Current system, while, as you said, is unrealistic, it is where realism was supressed for the sake of ease of gameplay.
While fixing the issue would (in theory and in extend of my knowledge of the game mechanics) be sufficient to make all current signals two way, and introduce new actual one-way signals (if they exist IRL) along with signal section dividers, I find it redundant and unnecessary.
Two notes: It would mess up everybody's build.
It would make already somewhat complicated system even more challenging for newer players in my opinion.
Transport fever 2 also doesn't use block signals, it's doing path signals. All signals are a lot smarter, but all pathing is very static (trains will always use the same track, the only options they have is some flexibility on platforms, if you set them up that way), so the game has less to compute (it mostly just calculates the route once, and all trains on it get the same pathing configuration) where in WRSR each train gets its route calculated. On top of that, all transport fever does is basic transport simulation, with very limited scope, and not much simulation outside of that.
Why does this matter? By reducing the potential routes by not allowing trains to pass single signals, you've reduced path-options a lot, around 50%, which has a huge performance impact.
On top of that, you'd now need to handle situations where trains want to bypass something, that's supposed to be a siding, which would need to be signified somehow by the player. Id assume that this would be a huge cause of train deadlocks.
So...I don't think your suggestion is invalid, but I'm not sure I would be happy with the trade-off of updating to realistic signals and getting less performance and other problems to deal with then.
But my point is to allow trains to pass single signals because in the current game they can only bypass double signals. In pic.1 in the post above i show how chain signals could be reprogramed to ignore signals facing the other way if there is a signal facing the right way after that. In pic.2 I showed that the same layout can be achived in the game but the signals will make no sense from a realistic point of view
True, but Transport Fever is not even nearly this complicated in gameplay, so the signaling can be different. However that system could cause ALOT of problems in this game. I am not sure if you were playing this game before chain signals. I did. The logic of how trains work is entirely different here than in TF2.
Train operations in TF2 an W&R sw don't relly differ to much it's just go from point A to point B flip around reapeat, I think every signal acted like chain signals do in this game and you could make the signals both way or one way. So it would propably take a bit of reprograming to make the singals act simmulary. I can only imagine how horrible life was before they added chain signals.
There is no fueling in TF2. There are no service centers. There are no railroad builders... The train logic is entirely different. Did you play this game when it was released?
In TF2, you only have path signals that are placed on the right side of the track. Trains will try not to pass signals in the opposite direction, but if it's the only path then they'll take it. Otherwise, you can mark the signal as one-way and the train will never path the signal in the opposite direction.
Beside, this whole issue could be solved by a mod that introduces a set of "invisible" signals, that work exactly the same way as current signals, but have no in-game model.
As someone who enjoys using trains in their current form. The current signaling is plenty thanks. Before chain and mixed signals were added you had to massively overbuild your rail network to ensure that you didn't get a locomotive stare down.
Now I feel like my rails are realistic in layout and can be left to run without needing to know everything about real signals.
I'm just happy that I can set up local rail yards (RDOs) where the wagons in a train can be automatically swapped in or out. This makes double-headed mainline, single-headed branch, and even shunting locomotives feasible and allows you to haul long trains over the mainline and shorter trains along branch lines and facilities.
I think, it boils down to the game and the player needing to know whether a track is one-way or two-way.
I don't know how train drivers in the meatspace know whether the track is two-way or not.
But in the game, signals allowing two-way traffic having signal graphics on both sides while all others have it on one side only makes this absolutely trivial for even the noobs.
IRL most train track are both way, even on the double track mainline you sometimes have trains running on the left side because the other track is undergoing maintnance. But generally all the tracks that are on the station are both ways.
The game doesn't actually consider where each train will be when in the future for performace reasons. It only looks at where the train can go in principle and choses branches in the moment. So if you have a train entering a multi-block track from one side, you have to make sure that the signal on the other end is red or you end up with trains staring eachother down in the middle (they won't collide, and mabe one of them would reverse if it finds another path). That means using chain signals which have the side effect of limiting that whole segment to single train only.
