Beiträge von Steve

RABDe 12/12 Mirage: 60%
Re 450 Pendelzug : 77%
Dualstoxx: 59%
Metroliner: 39%
Speedance Express: 44%

Btw: Alle Loks im Durchschnitt: 60-63% (Die LNER Class A4 sogar 100% o.O)

Zitat von fred1690

Im Kern fehlen noch die Kosten

Verglichen mit dem Re 450 und dem Dualstoxx würde ich einen Preis pro Kopf(Realwert) von ca. 4300cr. als grobe Richtung empfehlen. Als Betriebskosten würde ich 55-65% des Kaufpreises veranschlagen.
Würde bedeuten:
3-Tlg: ca 1,53M, 915k/Jahr
4-Tlg: ca 2,05M, 1,23M/Jahr
5-Tlg: ca 2,55M, 1,53M/Jahr

(Re 450: 5.300cr. pro Kopf, 77% Betriebskosten; Dualstoxx: 4.500cr pro Kopf, 59% Betriebskosten)

Ja, zu 95%. Dafür ist der Wert "ratedVmax". Er gibt quasi an was zur Zeit die zu erwartende Höchstgeschwindigkeit ist. Liegt ein Zug darunter wird er billiger und umgekehrt.
Beispiel: ratedVmax liegt um 1920 bei 120. Ein Zug der so schnell fährt wird mit 100% bewertet. Fährt er nur 60km/h --> 50%.
Um 2000 ratedVmax --> 200. Zug(200km/h) --> 100%, Zug(120km/h) --> 60%

Version 1.7 ist ab sofort online.

Im großen und ganzen bin ich zufrieden mit den Berechnungen und den Zahlen die raus kommen.
Zur Zeit teste ich das Script in allen Epochen auf verschiedenen Maps und Schwierigkeitsgraden.

Dazu habe ich den Testmodus eingefügt der in der config.file de-/aktiviert werden kann. So werden nützliche Daten als Beschreibung eingefügt.

Calculations: Errechnete Werte die zur Berechnung benötigt werden
Vanilla Finance: Ursprüngliche Werte mit Vergleich zu den gemoddeten in %.
Data: Zusätzliche Werte zum besseren Vergleichen

Hey Guys,

for last days i worked out this formula. Im not 100% fine with it but its the best one so far and with you help it can be the final one.

For the price:

$/kW = 450 - (year.from - 1850)


price =  (power * $/kW) + 200000

The price for 1 kW starts at 450$ and decreases by 1 per year (300 @ 2000). Multiplied with power, the Spanisch-Brötli-Bahn would cost 22.500$ so i added 200.000$.
For me it works fine through the years with some exceptions.

For the running.costs its more complicated a bit:

rated.Vmax = year.from - 1800


if rated.Vmax < 100 
 then cost.amount = 60 / 100 * rated.Vmax
 else cost.amount = 60
end


running.costs = price / 100 * cost.amount

To take the top.speed into account i created the value "rated.Vmax". It simulates a rough direction how fast a train can be for each year.
Then i set a fix percentage to calculate the costs in dependency of the price (60%). This percentage is reduced by the rated.Vmax value in percentage if it is less than 100.

Here are some examples:

D 1/3 Spanisch-Brötli-Bahn (40km/h, 50kW) $222.500 / $106.800 per year
2-8-2 Mikado (80km/h, 1173kW) $671.546 / $328.920 per year
BR 103 (200km/h, 5940kW) $2.189.900 / $1.313.940 per year
HHP 8 ( 217km/h, 6000kW) $1.940.000 / $1.1640.000 per year

Im ok with that so far. The only problem i see is, high powered but slow locos can be way too expensive as:

Re 6/6 (140km/h, 7237 kW) $2.573.736 / $1.256.941 per year

What do you think?

edit: damn it, i forgot the capacity for multiple units. just keep in mind its added to the price.

bam, einfach mal so eine Bombe aus dem Ärmel schütteln...

