Wise, 12/12/2000 0:58:57 [Reply]
• There needs to be a better track building facility. Like switching to plan view, to allow eisier construction of track in mountains, too often it is difficult to see exactly where you are placing your track. Similarly grading your track through mountains is too difficult without an undo facility. When grading trak through mountains I have to continually save and load to eliminate mistakes. - Lewis Hutton, 12/10/2000 6:22:48 [Reply]
• I agree with lots of people on the forum. We need some method of reducing congestion at big stations (eg chicago in most scenarios), probably through multi-tracks. I sometimes put in a second station on the side of the city, but still covering most of the houses & deliver passengers & freight there as well. Also, some more freight cargoes would add interest. - Brett, 12/9/2000 21:36:28 [Reply]
  • Agreed, increasing track capacity especially at stations would be nice. - Lewis Hutton, 12/10/2000 6:13:14 [Reply]
• Just LOOKING at this HUGE amount of fresh ideas on making RT even a better game than it already is, is a sure sign RT3 IS coming. No "if:s"!! Infact I visited this site, because I'm going tomorrow to BUY RT2 Gold edition! My wishlist: 1. RT is a TRAINlovers game - so be it in the future, too(only better) 2. Because this is a trainlover's game, make those trains look so real as is humanly possible - max, 12/3/2000 0:9:21 [Reply]
• The 'tutorial' shouldn't be so hard. I mastered the 'tutorial' b4 moving on to the level 1 campaigns, which I then found unbeleivably easy, boring. Virtually all the advice in HTML strategy guide should come as pop-up boxes at relevant points in the game play (saying things like "Don't forget to..." and "Are you sure..?" (and then you can switch off these help boxes when you know your stuff). - DrArsenal, 11/24/2000 7:2:4 [Reply]
• i would like to see your trains be able to pick up aditional cargo and add it to what is currently on the train. if you have 3 cotton farms in an area and all the cotton is going to the same place then why make 9 trips to haul it all. - mrbig, 11/23/2000 9:58:25 [Reply]
  • If you get the adon pack 'Second Century' you can however I dont think that pack is good over allvalue it adds a few things to the game but not worth the NZ$79 that I paid for it.. - CrazyH, 12/8/2000 4:38:20 [Reply]
• What I would like in RRT3 is an engine editorand the possibility to buy engines for a special country. Besides that also train sets would be a nice option, so you can use a realistic form of the TGV or ICE3 trains. Furthermore can the AI for the computer driven companies be so much better that they create trains which drive along more than two stations. - Dries, 11/22/2000 9:44:36 [Reply]
• I would like to see tunnels and a different map scale that would allow building subways like BART or the T in Boston - Anonymous, 11/17/2000 0:6:58 [Reply]
• Standard station setups (water & sand towers, telegraph/telephone,etc) surveyed routes(search for shortest, cheapest, fastest route). AI assistants .Undo. - David Wise, 11/11/2000 19:22:7 [Reply]
  • I think half the fun of RRT2 is choosing your own route through mountains etc., depending on your own skills to make it profitable. - Al, 12/15/2000 18:32:57 [Reply]
  • All good ideas. 'AI' assistants could help take the drudgery out of running a big system, you would have to be able to give them instructions, tho. Current 'AI' opponents are too easy to beat once you have learnt the game: the 'AI' needs to be less stupid. - DrArsenal, 11/24/2000 6:53:26 [Reply]
    • I agree that the AI are mighty dim. They choose the cities that they serve well , but track placement and engine choice is poor. And as the the game progresses engine upgrades and replacement are also poor. - David Wise, 12/12/2000 1:7:36 [Reply]
• It's a good idea to include tunnels, more bridges, ability to transfer trains on ships, railroad-cars for transportation of normal cars and support for creating a *really* large railroad system. - Zak, 11/11/2000 11:18:19 [Reply]
  • Engines and cars should be color-coded. Nowadays, there's not a single rail company who hasn't got their logo and colour on the engine(s) and cars. - Zak, 11/11/2000 11:46:59 [Reply]
• It'd be nice to have the ability to merge companies by utilising stock as in the real world. Currently you have to wait until one company has enough cash even if you own 100% of both companies. Also, the dynamics of city expansion need to be improved. If you are supplying a city with most of the basic needs (and then some) you should be able to see a more dramatic increase in size. - bgbdbn, 11/7/2000 10:4:18 [Reply]
• Central goods yards with engine sheds and shunters for marshalling and reorganising consists for further travel. Military bases re-scaled - oh, also 17/18 century angled atillery fort as military base or museum. - Peter Cameron, 11/6/2000 14:48:19 [Reply]
• Extra scenics - scottish/english castles, cathedrals, zoos, airports, football stadiums, theme parks, beach centres for extra passenger traffic (all sensitively scaled). - Peter Cameron, 11/6/2000 14:45:17 [Reply]
  • and sky scrapper in every big cities...don't miss it!!! - Alex, 11/8/2000 11:56:35 [Reply]
• Central stations with 4 or 6 tracks for the big cities or pride of railway. Brick, brick with box girder or metal (Firth of Forth type) for sea crossing or Train ferrys for the longer crossings. Ports with fishing for extra food supply. - Peter Cameron, 11/6/2000 14:43:13 [Reply]
• Level line facility - create embankments, viaducts or cuttings and tunnels dependant on the height or depth of the terrain, the gradient dependant on the start and finish point. More engines from each country or a sub-program to create wheel arrangements, styles and liveries (boilers, footplates, frames, lining etc) - technology movements automatically available at certain years. - Peter Cameron, 11/6/2000 14:37:44 [Reply]
  • Would'nt this just take all the challenge out of track building....especially as RT2 already automatically flattens some land when track building takes place - Al, 12/15/2000 18:37:31 [Reply]
  • Allow the building of tunnels, embankments & cuttings. - G Aitken, 12/12/2000 19:26:3 [Reply]
• hello,I want buy this game,but in Bulgaria this is dificult.I've got RT-2(first part).Also I want to buy the other parts(the second century and gold edition).I want RT-3 with one thing-in this game I want to make longer trains like American's,to make big stations with many lines with special lines(like crossing,double point-crossing and etc.) - milen kassabov, 11/6/2000 8:54:50 [Reply]
• hello,I want buy this game,but in Bulgaria this is dificult.I've got RT-2(first part).Also I want to buy the other parts(the second century and gold edition).I want RT-3 with one thing-in this game I m - milen kassabov, 11/6/2000 8:45:58 [Reply]
• i think it be in 3d two be nice walk around or drive train - andrew, 11/5/2000 20:29:46 [Reply]
