Some ideas to make the metro even better!

[Metropolitan]

Hi everyone, it's been only 48 hours or so that I play the game and I really enjoy it. Thanks to the CO team for this! :happy:

First thing, I really enjoy the new layout system based on nods and vectors rather than a grid. That's really powerful when it comes to gameplayer's abilities. It made me think of some ideas to improve even more the metro system.



1. An additional 4-track rail layout with enough space to build platforms

The idea is just that instead of having 4 tracks stuck at each others (RRRR), there would be a bit of a space allowing to build middle platforms (R|RR|R). The result would be a bit like current game avenues with 4 tram tracks and 4 stations (see screenshot). Of course we can still do this in using one track and two track vectors, but it's quite tedious and not really pretty.

This is what exists for tramways on avenues. You can see 4 parallel tram stations.

This is what I could do switching between 4-track, 2-track and 1-track rail. Not very pretty and rather tedious to build.

2. Underground train depots

Personally I find it fine that metro needs special facilities (either a loop or a depot) to turn back at the end of the line. That's how it is in real life and there's no reason to do things otherwise. However, it would be really great if we could build smaller depots underground. Those could be used only as a return facility (minimal storage capacity if you want) but they are really needed. If you don't want to show trains appearing and disappearing as they did in CIM1, you can always hide trains in drawing a workshop-style box or something. I'm not sure people would really mind the look (personally I wouldn't)



3. Corridors, stairs and escalators

Alright, this one is probably the hardest to devellop but I would really be in heaven if you do so. Currently, metro stations don't have corridors: people teleport from a cabin in the street directly to the train platform. I understand that it makes things much easier and more flexible but it's a weird simplification considering the system we had in CIM1.

Here's my idea: what if you would add a narrower pedestrian path layout? Using the vector system from the game, it should be doable. Ideally, it would be only about flat sections and stairs/escalator section, both being calculated automatically using simple math. This small alley tool could be used to build corridors connecting platforms between one another or to the road. Not only they could be used for the metro, but they would also allow creating access to underground/elevated tram or bus stations! If one day you make a design dream DLC, this would really be my design dream! :wub:

I agree though that it would be painful to build manually each exits for each metro stations (personally I would love it even though I agree most would consider that painfully tedious), but considering the current system already put automatically entrances on road, a vector system could do the calculation between point A and point B and thus put the corridors automatically. Alright, I'm probably asking too much. :laugh:

 

[unmerged(267252)]

Personally I find it fine that metro needs special facilities (either a loop or a depot) to turn back at the end of the line. That's how it is in real life and there's no reason to do things otherwise.

I don't agree with this. I've been playing around with the Metro in the sandbox and I simply cannot understand the design decision to make Metros have to run a loop to change direction. It doesn't work like this in real life at all, in my experience. The train reaches the terminus station, stops, the driver gets out, walks to the other end, gets in, sets off, and the train is routed onto the correct track for the different direction.

And this is another area where the Metro system in CiM2 is lacking. The four line track looks neat, and I imagine it would be great to put express services on the inner tracks, with stopping services down the outer tracks. But you can't build switches/points to allow the trains to change tracks, and you can't put stations on the inner tracks, so what's the point of them? How are we supposed to use them? The stations in CiM1 came with crossover tracks at each end - why can't the CiM2 stations automatically create a crossover if there's sufficient space? (Although I'd prefer the ability to manually create switches and crossovers where required - just as we can create just about any configuration of tram tracks at a junction).

Underground depots would be welcome too, and not at all unrealistic. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the London Underground and New York Subway both have underground storage sidings for trains?

Having experimented with all forms of transport in the game, it feels as though the number one priority by the devs should be to re-think and upgrade the Metro system to enable us to build switches to change tracks, and allow us to use a station to reverse direction at the end of a line. I can cope with teleporting passengers, that's just cosmetic, but the actual logic of the metro doesn't quite make sense to me at the moment. The features available to the Buses, Trolleys, Trams etc all work pretty well, but the Metro definitely needs further work and more options provided.

 

[Metropolitan]

I don't agree with this. I've been playing around with the Metro in the sandbox and I simply cannot understand the design decision to make Metros have to run a loop to change direction. It doesn't work like this in real life at all, in my experience. The train reaches the terminus station, stops, the driver gets out, walks to the other end, gets in, sets off, and the train is routed onto the correct track for the different direction.