Meines Wissens versteht das Spiel unter Bankrott eine rote Zahl in der "Echtzeit" Bilanz oben links. Sobald die rot ist bist du "Bankrott". Allerdings weis ich nicht ob 1 Sekunde schon reicht.

OnkelTom, wenn du schon ständig auf Wikipedia verweist und darauf drängst, dass Train Fever eine Wirtschaftssimulation ist, was sagt denn besagte Seite zu diesem Ausdruck?

Zitat

Als Wirtschaftssimulation (auch WiSim) wird ein Computerspiel bezeichnet, welches wirtschaftliche Zusammenhänge oft stark vereinfacht simuliert. Das Computerspiel ist damit eine Sonderform einer Wirtschaftssimulation und dient als Spiel vor allem Unterhaltungszwecken, seltener auch Ausbildungszwecken.

God damn. I need holidays, or sleep.
Youre right. I must have been blind.

With power as a basic value its much easier to handle MUs because power gets added unlike speed.

Zitat von Anachron13

to be honest i think the most important thing is the maintenance cost.

Yes thats true. But runningCosts are better to handle i guess. TF takes nearly every loc 60-63% of price. I think this can be well used as a basic value.

[quote='Steve','http://www.train-fever.net/index.php/Thread/3388-script-Cost-Price-Balancer/?postID=56223#post56223']

Lets say the all trains may have the same price and same power(lets say 6000kW), what is the price for MU if the loc is 2.00M and the coach is 20k?

1. Loc + Coach + Coach + Coach + Coach + Coach =
The price overall is 2.1M for 1 x loc and 5 x coaches.

2. MU(Loc) + Coach + Coach + Coach + MU(Loc)
The price for the coach is the same because nothing changes. (3 x 20k = 60k). That means the price of both MUs together is the difference betwenn 2.1M and 60k. (2.04M).
So each MU cost 1.02M at 3000kW (340cr./kW)

3. MU(Loc) + Coach + MU(Mid) + Coach + MU(Loc)
Now we have 2 coaches (40k) and 3 MUs (2.06M). MU Price: about 687k at 2000kW (343,5cr./kW)

4. MU(Loc) + MU(Mid) + MU(Mid) + MU(Mid) + MU(Loc)
And now? MU Price: 420k at 1200kW (350cr./kW)

What do i want to say?
If you calculate the whole train, its no problem using the cr./kW value. It probably still work with variant 2.
But for variant 3 and 4 its not possible. Thats why all 4 variants can not have the same price at same stats.

.....wait, am i completly wrong now?! i need a coffee.....:D

Zitat von Anachron13

If you can achieve this kind of result, you also probably mostly solved all you trouble with multiple units that have more than one engine.

Hm, ill try to achieve it.

Zitat von Anachron13

From a game balancing point of view, i think so yes

Im afraid its impossible. Let me do some math.

Zitat von Xanos

If the second case is true, it is complete irrelevant how emus can be organized

Das script greift auf jede .mdl einzeln zu. Das Spiel rechnet also automatisch den Gesamtpreis usw. aus. Das eigentliche Problem ist leider erst erkennbar wenn man das alles mal durchrechnet. Lass mich kurz ein paar Zahlen vorbereiten.

Zitat von Xanos

I'm currently at work so I can't test it but isn't it possible to just loop through all models and calculate there prices regardless if there have a multipleUnitOnly tag or not?

No, its not a problem. Thats the only way it works. The current problem with pre-configured trains is to know how much motored units are in there to adjust its price. But probably its the better way to get the balanced price at the time its calculated and then let the game add them together.

Zitat von Anachron13

I think loc with capacity entry should not be treated differently than loc without. I mean, a loc with 4000kw, a vmax of 200 and 50 passengers should be treated as a loc with the same power + a coach with a capacity of 50.