• UNDO - at least 1 level, Single step mode, (press a key, a day or two passes, then it stops again), Lanscaping (raise and lower the land), BRIDGES longer than 1 span, the ability to build industries where you want them. - jan slater, 11/4/2000 10:26:59 [Reply]
• 1000 per 1000 maps - Fabrizio Giuliani, 11/3/2000 0:39:59 [Reply]
• RT3 could have an option to re-order trains; instead of being sequenced by the date purchased, it is often important to view them by lines, based on two main cities serviced. - demilio, 11/1/2000 20:37:47 [Reply]
• Need Tunnels, bridges & flyovers, multi-unit lashups & longer trains, yard mgmt, better passenger mgmt & revenue model, player-designed passing tracks, better access to stk mkt (ticker anyone?), intercng w/ships, trucks & planes, more gvt meddling, better scheduling, seasons, better UI for train & consist mgmt, var-cost industries, auto-track laying w route surveys- Need RRT3!!! ;) - Brat Wizard, 10/31/2000 9:36:39 [Reply]
• The influence of the goverment could be better. In europe (i don't know for other countries) we have definitely the goverment who decides if a track can be made or a merger can be made (even forceful split-ups -> AT&T, IBM). conclusion: money is much, but you can't buy it all. - Mental, 10/19/2000 14:3:42 [Reply]
• I think some of you are being a little to picky with your requests ie. the fine details. Yes tunnels would be nice but so would the ability to survey a track and construct it as the money is available. Train colors could be tied to the company logo colors. Multitrack at conjested areas could be color coded for the number of tracks. (there is only so much room on the map). - Lloyd, 10/19/2000 11:10:4 [Reply]
  • Forgot, there is some good suggestions also like if a coalmine is in a city and coal is required there. The ability to specify what cargoes for individual ports. Also if an industry is on the map and it requires a supporting industry that supporting industry should be on as well (ie tires and rubber). - Lloyd, 10/19/2000 11:27:7 [Reply]
• The detail I missed most is multi-tracking at large stations (6 or 8 tracks), so there's no traffic jam at the station and trains don't lose so much of worth while waiting. Even tunnels would be nice. - Alex, 10/19/2000 4:6:57 [Reply]
  • I would like to be able to design/redesign track layouts at stations and then operate them. If you need extra tracks at a station, you can decide where they go, how much to spend on them: so a chance to expand a medium station w/o buying a whole new large station at $200k. Also, chance to have temporary stations that r cheap to build but expensive to maintain, like many railways started with. - DrArsenal, 11/24/2000 7:13:43 [Reply]
• i would ensure every map has the "attempt Merger" section available , even on easy!! - neil, 10/19/2000 3:38:32 [Reply]
• So-called 'improvements' such as tunnels, multiple tracks, multi-headed trains and so forth will not be worth a candle unless they tackle the real problem of RT1 and 2 - there is no point in running freight unless (a) it's very convenient, or (b) it is forced by the victory conditions. It's not enough just to clobber passenger/mail income as was done in TSC. That was merely a cop-out. - Don Turnbull, 10/17/2000 13:1:22 [Reply]
• How about having buses, planes, trucks and ships. Their purpose is primarily for competition; players can't use them, but would be able to have contracts, connections and joint operations with them if they choose. - ynot, 10/14/2000 17:48:23 [Reply]
  • In addtion to this, I'd downplay supply/demand. It will always be there but profits should be based on: how fast you can deliver cargo/passengers, how much you charge, and how fast the competition (if any) delivers and how much they charge. - ynot, 10/14/2000 17:54:30 [Reply]
    • what if you could buy planes, busses, trucks and so forth and be required to have them to deliver goods? i mean, you use the train to send the goods but you need trucks to distruibute them in the city. i know this is a little detail but why not? things like having repair trucks and construction teams would increase the level of realism. - Mrbig, 11/23/2000 9:49:32 [Reply]
• What makes RRT2 the best game available is its realism. In RRT3 I would like to see: (1) an option to reduce the frequency of crashes and robberies (2) more of the features from Transport Tycoon, like tunnels and color choices (3) industry cost should reflect its profitability (4) longer years so there could be seasons (5) larger gameboard - JeffW, 10/12/2000 1:30:50 [Reply]
• One idea is that someone could PLEASE summerise messages so that people don't have to scrol through the thousands of good ideas on this site - T Willis, 10/11/2000 9:33:59 [Reply]
• In addition to tunnels and multi-tracking (at least FOUR tracks) ... allow for modernazation of stations and facilities as well as city buildings. Also allow at least the option of using switches and track sectioning in compact scenarios. - RW Anderson, 10/8/2000 14:52:15 [Reply]
• How about more tunnels, the ability to have trains with more than one engine, and more city scenarios? Subways and trams, especially. The buildings need to look more modern than the late 19th century, especially when working with the city. - Saige-Jennifer, 10/7/2000 2:6:11 [Reply]
• Instead of shipping coal and iron ore to steel mills, have a choice of a new port, big ore docks used on the great lakes where ore cars fill ships. - Rail Creed, 10/5/2000 23:10:27 [Reply]
  • Sea ports should demand and supply virtually anything: if you have goods and need logs, you should be able to supply goods to a port and get logs from it (OTOH ports on lakes can only supply what is demanded at another port on the lake). - DrArsenal, 11/24/2000 7:21:52 [Reply]
• I like to see rail maintenance as a responsibility, poor maintenance and your trains pushed too hard......and BOOM!!! derail and crash. Check track condition by clicking on your rails....maybe pending on what your hauling, may create a mess. Instead of your trains sit and the locomotives burning, through those cars around ,pile them up!! Just don't haul uranium and munitions together BIG BOOM!! - Dean Kurowski, 10/5/2000 22:53:52 [Reply]
  • After train is cleared, go in a repair tracks. Keep those lines open. If a wreck occurs in a city or town could level some industry and may effect your stock value..Just keep the reality of rail disasters. Have poor maintenance cause a head-on collision from lights not working - Dean Kurowski, 10/5/2000 23:1:15 [Reply]
• True multiplayer games, with multiple monitors, so we can have teams of tycoon's battling each other. So you have one main window, one with the trainconsists, and one for the stockmarcket. Now you have a fast and dynamic game!! have people thought about this? Contact me please! - Lord Llurch, 10/5/2000 6:15:2 [Reply]
• On the station menu I would love to be able to select everything I want to buy at one time rather than having to go back each time I wanted to buy something. - Mark Taylor, 10/4/2000 1:28:49 [Reply]