Well yes, it can be made on station, but it can also be made in the tunnel after the station. The problem is the time needed for the driver to walk from one end of the train to the other. I know that here in Paris it's actually the driver of the previous train which takes control of the upcoming train to keep up train frequency. This way, the driver's walk is done during the interval time between two trains. Anyway, this is getting off-topic.

To come back to the first point, a depot or storage facility beyond the terminus station is pretty common. I would personnaly be okay with this. As for loops, they were done in very early metro systems. Paris had those in 1900, but they've been quickly abandonned because too slow.

And this is another area where the Metro system in CiM2 is lacking. The four line track looks neat, and I imagine it would be great to put express services on the inner tracks, with stopping services down the outer tracks. But you can't build switches/points to allow the trains to change tracks, and you can't put stations on the inner tracks, so what's the point of them? How are we supposed to use them? The stations in CiM1 came with crossover tracks at each end - why can't the CiM2 stations automatically create a crossover if there's sufficient space? (Although I'd prefer the ability to manually create switches and crossovers where required - just as we can create just about any configuration of tram tracks at a junction).

That is a correct observation. The problem is that in CIM1 stations were built with rails included. Here we build the rail first, and then we place platforms along them. Not sure how to correct this but there's surely a way.

Underground depots would be welcome too, and not at all unrealistic. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the London Underground and New York Subway both have underground storage sidings for trains?

Personally I don't know considering the London underground goes so far overground in the suburbs. But here in Paris most night depots are underground. Most Paris metro lines are 100% underground as a matter of fact.

Having experimented with all forms of transport in the game, it feels as though the number one priority by the devs should be to re-think and upgrade the Metro system to enable us to build switches to change tracks, and allow us to use a station to reverse direction at the end of a line. I can cope with teleporting passengers, that's just cosmetic, but the actual logic of the metro doesn't quite make sense to me at the moment. The features available to the Buses, Trolleys, Trams etc all work pretty well, but the Metro definitely needs further work and more options provided.

Alright, I agree teleporting passengers is only a cosmetic issue, but being able to design pedestrian path could be powerful. In CIM1, I actually loved to figure out transfers between lines. I agree it's not the priority though.

 

[xenon5]

Bumping this to show my support! I've had the same idea about the 4 lane track and stairs for the station. optimizing the 4 lane metro track is probably the biggest thing I'd like to see so that building express/local service on one line can be just as easy as building standard service.

For now I've just been imagining that the stairs are hidden and we can only see the entrance to the stairs. However, for above street metros it looks much more silly since there is nowhere to pretend the stairs could be. I guess I'll just have to accept the fact that our technologically advanced CiMs have found the secret to short distance teleportation.

Also, something should be done about the supports for the metro tracks if you build them above roads. I built an above ground line where 95% runs above a road, but there are no support beams anywhere! The game only builds support beams when you build the track over grass, so the track just floats in mid air over long stretches of road. From above it looks fine but when you look at it from street level it looks very strange as you can imagine.

 

[unmerged(630431)]

It would be really cool if the four-track lines were designed such that they are really four single tracks prefabricated to the widths they are at the time of placement. This would mean that we can extend each track differently, if we wish, and hence enable us to do something like this:


(especially the third one)
Source: Wikipedia (Japanese)

Better yet, give the builder the ability to "snap". There are two types of snapping I would recommend implementation:

1. The more important one but not pertaining to the general problem here: ability to snap (well, align, really) a station platform (because that's what they really are now, not stations, but platforms. Commendable -- allows us to save money placing platforms we didn't need in like in CiM1 -- but I digress.) to another on the same group of tracks, where a group of tracks can be defined as "any track running parallel to the track-in-focus for a certain length that is at most 4 track-widths* away" (this allows for two station platforms to be placed between the tracks).* See below for "track-width"
   
2. The less important one but pertaining to the problem here is the ability to snap tracks themselves to run parallely with existing tracks, up to a certain distance away (for example, 4 track-widths, where one track width is the distance between two centers of two tracks running parallel to each other).
   

This would be one way to "optimize the 4 lane metro track".