Im confused because Im not sure if we mean the same when we are speaking about multiple units. The german translation can be "Triebwagen", which is a single motored vehicle with capacity, and "Triebzug" which is the whole Train . Just for me to understand:

There are at least 4 variants of multiple units (train) possible:

1. Loc + Coach + Coach + Coach + Coach + Coach (i.e. RE450)
2. MU(Loc) + Coach + Coach + Coach + MU(Loc) (TGV)
3. MU(Loc) + Coach + MU(Mid) + Coach + MU(Loc) (ETR 1000)
4. MU(Loc) + MU(Mid) + MU(Mid) + MU(Mid) + MU(Loc) (BR 423)

If it all got same stats (TopSpeed, Power, Capacity,...), should it really have the same price?

Zitat von Anachron13

A loc B with the same stat as loc A but available 10 years later will cost more. It seems to me that it make no sense

I agree, its not logical.
I´ve tried many, many formulas and with TopSpeed as a basic value i´ve got the best results. Please let me know what you think:

A 1965 BR 103 (200km/h, 5940kW),
a 1972s Re 6/6 (140km/h, 7237kW) and
a 2010 Vectron (200km/h, 6400kW)

What prices/costs would you expect, just about?

Zitat von Anachron13

The ideal would be that for the TGV example, the price of the two 4400kw / 300km/h loc cost a just a bit more than a single 8800kw/ 300km/h loc.

Hm, another good question. Hmm....

Zitat von Anachron13

If my quick calculation are right, having the max speed go from 200 to 300km/h make the maintenance cost skyrocket.

Yes, skyrocket is the right term! Thats why i disabled multipleunits and implement a kind of dimishing return for MaxSpeed in the next version.

Im working hard to find a way to implement the calculation of MultipleUnits. If there wouldnt be these conditions the TGV´s or other MU´s price would be too much unbalanced. The reason is:
-there are MU-waggons with/without "engines" entry and with/without power,
-there are MU-locos with/without "capacity" entry,
-and in all MultipleUnits are different numbers of each kind,
These things, and the fact im a script-newb, makes it hard for me to code. But i think i found a way.

So feel free to delete the conditions you want and tell me your experience. (Maybe its ok. Couldnt test it.)

Unfortunately im quite busy this week but be sure ill take a look on the formula this weekend.

I wanna thank you much for brainstorming and finding issues. I appreciate and i will care as soon as i get some time.

i would really like to enter the age into the formula. But after many tries in early versions i decided to keep it as much simple as possible because the more variables there are, the more unexpected issues are possible.

But if you create a simple solution i will implement it.

I agree and have removed the power/weight ration of the formula. I´ve adjusted the formula as well. See the image attached above.

I also did find TGV-bug´s reason. The waggons do have a array "engines = {}" but without any value so the sript calculated it like a loco. I´ve fixed it.

In very early versions i did try to implement "year.from" value but it would be too complicated to balance it with really old locos. Maybe i´ll give it another try later.

The reason why BB7200 is more expensive per year than BB2600 is the power/weight ratio which is worse. A good ratio benefits running costs. The thought was, an hard working engine needs more maintenance. But i see this can cause inexplicable differences. Ill work on it.

I like the idea to implement a cap for the speed. But this is not the problem. Its the way the script works. I have to find a way to calculate multiple units correctly.

Thx

Waggons bleiben im Moment noch unangetastet. Aber wenn es soweit ist wird die Kapazität sicherlich eine Rolle spielen.
Im Moment gilt es erstmal die bisherige Formel zu testen um herauszufinden ob das so überhaupt praktikabel ist.
Sollte ein vernünftiges Testen jedoch nicht möglich sein werde ich natürlich vorher noch die Waggons einbeziehen.

Willst du das er besser aus dem Stand (bis ca 30-50km/h) beschleunigt musst du die Anfahrzugkraft erhöhen.
Soll er eher "von hinten raus" besser beschleunigen (ab ca 50km/h) brauch er mehr Leistung.

Genau, Triebwagen müssen auf jeden Fall anders berechnet werden.
Die Formel und das Erstellen des Scripts hat bisher enorm viel Zeit in Anspruch genommen. Deshalb habe ich mich entschieden es so erstmal zu veröffentlichen um Meinungen/Anregungen/Verbesserungsvorschläge einzuholen.

Ich habe einen eigenen Thread dazu erstellt um die Ordnung zu wahren.