• The game should include numerous options to allow the user to tailor it to their own tastes. The game should include some method of saving to options so they do not have to be reset before each new game. The game should also include an option to return the game board to it's original state . - DonT, 9/27/2000 18:24:7 [Reply]
• Hey everyone I've been working on the "club" page so it's up sorta. The adress iswww.geocities.com/stewie223 - Chris S., 9/24/2000 22:12:51 [Reply]
• One word: spellchecker. - Lord Strathcona (NOT Strathconda, 9/24/2000 4:45:23 [Reply]
• As much as I love RT2, I'd love to see Poptop go over Transport Tycoon Deluxe. I love the trains, but I also loved the cars, trucks, boats, and airplanes in Transport Tycoon. The same (upgraded) engine should be able to handle all of the different modes of travel. - Kurt H., 9/23/2000 20:43:32 [Reply]
  • Yeah, I agree. Another ting I'd like to see are Rail Diesel Cars(RDCs), not all railways operated conventional passenger trains. - Tyler Welsford, 9/27/2000 22:55:17 [URL] [Reply]
• Go back to signals and tunnels as in original RRT. Also go back to financial market closer to original RRT. How are the computer players worth more when their trains aren't running?? - Bill, 9/23/2000 9:17:51 [Reply]
• Why no special colors for trains, i don't often see TGV's or so driving around with blue cars or panorama windows. Also in mountains there should be bridges which can span the canyon or valley, the rails in mountain areas is a lot on bridges too. - BBK, 9/22/2000 14:14:40 [Reply]
• I agree with most of everything here, Having played rt2, civ2+,roller coaster,etc,etc,etc... But what I haven't seen yet is more than the square 4 views. A system like the ones used in many board role games with hexagons or octogons would help alot. It would give you 6 or 8 views vs. 4. What a help when looking at grades, station placement or that really cool new paint job on your loco...( ie Nascar 1,2,3,4,9...?;) Also the suggestions for bridges over your track, multiple station tracks and signals are very good. I would also like to see an in depth city level, maybe even as a game or scenario w/in the game, like the metro. (whew!) - antracer, 9/16/2000 10:5:59 [Reply]
• Stock market on the main screen. I rarely (if ever) use the big map down in the lower left corner. I would like to be able to swap that view for a small version of the stock market screen. If it were available, I could more easily trade stock. Of course, this could lead to the day-trading phenomonem... <:-) - Degrees, 9/15/2000 17:47:16 [Reply]
  • Generally, the ability to configure the screen the way you want it, rather than having space taken up by the pretty borders when you don't want them. - DrArsenal, 11/24/2000 7:28:29 [Reply]
• Through out the game and through the years, train remains the main method of transferring freight and passengers. Airplanes are looked at, but without control. It would be cool if you could start airplane companies, trucking and ferry companies - one big mass freight/passenger transport company. - Jason Scott Carter, 9/15/2000 6:41:39 [Reply]
• What I would really like to see the most in RRT3 is a much greater variety in locomotives. It would be neat to see multiple unit lashups of locomotives with their pulling capacity and speed factored into the game. More locomotives are also definately needed. In RRT2, the most modern EMD locomotive was like a SDP40 or an FP45 or something that was produced up until 1971. I'd like to see some more locomotives that were and still are key pieces to the railroad industry like SD40-2s or GP38-2s or even a GE U30B. Maybe allow the player to order locomotives from the various dealers and include variables like cost, horsepower, efficiency, and tractive effort. The ability to rebuild reliable locomotives like the F9 or the GP18 would be a plus - eric, 9/12/2000 18:34:39 [Reply]
  • This is true! I don't think there are any US diesel locos made between those 2 and the dash-9 and AMD 103, What about the GP38s, GP40s, F40PHs, SD40s, dash-2s? What about U-boats, and dash 7s? I guess you can't put every engine in the game (or can you). I could think of a lot of engines they could put in RRT3 (and not just diesels). - ynot, 9/13/2000 3:46:40 [Reply]
    • Doesn't anybody remember ALCO? out here in the N East the D&H had many rs-3's etc.. ( The ALCO plant was in Schenectady, NY... ?;( - antracer, 9/16/2000 9:57:26 [Reply]
      • Sorry I left out the "smokers", "alligators", and RS-3s. - ynot, 9/17/2000 12:42:55 [Reply]
• RRTII is a great game but I find that once you're left with a couple of electric and diesel locos to use , with no new locomotives becoming available, the game loses its appeal. Virtually every train eventually ends up with the same loco, and the fun of having a variety of locos and selecting the best loco for the route/consist is no longer there. I'd like to see more business options, perhaps the ability to set fares, the ability to design your own locos and set their capabilities (the more capable loco costing more to produce?/ limits on capabilities related to the time period etc), tunnels, the ability to control more than one company at once, a wider choice of locomotives throughout the game period, and the ability to build industry. - Steve, 9/7/2000 7:32:34 [Reply]
  • Why dot you just use the get all engines cheat and i find that if I start a new company and then cheat some money of then there is a lot richer resources in my first company. I tend to do this every 4-8 yers. - Haloha, 9/17/2000 16:35:9 [Reply]
• 1. why are my trains still getting robbed in the 21st Century (passenger trains moving at high speed)? 2. we have to buy locos, why not buy freight/passenger cars; engines and cars should be delivered to you and sent to their routes before they can start hauling things. - ynot, 9/4/2000 5:3:42 [Reply]
  • I agree with the robbery thing. It's incredibly annoying to have trains being held up in the 1990s. They should become less frequent not more frequent. Also I think that the seasons should change as a year goes by so you start in winter then spring then summer and fall. If EA could do it in Sim City why not is RRT2? - Chris S., 9/4/2000 16:7:0 [Reply]
    • How about night and day? Think how cool those train lanterns would look! :--D - Stephen, 9/26/2000 2:59:21 [Reply]
    • Nightfall - Stephen, 9/26/2000 2:57:20 [Reply]
      • What about setting up timetables: so (say) twice a year you work out the timetable to run until the next one, by running trains on that timetable for a week (so you run two complete weeks of 7 days, 7 nights each year), then get messages if it weather means disruption, loss of profits? And trains have to end the week in the right places for the start of the week to make it a little more real! - DrArsenal, 11/24/2000 7:38:16 [Reply]
• Also more realistic time frames and larger consists. I'd also get rid of the campaign videos -- they take up a lot of room on the hard drive/CD and are unnecessary, even boring. - Watson, 9/4/2000 1:47:4 [Reply]
• New industries: Lead/zinc->smelter = goods; grain or produce->processor=oil; salt; soybeans->processor=food or chemicals. - Watson, 9/4/2000 1:45:6 [Reply]