The idea for the ability to build out passageways is awesome. Think about the possibilities, where you can join stations that are not directly next to each other, perhaps even into a different company's station...

 

[djw2000]

Agree with all of this.

Have said several times now that the "no ticket hall" station looks, well, daft. That really was one of the charms of CiM1. That, even above ground, the citizens could be seen leaving the platform, taking the escalator down and ending up on the street. I won't deny that we have MUCH flexibility now with the platforms but, on road-testing the sandbox again last night, I was also struck by the limitations of the four-track setup. I'm creating my own map already, to provide a bit less of the random urban sprawl in the cities provided and to make things a bit more "natural" in city terms. As it's a peninsula, there is (at the moment), a main artery route down one of the main roads out of the city. This is shown best with this graphic:

(Don't forget this is very much work in progress and just shows the natural line placement AT THE MOMENT). As you can see, there is one main route. The down the central line are the "local" stops with the circles being the stops used by all the lines. There are four-line express bits and it looks cool. So far, so good. However, due to the lack of islands, I have to close up the interchange stations to two-track bits, which wouldn't happen for real. In addition, the split of the black and blue lines is rather fussy to ensure that the right *tracks* go to the right places. A fun problem maybe, but not very realistic.

I'm ok with the depots now, although I would still prefer large sidings, even underground (they DO exist...). What would be more useful would be a chance to, as shown above, snap-in crossover tracks to get the traffic to go where it is supposed to without the need for addition single-track under/overpasses and the island platforms to allow the express trains to remain in the middle and only stop at certain places.

On testing the route last night, I also saw that the trains sometimes ignored the fact that they were expresses and hugged the right-hand track. That would need to be fixed too, so that trains take the straightest, quickest route to a destination and only change tracks if we specify that they should stop at another station on the way.

The metro is eons beyond what we had in CiM1 (even though the porting of citizens is just silly). We have a lot of options and a few tweaks would make this just a player's dream. It's good now, but could be even better...

 

[Tintinfan]

Underground depots would be welcome too, and not at all unrealistic. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the London Underground and New York Subway both have underground storage sidings for trains?

Yes. Some London Underground Stations have the ability to cater for a few spare units underground in turn-back sidings. It can vary from 1 siding simply used to turn the train around (such as Rayners Lane where in non-peak hours the Piccadilly Line uses a siding to turn around services so as not too get in the way of Metropolitan Services)- to 4 sidings storing units for later rush hour usage (can't think of an example off the top of my head). Plus, there is also the Waterloo & City line that has a total underground depot at Waterloo.

And this is another area where the Metro system in CiM2 is lacking. The four line track looks neat, and I imagine it would be great to put express services on the inner tracks, with stopping services down the outer tracks. But you can't build switches/points to allow the trains to change tracks, and you can't put stations on the inner tracks, so what's the point of them? How are we supposed to use them? The stations in CiM1 came with crossover tracks at each end - why can't the CiM2 stations automatically create a crossover if there's sufficient space? (Although I'd prefer the ability to manually create switches and crossovers where required - just as we can create just about any configuration of tram tracks at a junction).

I agree. We need more flexibility as far as trains switching tracks goes. Personally, I think there should be a "crossover" track type that you can build. Pushing it (as it may confuse some people) one-way junctions that can change direction possible with trigger key like "<" and ">".

I would also like too see single track lines that allow trains to travel in both directions rather than a single direction and when building double too single track both the double tracks converge into the single track. The ability to create a single track spur off the main network and operate a shuttle service to areas of the city with a lower demand would be fantastic.

It would also be a wonderful feature if we could build level tracks across roads and level crossing barriers get placed. I have never seen a metro or commuter line in the city cross a busy main road without level crossing barriers. This is a tiny eyecandy feature and by no means a top priority, but it would be rather a nice additional feature. It would probably also be nicer if you could build straight across the roads, rather than having to click again to go across the roads, as at first it sent be confused as to why my railway was connecting into the road!

My last little irritation is on of personal irritation - the "Stern-Berger Antilope" looks ridiculously un-realistic as far as metro trains go. If there is a real modern day metro train with only 1 cab and a flat rear carriage I would love for this to be drawn to my attention. (I know of the locomotive hold and some older units a little like this though).