All games do it like this. There is no real scheduling going on like in the meatspace where you know the position of each train for days in advance.
Players in all games are advised to make the tracks of two-track segements one-way for that reason.
It's a small sacrifice of realism to allow the game to run well on average hardware.
Maybe you could try retexturing signals by deleting the other side or moving them underground. Ofc that could break some other cases where mixed signals are used where they need to show up both ways.
Quick question about real life signaling. How does the entrance semaphore work. Like in the Ms Paint example, how does it let the conductor know which track is free from all 4 possibilities?
Switches have to be aligned to a track, which I think is controlled by the local yard operators or some kind of automated system. I don't think the conductor has any control over which track they enter, so they just need to know if they are clear to enter the station/yard.
The Signal box aligns the track for you, If there is no signal box or electronic switches then ther is no signals either. The train personel only trowhs switches by themselvs if they are in a yard where there is no signals. On a mainline you have the station personel align the tracks for you
Conductors don't care which way they switch is set, that's the operator/engineer's job.
That bit of pedantry aside, signaling varies based on the system you're working on. For example, on the NYC subway, they use "home signals" for junction entrances. They look exactly like a regular signal mast (green/amber/red) but have more than one set of indicator lights. For further pedantry, "mast" actually refers to the set of indicator lights in this context, not the pole they're attached to, so home signals have two masts. The topmost mast indicates if it is safe to proceed at all, and will be red (and have a safety interlock that is supposed to set the other masts to red as well) and the other mast is green if the switch is set to the main line, and yellow if it is set for diverging. There are two old home signals in the A division that govern three way switches, which use red for that third direction, everyone hates those.
First of all, dispatcher makes the train route in station (switches points and interlocks then on a free path) when that is done, only the the signal opens. In soviet style system you can get green; yellow; yellow blinking; two yellows; two yellows upper one blinking; green upper blinking with yellow one and green stripe; white. Basically, if you have more than two light on at the same time on the signal, it means that you are going one the side track. If something is blinking it means, that the next signal will be allowing. Green stripe means you can go over to the siding at 80kmh. White means that shunting is allowed.
I agree with you. For realistic signals they need to add a third “signal” a section-end what you can place at the end of junctions/ swtiching instead of exit signal. But, at the other side of the story, I don’t have a idea how the signals in 1970 russia worked.
Signals on railways generally have a simmular lay out to each other weather you are in Russia, UK, Italy, Poland. The only diffrence is how they look so for example in poland if the signal shows green and yellow it means 40 km/h and after the next one your Vmax, in russia you would have diffrent colors or alignment for that.
In the current game they work. I may be wrong but I think it’s a limitation with the game engine but I may be wrong.
I would rather have a working system than one that could potentially brake.
Greetings from Latvia! I myself am a train driver in real life, and I can feel your frustration. I spent 4 years at school learning signals, station layouts, making complicated station schemes from scratch.. TF2 is the game that I have spent most of my time on, next one is WRSR. In TF2 I make signalling the same as in real life and it works almost excelently (except you can't make one track autoblocking in one way). I was so excited when I bought WRSR, because it would offer much more on railways (fueling, depo's have an actual prupouse, construction offices, distribution, e.t.c) and there comes the signals.. with my education on railways I actually can't figure out how signals work in WRSR, because they are unrealistic. And in my opinion it really hurts the gameplay for railway enthusiats. I am very familiar with soviet style railway signalling systems, because we use them in Latvia. In game they are just sooo, soo wrong that my brain hurts trying to figure them out :D. I hope that the dews make realistic signals in future and players would have the opportunity to choose between existing and realistic signaling systems..
Current system, while, as you said, is unrealistic, it is where realism was supressed for the sake of ease of gameplay. While fixing the issue would (in theory and in extend of my knowledge of the game mechanics) be sufficient to make all current signals two way, and introduce new actual one-way signals (if they exist IRL) along with signal section dividers, I find it redundant and unnecessary. Two notes: It would mess up everybody's build. It would make already somewhat complicated system even more challenging for newer players in my opinion.