• RT3 should allow for the complexities of large cities. In that for the major cities within a scenerio (London, Moscow, etc), the main map contains a maximum city boundary. When track is required to be laid within the city boundary, the program automatically switches to a larger scale map (i.e. similar to that of the RT2 rapid transit scale). This would allow a more complex layout of stations, track, and junctions to be created if desired by a player. After all most major cities have many stations, using a larger scale could allow a small rapid transit set up to be designed to help feed passengers into the main line stations (i.e. joint mainline/rapid transit stations). - David, 9/3/2000 17:31:4 [Reply]
  • You are right on the mark with that. Every city/station should generate some kind of "detail" map where we could run local freights and commuter/subway trains. The local freight trains would help solve the problem of a city/station supplying something it also demands. - ynot, 9/4/2000 4:33:10 [Reply]
• In Transport Tycoon you could choose the size of your station. There should be something like that, so that you can ad platforms and increase the length of the platforms. The greater the lenght of a platform the faster the turn-around speed of the trains. You should be able to expand the station if traffic picks-up on a line. Another important thing is tunnels, fly-overs, signels, more trains of different countries and a real 3D terrain (like in Earth 2150). I would love to zoom in on my trains and see them from all sides. - ArjanJ, 8/30/2000 15:36:31 [Reply]
  • Exact ! I think that a true 3d engine would be great : "flying" into valleys , over hills , etc ... - TomVenom, 9/1/2000 3:34:32 [Reply]
    • I dont think 3D engine is a good idea, because of still too slow computers for that :( - ckkm, 10/20/2000 12:4:42 [Reply]
      • get with it dude, everyone has a 3d engine. just because your computer sux dont mean we need to pay for it. besides, i would gladly buy a new computer for this game - mrbig, 11/23/2000 14:7:57 [Reply]
• Ok now I'm considering creating a webpage "group" for people to get together to play multiplayer games and sort of have a "online railway". If I did that how many would be interested in joining? Please respond. - Chris Schanbacher, 8/27/2000 22:47:59 [Reply]
• Passengers should have a specific destination, they wish to go to. It's unrealistic that you can bring them where ever you want. It also leads to the unrealistic consequence that intermediate stops are useless. For instance: A train from New York to Miami that stops at D.C. loses all its original passengers there. With this model only a third would leave the train(and maybe another third in Jacksonville) while Washingtoners with the destination Miami would enter the train. The only problem I see is a lack of flexibility: you cannot simply change the destination of the train. But I think it's worth it. You could run other trains on the same line, that stop at other stations and slow trains that stop everywhere. - Abraxas, 8/27/2000 19:9:37 [Reply]
  • I like this feature the way it is - Gregg Murray, 12/20/2000 19:8:41 [Reply]
  • I know exactly how you feel! The train running from New York to Miami should be able to stop at least at all major stations along the way and be just as, profitable (if not twice as profitable) than a train that goes straight through. - ynot, 9/2/2000 4:19:56 [Reply]
    • Not just passengers. For all cargoes, you should be able to decide for each waggon and each station whether to unload at that station or not, even if there is demand; so that a train carrying grain can call at a station that serves both grain silo and cattle yard and pick up more grain w/o the cattle yard getting the grain on the train. But yes, passengers & mail want to go to particular places. - DrArsenal, 11/23/2000 12:4:12 [Reply]
      • If passengers and mail have particular destinations and you can't take them all the way, you should still get some $$ for taking them part way, as long as it is the right direction and quicker OR cheaper than the alternatives for the era. You should also be able to set charges at the level you want, and carry what cargo/passengers are available at that charge level (competitors may undercut). - DrArsenal, 11/23/2000 12:10:5 [Reply]
• Passengers like in Rollercoaster Tycoon, with faces, clothes and luggage walking in and out of trains!!! That would be reason enough to buy the game!!! - Gino, 8/26/2000 18:42:31 [Reply]
• SIGNALS. I want a game that is like a virtual train set. So signals definitely! - Ray, 8/26/2000 18:41:24 [Reply]
  • I totaly agree, SIGNALS! millions of people have trains at home and signals are the most fun. Don't forget the UNDO button! - iemke, 9/10/2000 14:18:22 [Reply]
    • If you want to set up a complete "virtual train set" with signals etc. try the link below. The graphics are not as slick as RRT2 and it's a different type of sim but you get complete control over your trains. - Roy, 9/16/2000 6:32:26 [URL] [Reply]
• It'd be cool if you could have concrete ties for tracks. They 'd be more expensive, but have lower maintenance costs or higher max speeds for trains. Oh yeah, I'd also like to see tunnels and overpasses or maybe a scenario where you build a subway. - acmadude, 8/25/2000 17:58:52 [Reply]
• Another thing. If you drop freight at a way station destine for another particular station it would be con vemiant to somehow mark that freight in order to keep tract of where it is suppose to go. Each station could have it's own code as simple as 1, 2, 3, etc and when a marked car was pulled up on the consist board the code would appear next to it. - Derrell Poole, 8/24/2000 18:19:6 [Reply]
  • Same idea - would like to pick passengers up in one station and stop at the way and pick up freight to carry through w/o getting shorted out of the passenger revenue because the station has no demand for them - Eric, 10/11/2000 20:10:52 [Reply]
• Larger stations with MORE TRACKS is definitely a must. It is very unrealistic to have to build extra stations very close to each other because of congestion at the entrance to a station. A real mainline station could have 8,10 12 or more tracks. I would also like to be able to upgrade the tracks from double to perhaps four-tracks on major routes. In the later stages of games I often end up with queues of trains along certain tracks and then an express comes along and one by one they have to stop as it goes past. - David, 8/24/2000 10:53:11 [Reply]
  • I absolutely agree. Also maybe have an option where you could have head in passenger rail stops as in larger stations for scenarios where this type of passenger loading/unloading staqrted. - G Maheu, 9/3/2000 23:1:19 [Reply]
• What I would like is if there is a resource available at a particular station that's need for an industry at the same station the industry should use the available resources. It gets annoying to have a steel mill in the same town as 2 coal mines and yet you have to bring IN coal. Why can't they just use the available resources? - Chris S., 8/23/2000 22:5:58 [Reply]