Apart from this, that and the other I'm so far loving Cities in Motion:2 and the flexibility the game presents. I'm loving the depots idea, even if it's a little strange I think I have got the stage of accepting and loving it. By no means am I complaining that I hate the game outright, I love it and I praise all that developed it. Well done CO.

 

[PharaonKheops]

I don't agree with this. I've been playing around with the Metro in the sandbox and I simply cannot understand the design decision to make Metros have to run a loop to change direction. It doesn't work like this in real life at all, in my experience. The train reaches the terminus station, stops, the driver gets out, walks to the other end, gets in, sets off, and the train is routed onto the correct track for the different direction.

This is not perfectly correct... actually, every terminus station have some turning back and parking facilities. But those are beyond the station... In the game, this is typically what a depot represents.
Alternatively, loops are very common in metro and trams lines... though generaly not clearly visible...

 

[unmerged(630431)]

Depots are common at the ends of lines, but having no depot is just as common. Two examples:

1. East West Line, Singapore. The termini, Pasir Ris and Joo Koon, both do not have depots; instead, at the end of each line, drivers walk to the rear and drive the train as if it were the front.
2. Chuo Rapid Line, Tokyo. I'm not sure about Takao, but I'm positive the elevated station at Tokyo simply does not allow space for a siding, let alone a depot. The train just departs Tokyo back-to-front.

In fact, this is why metros aren't like most locomotives: They're the same on both ends. It's to accommodate for that lack of space to turn around.
But I don't find having to put depots at the ends of each line to be aesthetically displeasing.

 

[jfjohnny5]

I agree with a lot of what's been said here.

Personally I think a crossover track would be tremendously helpful. As would underground depots. I don't have an issue putting a depot at the end of a line to turn around, but having to come back above ground to do it is kind of silly. And crossover tracks would make the 4-track sections soooo much more useful.

 

[huangyihe]

I couldn't agree more.

Metro track switches are must-haves, otherwise the introductions of four-track rail and waypoints will be pretty useless. Details for underground stations are something I have been longing for (since CiM1)... Although it seems that not a lot of people care about this, I would love to see a DLC or something to make my dream come true. I don't care if it costs me extra bucks, given that it is not requested by the majority of players.

 

[Metropolitan]

Just to make my point clearer about pedestrian passageways, they could be used to build pedestrian subways and bridges, expressway's overpass, to connect any network underground to the above road, to connect transfer lines... and I necessarily forget some!

I've thought again about it and it's really possible to make them easy to build thanks to the new layout system based on nods and vectors. I've made a little sketch explaining how it could deal with slopes simply in being divided in a flat corridor section and a stairs section.

Connexions with road could be automatic, simply making the last section parallel to the sidewalk. If a turn is need, just do a sharp angle, there's no need for curve.

As for people who wouldn't want to use them, it shouldn't be mandatory. However, if we could have those to connect metro platforms to roads, then it would be great to be able to delete teleporters. :happy:

 

[unmerged(272669)]

Glad to see I'm not alone in finding building four-track layouts an… odd experience.

The trick seems to be to use 2x two-track (one way) roads where you think you might have junctions or trains crossing between tracks, or where you want platforms on both the inner and outer lines. For stretches where you just want platforms on the inner lines with no junctions (I.e. stopping trains in the centre, fast trains in the middle) it's fine to use the default four track layout. When doing crossovers, I'm finding that judicious use of waypoints helps in ensuring the trains go onto the track they're supposed to.

It certainly requires patience, but it *is* possible to have a combination of semi fast/express/stopping trains. A nicer solution for terminating trains than a depot or a balloon loop would be worthwhile—as would an easier way to do 'flat' two track junctions, and the ability to add crossovers between fast and slow tracks—but it's still perfectly doable with a bit (or a lot!) of practice.

 

[PharaonKheops]

Glad to see I'm not alone in finding building four-track layouts an… odd experience.

The trick seems to be to use 2x two-track (one way) roads where you think you might have junctions or trains crossing between tracks, or where you want platforms on both the inner and outer lines. For stretches where you just want platforms on the inner lines with no junctions (I.e. stopping trains in the centre, fast trains in the middle) it's fine to use the default four track layout. When doing crossovers, I'm finding that judicious use of waypoints helps in ensuring the trains go onto the track they're supposed to.