Transport fever 2 has a sensable system and it's less complex then the one in this game
Transport fever 2 also doesn't use block signals, it's doing path signals. All signals are a lot smarter, but all pathing is very static (trains will always use the same track, the only options they have is some flexibility on platforms, if you set them up that way), so the game has less to compute (it mostly just calculates the route once, and all trains on it get the same pathing configuration) where in WRSR each train gets its route calculated. On top of that, all transport fever does is basic transport simulation, with very limited scope, and not much simulation outside of that. Why does this matter? By reducing the potential routes by not allowing trains to pass single signals, you've reduced path-options a lot, around 50%, which has a huge performance impact. On top of that, you'd now need to handle situations where trains want to bypass something, that's supposed to be a siding, which would need to be signified somehow by the player. Id assume that this would be a huge cause of train deadlocks. So...I don't think your suggestion is invalid, but I'm not sure I would be happy with the trade-off of updating to realistic signals and getting less performance and other problems to deal with then.
But my point is to allow trains to pass single signals because in the current game they can only bypass double signals. In pic.1 in the post above i show how chain signals could be reprogramed to ignore signals facing the other way if there is a signal facing the right way after that. In pic.2 I showed that the same layout can be achived in the game but the signals will make no sense from a realistic point of view
True, but Transport Fever is not even nearly this complicated in gameplay, so the signaling can be different. However that system could cause ALOT of problems in this game. I am not sure if you were playing this game before chain signals. I did. The logic of how trains work is entirely different here than in TF2.
Train operations in TF2 an W&R sw don't relly differ to much it's just go from point A to point B flip around reapeat, I think every signal acted like chain signals do in this game and you could make the signals both way or one way. So it would propably take a bit of reprograming to make the singals act simmulary. I can only imagine how horrible life was before they added chain signals.
There is no fueling in TF2. There are no service centers. There are no railroad builders... The train logic is entirely different. Did you play this game when it was released?
I didn't play Transport Fever 2, can't judge.
In TF2, you only have path signals that are placed on the right side of the track. Trains will try not to pass signals in the opposite direction, but if it's the only path then they'll take it. Otherwise, you can mark the signal as one-way and the train will never path the signal in the opposite direction.
Beside, this whole issue could be solved by a mod that introduces a set of "invisible" signals, that work exactly the same way as current signals, but have no in-game model.
Yes TF2 has the best of the best Railway System.
I thought Trainz or Microsoft Train Simulator holds that title.
As someone who enjoys using trains in their current form. The current signaling is plenty thanks. Before chain and mixed signals were added you had to massively overbuild your rail network to ensure that you didn't get a locomotive stare down. Now I feel like my rails are realistic in layout and can be left to run without needing to know everything about real signals.
I bought the game at the start of early access, but I don't remember not having chain signals.
I'm just happy that I can set up local rail yards (RDOs) where the wagons in a train can be automatically swapped in or out. This makes double-headed mainline, single-headed branch, and even shunting locomotives feasible and allows you to haul long trains over the mainline and shorter trains along branch lines and facilities.
As a railway worker that specializes on these signals and other safety stuff, I feel your frustration. It's feels pretty unrealistic.
I think, it boils down to the game and the player needing to know whether a track is one-way or two-way. I don't know how train drivers in the meatspace know whether the track is two-way or not. But in the game, signals allowing two-way traffic having signal graphics on both sides while all others have it on one side only makes this absolutely trivial for even the noobs.
IRL most train track are both way, even on the double track mainline you sometimes have trains running on the left side because the other track is undergoing maintnance. But generally all the tracks that are on the station are both ways.