  • I completely agree with this. Why bring in grain or sugar to a distillery when there is a farm already located in that town. - eric, 9/12/2000 18:23:52 [Reply]
• Diddo on multi-span bridges, double and triple headers, tunnels, longer trains. But here's another outrageous idea. Let boxcars pick up a multitude of cargos - same for covered hoppers flatcars, etc. is it possble to break the siamese twin connection between cargos and cars. Heck in the 1930's the Colorado and Southern punched holes in the roofs of some of their boxcars so they could haul concrete and sand to climax in them. If the car would work the railroads would use them. - Derrell Poole, 8/22/2000 19:44:45 [Reply]
  • Yeah, breaking the siamese twin link and having waggons that cost money to buy would mean there would be a NEED sometimes to run a train of empties: profits might then be increased by putting the 'wrong' cargo in it, even though (for example) a cheaper waggon could move that 'wrong' cargo, if you had one. Putting coal in passenger coaches might increase maintenance costs, but would be possible! - DrArsenal, 11/24/2000 8:25:21 [Reply]
• Narrow gauge! I'd like to play rails through the Rockies or the Outback or in South Africa. Let's have some Mason Bogies (a worthless engine but Quaint). How 'bout some two foot gauge on the East Coast. How 'bout some third rail for the D&RGW? Moreover it would be great to have a rolling stock editor to paint cars and put Company Herolds on. Hey, we could have a lot more fun than the great itme were having now. One final suggestion - TUNNELS!!!!! - Derrell Poole, 8/22/2000 19:33:17 [Reply]
• You know what? If when you lay track, you could have cars carring ties and rails, and other stuff, you should have to send them over there. Also, having to pick between iron and steel rails would be sweet. Also, every 30 years or something., you should have to do repair jobs on track. - JB, 8/22/2000 13:23:48 [Reply]
  • i think this kind of "construction team" would be cool. you have to buy the equipment and have the personel to do it. i think putting in a employying thing would work. not hire each individual but hire as many as you like in a time. there could be special things like illegal imigrants and children working for you and the government would crackdown on it. it would be a risk. - mrbig, 11/23/2000 14:16:40 [Reply]
    • At least having a construction delay with animation would be more realistic, and fun. You just mark stuff for bulldozing or construciton and your team moves in - Gregg Murray, 12/20/2000 19:11:29 [Reply]
• I would like in RRT3 tunnels, viaducts and the possibility to create tunnels and bridges which cross the seas (see the Channel Crossing and some crossings in Denmark. At the same time the possibility of other gauges would be interresting. In variuos parts of the world the trains interact with ferries and this also could be a nice improvement in the game - L. Dries, 8/22/2000 6:46:48 [Reply]
• While I LOVE RC II, having to deal with outrageous grades & single span bridges can drive one to resign as chairman! A tunnelling option would be great! Make it expensive (as in the real world) so that you don't just build a subway through Europe. Also, how about expanding the bridge building capability? It would be great to be able to cross something wider than one span. Also, allow crossing at any angl rather than 90 degrees. How about trestles spanning a canyon in the mountains? But enough of this dreaming! Thanks for a great game!!! - Jeff McConnell, 8/20/2000 12:54:19 [Reply]
• Station service from both sides, 3 way 1switch track - Stephen Dambra, 8/20/2000 10:14:51 [Reply]
  • Y switches/points as well as 3 way. - DrArsenal, 11/24/2000 8:29:17 [Reply]
• Overpasses, tunnels, doubleheading or multiple engines. Ability to paint rolling stock including engines. More cars on a train. Mr. D. - Philip Dampier, 8/20/2000 8:8:39 [Reply]
• Not having played the Sid Meier's original, I don't ask for tunnels; but for heaven's sake, why can't scenarios have industries for the raw materials that are produced and vice versa i.e.. auto factories but no tire factories, rubber but no tire factores on the map. - Bill Polyniak, 8/20/2000 2:37:29 [Reply]
• I hate to look up and see a competitor's trains on my tracks. Trackage rights should be negotiated; the owner can say yes or no and if yes, what lines and what price. The railroad seeking trackage rights might be able to have the matter settled by the authorities (FRA, STB, ICC). - ynot, 8/19/2000 8:26:26 [Reply]
  • Not a real problem for me, you get a % of his earnings, not his profit on that line, the % defined as the distance on your track divided by the total distance travelled. And that "foreign" train has priority below "slow". Negotiations are needed if it can hold up your trains. - J.P. van Bolhuis, 8/24/2000 5:2:58 [Reply]
    • They sometimes take away cargo from stations that was intended for my mostly "unit" trains. I don't mind the competition, but not with cargo at my stations, on my tracks. - YNOT, 9/2/2000 4:15:6 [Reply]
      • I don't agree, I find the AI doesn't use my track enough. I laid a piece of track in a gap between two major networks of one competitor, but he didn't use it. Instead he laid another track just next to it!!! I hated it. Let them use my tracks more (or just become more logical) - PJay, 9/22/2000 15:36:13 [URL] [IMAGE] [Reply]
        • It should be theoretically possible to run a train at a profit 100% on foreign track, if the run would be highly profitable and nobody else is doing it (eg bust company's track). - DrArsenal, 11/24/2000 10:30:29 [Reply]
          • When companies go bust, should be possible to buy up some of their assets (eg a key bridge, any worthwhile locos they have) at less than it would cost to build new. Obviously, 'AI' players should be allowed to bid too, to keep prices reasonable. . - DrArsenal, 11/24/2000 10:34:4 [Reply]
• I did not see this suggested but i would like to see more than 3 train classes (express, normal and slow). You might want your "food" train to have priority over, say a "goods" train but you may not want it slowing down a passenger train behind it on the same route and priority level. I would go as far as to have 10 levels of train priorites (or something like the AT&SF's numbering system). - ynot, 8/19/2000 8:9:26 [Reply]
• (Can I just say that Poptop may be getting a bit depressed reading all of these messages on how their game could be improved so can I just add a WELL DONE to poptop for RRT and RRT2 - good work so far!) - Dave McLeary, 8/18/2000 15:8:32 [Reply]
• I would like to be able to keep companies that I buy seperate or be able to sell off pieces of my company, particular stations, etc. - g, 8/18/2000 9:23:10 [Reply]
  • Yeah a person should be able to sell of unprofitable branch lines or lines that aren't highly used. Also maybe an option to select the weight of rail that's to be used on the line. Like 90 pound for branches and 120 for mainlines. - C. Schanbacher, 8/19/2000 0:19:6 [Reply]