It certainly requires patience, but it *is* possible to have a combination of semi fast/express/stopping trains.

Screeny? :glare: :huh: :laugh:

 

[huangyihe]

As for people who wouldn't want to use them, it shouldn't be mandatory. However, if we could have those to connect metro platforms to roads, then it would be great to be able to delete teleporters. :happy:

Nice post! If teleporting ever exists why people do bother using public transport? :laugh:

 

[unmerged(276373)]

Just to make my point clearer about pedestrian passageways, they could be used to build pedestrian subways and bridges, expressway's overpass, to connect any network underground to the above road, to connect transfer lines... and I necessarily forget some!

I've thought again about it and it's really possible to make them easy to build thanks to the new layout system based on nods and vectors. I've made a little sketch explaining how it could deal with slopes simply in being divided in a flat corridor section and a stairs section.

Connexions with road could be automatic, simply making the last section parallel to the sidewalk. If a turn is need, just do a sharp angle, there's no need for curve.

As for people who wouldn't want to use them, it shouldn't be mandatory. However, if we could have those to connect metro platforms to roads, then it would be great to be able to delete teleporters. :happy:

Great post.

I would love to something like this.
I remember in CiM 1 the metro had more soul and it was interesting to watch the passengers walking and waiting under ground.
Would've loved to build big metro complex under ground.

 

[unmerged(272669)]

Screeny? :glare: :huh: :laugh:

Trust me, it is possible! I'll try and grab some screenshots or do some diagrams soonish.

 

[PharaonKheops]

Trust me, it is possible! I'll try and grab some screenshots or do some diagrams soonish.

I was not doubting about your words...

It's just that... english not being my mother tongue... I had some hard time visualizing the whole stuff... even when reading SLOWLY :laugh: (french guys are not dumb, but they need several explanations lol )

 

[tyteen4a03]

For the 4 rail idea, island platforms have to be back...

 

[Dreamcaster]

I'm seeing a lot of people arguing on this forum about what's "right" based on how operations are typically run in their countries. There is no right or wrong way, only disagreement over the most efficient ways of doing things!

In some countries it may be common to have loops at the end of metro systems, in the UK examples of this are few; the first "tube" line - London's Northern Line - has a turning loop at Kennington near the southern end of the line where two branches merge into one but this is used as a "flying" or "diving" junction for the purposes of grade separation to turn the trains from of those branches back round without needing to cross over in the paths of other trains - important for a metro line with a high service frequency.

Beyond this the trains from the other branch of the Northern Line run further south to the end of the line where there is a depot, however both of the two (point five) northern branches end with termnius stations where trains are turned back round. Whilst depot facilities do exist for these northern ends of the branches they are not used for turning trains round.

The only other example of a loop I can think of in the UK is on the Heathrow branch where the terminals have stations on the loop itself and it is not just for the purposes of turning trains around. I believe this sort of arrangement does exist in other parts of the world.

Other than that all of the London Underground lines have to the best of my knowledge had terminus working from the beginning, both the first sub surface "cut and cover" lines and the later deep level "tube" lines. When it was first built the Northern Line had both a north and a south terminus with a "sunken" depot branching off from the line just north of the southern terminus.

Anyway, this is typical UK operation. In the UK both on metro lines and even on overland rail, during the morning and evening peaks where you only have a few minutes turnaround you will often find a driver brings a train in and another driver will be waiting at the end of the platform to jump straight in the back cab and take the train back out. In some examples such as on London's Bakerloo line, one ore more of the terminus have such limited capacity then this practice also occurs during the off-peak, where the train cannot dwell for more than 2-3 minutes before it has to be on its way again so that the next train can enter the station.

No doubt in other countries turning loops prevail, but judging from the volume of complaints about this limitation in CiM2 it's obviously not just the UK that has metro systems which use terminus' for turning trains around.

* * * * *

I would also like to see underground depots - they are rare but they do exist, London's Waterloo & City which is underground for its entire length is one such example, featuring a depot with seven roads immediately after the southern terminus. This depot is capable of carrying out routing maintenance although for complete overhauls the carriages have to hoisted out of a hole using a crane and taken off by road.