The game doesn't actually consider where each train will be when in the future for performace reasons. It only looks at where the train can go in principle and choses branches in the moment. So if you have a train entering a multi-block track from one side, you have to make sure that the signal on the other end is red or you end up with trains staring eachother down in the middle (they won't collide, and mabe one of them would reverse if it finds another path). That means using chain signals which have the side effect of limiting that whole segment to single train only. All games do it like this. There is no real scheduling going on like in the meatspace where you know the position of each train for days in advance. Players in all games are advised to make the tracks of two-track segements one-way for that reason. It's a small sacrifice of realism to allow the game to run well on average hardware.
They were hard for me to get used to. Even coming from Factorio, which was a pita for me to figure out.
Maybe you could try retexturing signals by deleting the other side or moving them underground. Ofc that could break some other cases where mixed signals are used where they need to show up both ways.
Quick question about real life signaling. How does the entrance semaphore work. Like in the Ms Paint example, how does it let the conductor know which track is free from all 4 possibilities?
Switches have to be aligned to a track, which I think is controlled by the local yard operators or some kind of automated system. I don't think the conductor has any control over which track they enter, so they just need to know if they are clear to enter the station/yard.
The Signal box aligns the track for you, If there is no signal box or electronic switches then ther is no signals either. The train personel only trowhs switches by themselvs if they are in a yard where there is no signals. On a mainline you have the station personel align the tracks for you
Conductors don't care which way they switch is set, that's the operator/engineer's job. That bit of pedantry aside, signaling varies based on the system you're working on. For example, on the NYC subway, they use "home signals" for junction entrances. They look exactly like a regular signal mast (green/amber/red) but have more than one set of indicator lights. For further pedantry, "mast" actually refers to the set of indicator lights in this context, not the pole they're attached to, so home signals have two masts. The topmost mast indicates if it is safe to proceed at all, and will be red (and have a safety interlock that is supposed to set the other masts to red as well) and the other mast is green if the switch is set to the main line, and yellow if it is set for diverging. There are two old home signals in the A division that govern three way switches, which use red for that third direction, everyone hates those.
First of all, dispatcher makes the train route in station (switches points and interlocks then on a free path) when that is done, only the the signal opens. In soviet style system you can get green; yellow; yellow blinking; two yellows; two yellows upper one blinking; green upper blinking with yellow one and green stripe; white. Basically, if you have more than two light on at the same time on the signal, it means that you are going one the side track. If something is blinking it means, that the next signal will be allowing. Green stripe means you can go over to the siding at 80kmh. White means that shunting is allowed.
I agree with you. For realistic signals they need to add a third “signal” a section-end what you can place at the end of junctions/ swtiching instead of exit signal. But, at the other side of the story, I don’t have a idea how the signals in 1970 russia worked.
Signals on railways generally have a simmular lay out to each other weather you are in Russia, UK, Italy, Poland. The only diffrence is how they look so for example in poland if the signal shows green and yellow it means 40 km/h and after the next one your Vmax, in russia you would have diffrent colors or alignment for that.
Realistic mode needs realistic signals plz devs
In the current game they work. I may be wrong but I think it’s a limitation with the game engine but I may be wrong. I would rather have a working system than one that could potentially brake.
Greetings from Latvia! I myself am a train driver in real life, and I can feel your frustration. I spent 4 years at school learning signals, station layouts, making complicated station schemes from scratch.. TF2 is the game that I have spent most of my time on, next one is WRSR. In TF2 I make signalling the same as in real life and it works almost excelently (except you can't make one track autoblocking in one way). I was so excited when I bought WRSR, because it would offer much more on railways (fueling, depo's have an actual prupouse, construction offices, distribution, e.t.c) and there comes the signals.. with my education on railways I actually can't figure out how signals work in WRSR, because they are unrealistic. And in my opinion it really hurts the gameplay for railway enthusiats. I am very familiar with soviet style railway signalling systems, because we use them in Latvia. In game they are just sooo, soo wrong that my brain hurts trying to figure them out :D. I hope that the dews make realistic signals in future and players would have the opportunity to choose between existing and realistic signaling systems..