    • But use metric, or allow it to be configurable (metric/arcane) - J.P. van Bolhuis, 8/24/2000 4:59:37 [Reply]
• Real industry can produce more than 6 or 7 car loads of goods year this is another part where rrt2 falls short trains are usually more than 100 cars long - JD, 8/17/2000 16:1:16 [Reply]
• The ability to have more than 6 or seven cars on one train along with being able to put more than one locomotive on the trains as well particulary in the diesel era. Trains usually have more than 100 cars on them as well as 2+ locomotives... it would make the game more realistic and also the amount of loads per car should be available - Joel Dunsmore, 8/17/2000 15:31:12 [Reply]
  • How nice it would be to see 100 car (and larger) trains, but on the current map scale a train running between say Cleveland and Pittsburgh would take up the whole track route. The map scale/size would have to be made considerably larger for longer trains. Don't get me wrong, if they can do it i'd sure love to see it! - ynot, 8/21/2000 2:18:5 [Reply]
    • i agree the scale should be changed to allow for trains of 100- 200 cars with multiple units, also rail barges, and RDC cars - chris, 10/9/2000 23:46:9 [Reply]
• Quite simply, a concurrent Linux version. Also, I like the idea of being about to build industries as needed. In addition, building an industry should result in more population in an area (more houses spontaneously appear). If you don't use an industry, the population around it should disperse to reflect realistic conditions. - Daniel Davis, 8/15/2000 10:46:44 [Reply]
  • Hear Hear, I didnt even think about playing RT2 until I got my linux version. Also ability to zoom in on busy sections of tracks and stations, add more tracks, more priority levels, tunnels/bridges, 3d terain (ala Earth 2150) - Paul Weaver, 9/17/2000 18:8:12 [Reply]
• The ability to build industry. In RRT1 you could build industry in suitable area when you needed it. This would be great for when, for example, a tire factory never shows up. I also think that the purchase price of an industry should fluctuate with economic conditions and with the amount of profit that it generates. - Matt, 8/14/2000 3:31:49 [Reply]
  • YES! Being able to build industry would be good. I think you would have to make it more expensive then buyng existing industry though. And the price of an industry should vary depending on how well it's doing. An industry that is doing poor should not cost the same as one that is gushing cash. If you could buy a poor industry and then supply it making it profitable and then sell it for more money would be far more realistic, and a great way to make more money. If you could buy industry as an individual would be good as well. Being able to buy industry from other companies or individuals (if that option was there) the same way that you make a bid for merging rail roads.. - rrjohnson, 9/11/2000 17:57:13 [Reply]
• Multiple Locos So you can three or four locos on one train - Peter, 8/12/2000 20:20:21 [Reply]
• Scaling tools - It does rock managing a huge train network (mostly what we have been doing), But it would also rock to control a small mountain railroad, or other small situation (I haven't played Add on where I understand there are small urban settings?). In these smaller settings trains should act more like direct line usage, IE sidings must be used for passing trains, Y's and loops must be used to turn trains around, industry specific sidings(no "station" needed, just place track next to industry, then industry accumulates freight) - Brian, 8/11/2000 16:59:25 [Reply]
• Train Management tools. Once your empire starts getting large, or you take over companies finding what trains are where is tedious. Grouping flags should be relatively quick and easy, you can put trains into your own groups, then only view a group at a time. Also I would like to be able to customize the color of passenger train/cars IE sunset limited Orange and Black, or other. - Brian, 8/11/2000 16:53:57 [Reply]
• INSERT! I would like to be able to insert a station in the middle of a consist. This would also allow replacing a station with another station. This is espically useful when you find that demand is dropping at a station that processes a commodity, and you want to move that processing step to another station. - jlong, 8/11/2000 15:4:38 [Reply]
  • Already possible. In my version (RT2 linux), select a station on the map, *KEEP* the mouse button down, and move the pointer over the routing list. A bogey will show the insertion point - J.P.vanBolhuis, 8/24/2000 4:56:47 [Reply]
  • As a side note, this would also be useful for cases where you don't like the route a train is taking, and you would like to insert waypoints. - jlong, 8/11/2000 15:7:16 [Reply]
• SUBLISTS! I would like filters for the train lists and station lists. For instance, a train list that only shows the trains that go to a particular station, or only the trains that are hauling a certain type of commodity. - jlong, 8/11/2000 15:1:28 [Reply]
• There should be at least one EXISTING loco or emu or dmu from every country in the game. Why not assign different jobs to players in one company: one is CEO, the other is traffic manager and another is train engineer. - CBJ, 8/5/2000 7:24:19 [Reply]
• I think there should be different kinds of curves, for example curves with a radius of 5 kilometers which would be less flexible in the game but allow higher speeds (300 km/h), and curves with a radius of only 300 meters but only allow low speeds (90 km/h). Also some lines allow greater speeds than others, but are more expensive. 200 km/h lines weren't available before 1955 I think. When you build a new line in 1990, you should be able to determine if the line allows 90 or 120 or 160 or 200 or 300 km/h... There should be different overhead wires: 15 kV/AC introduced in 1912, 1500 V/DC in 1920, 3 kV/DC in 1930 and 25 kV/AC in 1954. More volts mean cheaper wires, but not all electric trains support those different voltages. - CBJ, 8/5/2000 7:21:32 [Reply]
  • Yeah. Less sharp curves would be difficult to do, but could vastly improve realism. Then give a chance to specify end points for a section of new track and then allow specification of max gradient, min curve radius between them, with a survey giving a choice of cheapest or shortest route for that gradient and min curve. - DrArsenal, 11/23/2000 11:28:6 [Reply]
    • When using Sub-contractors for building track make it take time, require shipping supplies (rail, ties, food). It took two years for the Great Northern to build the line from Havre, MT. to Seattle WA. (800 miles over two sets of mountains). - David Wise, 12/12/2000 1:28:54 [Reply]
    • Also, when gradients are displayed, there should be an arrow to show which direction is uphill: with RR2 on moderate gradients it isn't always possible to tell except by seeing the direction in which trains slow down! - DrArsenal, 11/27/2000 6:0:19 [Reply]
• ok maybe this has been said alrdy, but there should be a tool to let you designate main lines, because if you make a route to a coal mine and it goes a shorter distance than say the main line the trains will use the coal mine route even though it might have a steeper grade, just make it so you can have main lines setup so you tell your trains where to go - chase, 8/4/2000 16:52:10 [Reply]
  • That has already been done in the expansion pack and in the gold edition in the form of waypoints. Even tho TopPop have gone to some lenghts to improve this, it could be done better as its a tedious task to reroute a whole heap of trains around a busy intersection that its not vital they go through. - Rich, 10/5/2000 21:58:19 [Reply]
    • Waypoints have helped with this, but on the routing screen, I can't always pick out the various tracks in a crowded area: the ability to zoom in on the routing screen or place waypoints on the main screen would help. - DrArsenal, 11/23/2000 11:4:55 [Reply]
• I am just wondering if the company (Poptop) even reading this wish list, when they already said they are not going to make RT3 in any forseeable future, aren't we wasting our time ? Maybe better off getting hook with some other game, slowly we going to like it. - confuse, 8/3/2000 8:49:6 [Reply]
  • I think they will investigate what will be popular and try to guage a level of interest in a subject - It is an expensive business producing a game, PopTop will have eighteen months work to get a new title out and a large amount of money, they will be looking at a niumber of possibilities - RRT has a couple of advantages, it is a good rail sim and it is a good business sim - put together it is great game, thye'd be silly to ignore it.. - Dudley Brooke, 8/6/2000 6:37:29 [Reply]
• a better choice of locos. A place to send locos for maintanence; works or a seperate depot. Sidings to hold slow frieght and high speed lines. Different voltages and border stations where a certain loco comes off and another goes on i.e. when gauge or voltage changes. Liveries need to be introduced and the works would help here if you need to repaint a loco or change the livery like when the USSR split. Bridges, tunnels and more interaction with roads like level crossings. The level crossings should be optional so you need to make them to increase safety. Russian locos they are fascinating and broad gauge. You should be able to produce a separate part of your company to make say a narrow gauge island railway. Varieties of coaches and units - Findus, 8/3/2000 7:54:7 [Reply]
  • When talking about defining train priority, it would be good if i could set it dependent on the leg of a journey. For example, a coal-steel-goods haul could have a slow-slow-normal priority. This could be achieved by allowing definition of priority in the routing screen, dependent on the station (just like one can do now with the cargo handling [the flags]) - J.P. van Bolhuis, 8/24/2000 4:52:54 [Reply]
  • Why would grade crossings increase safety? This maybe a stupid question but working for a railroad I know that grade crossings are NOT safe. Rather overpasses or underpass should be the options. - C. Schanbacher, 8/3/2000 17:0:25 [Reply]
    • I would assume he meant grade crossing improve safety over unmarked, unimproved crossings. (IE the farm road with only a sign versus a road with flashing lights, and gates) - Brian, 8/11/2000 16:32:28 [Reply]
• hi as someone mentioned earlier, there needs to be a way to manage your trains better. with a large fleet of engines, you can't be wasting all your time replacing locos. maybe a option where your engine automatically replaces itself - chase, 8/2/2000 0:15:21 [Reply]
  • Yes, there needs to be a better way to replace aging trains rather than one at a time. It'd be nice to see some type of query option, where you could select a model and replace all trains at the age of X and over and that carry cargos you specify in their routes. For example, replacing all 12 year old & older passenger and mail trains w/ a new Atlantic loco. - Jeff Hollifield, 10/15/2000 6:13:19 [Reply]
    • OTOH, I would like more realism: locos can only appear where you have a works to build them or a port to import them. If you want them somewhere else, you have to run them from the works or port to where you want them before you can use them. - DrArsenal, 11/23/2000 11:44:40 [Reply]
• I am glad someon has metioned UNITS and LIVERIES two things that would help the game. - Laddie, 8/1/2000 10:12:29 [Reply]
• I need to run a frieght double headed (two locos pulling on frieght) this would make it easier and provide more power. I wanna see the publics reaction to the railway and know how to improve it. If diesel or electric units were introduced we would need the capability to run them in multiple to lengthen say a 4 car set to 8 cars. Definitely a narrow gauge and museum area of the system. I think liveries are needed for my trains to be told apart from the other players - Young, 8/1/2000 10:6:15 [Reply]
• Good idea to send trains to works and maybe change the engine in the train for a better one. Should we not get the right trains for the right country it would be more realistic. Units is a very very good idea and I also think more advice on working trains would be good - King T, 8/1/2000 10:1:51 [Reply]
• DIESEL AND ELECTRIC UNITS - they should be available in 2,3,4,6 car sets that can be used on branch lines and stopping services, it would stop the confusion with faster services. Trains should be labeled as Regional/Inter City and Express City. - Chris, 8/1/2000 9:56:5 [Reply]
• I think there should be a place to put a depot and works that you must build (not in a station) where trains must be overhauled every 3 years. You should be able to store and scrap locos after 30 years. There should be facilities for players to make a museum and have active museum locos after all they disappear after a while. There should be a narrow gauge/third rail/different voltage types of track this would allow the use of dual voltage locos and narrow gauge steam for smaller towns. There should be more large city scenarios with tram and underground as extras. - Dave, 8/1/2000 9:49:28 [Reply]
  • The idea of having a back shop for heavy repairs is excellent. But DonT believes the the government should set a maxinum period say of ten years. The player should be able to set a policy requiring more frequent repairs based on time since the last heavy overhaul or miles traveled since last overhaul. Operating costs should increase at a compound rate as the engine accumlates milage. - DonT, 8/3/2000 19:33:16 [Reply]
    • Yeah, but at the moment, engines are so cheap that they can easily pay for themselves in a year: so if that wasn't dealt with you could just replace them all the time. Make the engine and the waggons more expensive so they (virtually) always have to do very many journeys to pay for themselves. Haul fuel to where they are refuelled. Haul steel to the works where engines and waggons are built... - DrArsenal, 11/23/2000 11:37:39 [Reply]
• I think you should get 4 times as many trains, and trains that relate to that particular country. Designing your own trains, making liveries so the TGV sets look better and all trains match. Selecting coaches for your railway and more metra scenarios. I agree with track companies working for you like the French do. Also tunnels and a possible underground scenarios - John, 8/1/2000 9:43:19 [Reply]
  • There should be marshalling yard capabilities and you should be able to control freight between cities because they block the main passenger stations. Storage sidings and different types of frieght car. - John, 8/1/2000 9:53:37 [Reply]
• FLY OVER (bridge) to avoid congestion and LOOP line for overtaking the slower trains would be nice. - railboss, 7/31/2000 10:28:34 [Reply]
  • A loop would reverse the direction of the overtaking train, not allow it to pass. DonT would assume that you are referring to sidings, in effect a short piece of double track. These are highly important. But their function of allowing opposing trains to meet is even more important then allowing trains to pass. - DonT, 7/31/2000 19:56:8 [Reply]
    • Unless the RR engine become immensly more complicated passing siding and loops and Y's are pretty much mute points. The game engine currently assumes you have a passing track whereever you need it (hence your train turns grey and one train continues and the other stops) Loops and Y's are simply the train reversing on itself when it gets to a juntion where it needs to go the other way. The SCALE of the game is to large for these types of individual items. The most notable exception to this rule was during the Northwest Teddy tour, where you felt like the scale was small enough where these items maybe should appear. As for Fly Over's (I assume you mean an extra main line to avoid congestion inside cities) Triple track, is that too much? - Brian, 8/11/2000 16:43:30 [Reply]
      • A flyover means a track going over another on a bridge. - Juhana Siren, 8/22/2000 9:32:46 [Reply]
        • Fly-over bridges would be REALLy helpful. - Steven B., 12/20/2000 0:3:36 [Reply]
        • I think the game would be better if it DIDNT act as if you had a passing loop wherever you needed it. If there isn't track free, the train shouldn't be able to move there. Faster trains should only be able to pass slower trains at passing loops, quad track, stations etc, which cost money. - DrArsenal, 11/24/2000 8:40:14 [Reply]
• I would like to hire a track construction company to build my track. When there would be several construction companies, you could negotiate the best price. - R. Vlasblom, 7/31/2000 1:56:56 [Reply]
  • .. Meaning that you can ask them to build track between 2 cities over a period of time for a fixed price, so I can focus on running my company - R. Vlasblom, 7/31/2000 1:58:20 [Reply]
    • Nice. And you could have railways controlled by construction companies, so the construction co makes a profit in building it, then sells a railway that will never be able to make enough profits to pay off its debts to anyone stupid enough to buy it.... - DrArsenal, 11/24/2000 8:43:55 [Reply]
• Hi. In RRT3 I would like to have control over a company when I own more than 50 % of their shares, as in the normal world. Therefor being able to regulate dividend payment and see more information about their trains etc. I also would like to run more than one company at the same time, therefor increasing my personal wealth (if it goes okay) - R. Vlasblom, 7/31/2000 1:55:10 [Reply]
• Develop a Linux version concurrently - I use Loki's excellent port of RT2 - I like the graphics, but I would like to see more detailed and larger playing area - most PCs make short work of RT2 now Tunnels and bridges are a must, there is no way to do the Alps without, don't use DirectPlay for the next version as I can't network to the Windows version, neither can Mac users. More engine options, more everything, but keep it accurate More of the same, but bigger and better - Dudley Brooke, 7/30/2000 17:43:51 [Reply]
  • Another idea regarding layability and realism - It would be nice to assign an engine to a group, for example mainline express - when a new loco became available this group could be down graded or moved to another operation, finally to have your oldest locomotives sold off to another company or for scrap, with large games at the moment you can spend the whole time updating your Locomotives, I just like to watch the trains now and again :-) - Dudley Brooke, 8/1/2000 10:24:49 [Reply]
• How about draw bridges. They could be set up to open for shipping at just the would times to create maxinum choas in the schedule. Also the ability to build high bridges like the Huey P Long bridge over navigatable water ways. High cost and long long approaches. - DonT, 7/29/2000 18:0:11 [Reply]
• Bridges and tunnels - the ability to cross a track with a bridge. - Chris Stark, 7/29/2000 14:35:59 [Reply]
  • Absolutely! The lack of these always strikes me as idiotic. What is more romantic about trains than tunnels and bridges! This is a must. - Tyler, 8/11/2000 12:53:49 [Reply]
• Another thought struck me, why not have an undergound rail system ability later in the game to relieve that blasted congestion in large City's one always has to kill of customers to get in another track or double track, Or we need a means to relieve congestion in large City, my fingernails get a hammering when I see 36 trains bearing down onto one terminal, creating a star topology into the terminal and bypasses dont work that well because you still only have one track into the station and you still have tonnes of frieght and passenger backlog waiting. Monorail perhaps may be an option for the latter stages of the game, Also sheduling is a must however game time needs to be slowed down for this I think. My passengers demand a time table. - CrazyH (Rob Dreijer), 7/29/2000 10:37:30 [Reply]
  • There should be MORE need to demolish buildings to get tracks into and through a city, but with the ability to rebuild them elsewhere in the city (at a price, of course), so there is the real comprimise of a city centre station at huge cost, or one further out that was cheaper but generates less revenue. - DrArsenal, 11/23/2000 11:51:25 [Reply]
    • Ah yes, and rather than a simple boundary of the station's coverage, you get more revenue the closer the station is to the industry/housing, and the reason to build a bigger station is to handle more goods/passengers rather than to cover a bigger area. And all housing has SOME demand for passengers and mail (not just if near three other houses...). - DrArsenal, 11/23/2000 11:56:11 [Reply]
  • Absolutely! This is such a pain to deal with...love the underground idea - Tyler, 8/11/2000 12:48:22 [Reply]
  • What would interest me is the ability to create multiple tracks within stations. The maximum number could be restricted with the size of the station. Another interesting thing would be the separation of passengers and cargo in accordance with the ability to control the speed with which passengers and cargo are handled. This would be interesting when combined with customer satisfaction for instance - Geert-Jan van der Wolf, 8/8/2000 17:44:34 [Reply]