Wholesale GLR Station Update?

[allan_kuan1992]

I was looking through some lots recently while building my GLR network.

Some are old and don't work with the new draggable GLR.
- Suburban GLR Stations Pack (cogeo)
- Several miscellaneous stations on the STEX

Some have capacities that are just too small for Simulator Z.
- Any station other than RTMT Simulator Z revision.

I'd wish there was something or someone out there that would at least provide a remedy to these problems to others with the same problem.

In addition, the RTMT hasn't focused a lot on the GLR but it might be a worthy addition to do so (random designs per click helps reduce # of lots!)

- Allan Kuan

[choco]

there were some NAM station patches for draggable GLR...i think you may be missing them.....

[Meastro444]

Check this[linkie]

It's the draggable station patch from the STEX.

[allan_kuan1992]

yes... but I do also want a Simulator Z update as well... or at least someone who can post the values that are realistic for all of the stations that I have listed below, because the current capacities are way too small for Simulator Z. This includes:

- all lots with size 1x1, 1x2, 1x3, 1x4
- lots with size 2x2 + 2x3
- Cogeo Suburban GLR Stations
- Cogeo GLR Hubs Set

Thanks,

- Allan Kuan

[cogeo]

allan, I would advise that you don't install the patch (for draggable GLR) for the Suburban GLR Stations. First you don't need it (pls refer to the documentation for instructions on how to connect to draggable GLR - and this applies to all GLR stations, not jsut these ones), and second, the set was updated to fix a bug related to the stations' orientation; installing the patch will simply resurrect the old worked-around bug. So I would suggest that you:
- Check the readme for instructions on how to connect to draggable GLR, or
- If you want the stations modded for draggable GLR anyway, make some little modding work: take the patch and delete the building exemplars (they contain the bug), ie leave only the lot exemplars in the patch (these are the modified ones for draggable GLR). I don't think the draggable GLR patch is about to be updated any time soon.

One note about RTMT, the prop-familes features was not implemented for "random designs per click" (and often this causes unwanted effects, like two different bus-stops in the same lot), but instead for reducing the # of lots, as you correctly mentioned. RTMT has a mechanism that allows the player to specify the prop(s) to be selected in each plop. It's not convenient to use (requires exiting the game and installing/uninstalling prop-files), but it does allow selecting props, and afaik it's so far the only pack that does so. The installation guide describes the procedure in detail. I'm disappointed, as very few players have actually utilised this feature; I thought the extra effort would be justified in a case of, say a MD, or where appearance is paramount, eg players might want design A in the CBD, B in the suburbs and C somewhere else, but they usually just plop the stations without configuring the installation first, resulting in an odd mix of stops and stations models. For those that want to avoid the hassle, RTMT can also work in single-prop mode, ie having a sibgle bus-stop model, used by all busstops throughout the city (the same applies to subways and GLR).

[allan_kuan1992]

Oh I see. I do like the variety however xD

I kind of forgot to mention that I can modify the lots myself... but I do need help on figuring out transit switch costs and recommended capacities (especially for Simulator Z medium)

- Allan Kuan

[z]

In addition, the RTMT hasn't focused a lot on the GLR but it might be a worthy addition to do so (random designs per click helps reduce # of lots!)

Could you explain a bit more what you mean here?  RTMT has a fairly complete selection of GLR-in-Avenue and T-RAM stations, probably more than anyone else.  In RTMT V4, there will also be tram stops that are less elaborate than full-blown stations; they won't have shelters.  RTMT doesn't have any plain GLR stations, because those aren't RTMT stations.

I'll also second everything Cogeo said about the prop families feature.  And I'll also add that in RTMT V4, this will be a lot more automated and easier to use, with no reduction in functionality.

As for capacities, it's not just Simulator Z.  Way too many stations have capacities that are just too small for the higher capacity simulators.  BTW, the RTMT GLR station capacities are what they were long before Simulator Z arrived.

A lot of station builders don't realize that with RTMT-style stations, the station usage counts all traffic going through the station (except subway traffic).  So RTMT-style stations need to have their capacities take this effect into account.  Cogeo did this from the beginning, which is why there has been no need to change the capacities of those stations.  Also, most people don't understand how station congestion works, largely because it is misrepresented by the game.  Stations can go over capacity into the yellow, orange, and even the red with no service degradation whatsoever.  The only time service degradation occurs is when stations hit a certain multiple of their nominal capacity.  Different experiments have given different results for the value of this multiple, and so it probably varies due to unknown factors, but the lowest multiple observed was four, by RippleJet.  If a station hits this hard limit, service doesn't simply begin to degrade; the station simply won't accept any more traffic above that limit.  Since this limit includes all traffic from its feeding networks, this puts an artificial cap on those networks around the station.  The results can range from mildly inconvenient to very nasty, depending on how much the demand for the networks exceeds the station's capacity.  For this reason, you definitely want to avoid stations (especially RTMT-style stations) with very low capacities.  Network congestion, on the other hand, is a lot less calamitous than it may appear; regardless of how congested a network is, the speed of the network never declines below 30% of its nominal speed.

Also, if you see an RTMT-style station with a lower capacity that you'd like to see in RTMT, let us know.  It's pretty simple to add new station options.

The NAM is currently working on a set of specs for NAM-compatible stations.  I have urged that station capacities be part of these specs.  Things are moving somewhat slowly here, so we'll have to see what happens.

As for figuring out recommended capacities, the RTMT stations are a good guide to follow, but only for RTMT-style stations.  Transit switch entry costs for road and avenue stations should be .02; for everything else, they should be .96/(travel type speed).

[allan_kuan1992]

Could you explain a bit more what you mean here?  RTMT has a fairly complete selection of GLR-in-Avenue and T-RAM stations, probably more than anyone else.  In RTMT V4, there will also be tram stops that are less elaborate than full-blown stations; they won't have shelters.  RTMT doesn't have any plain GLR stations, because those aren't RTMT stations.

Oh... I meant normal GLR stations... oops.

As for capacities, it's not just Simulator Z.  Way too many stations have capacities that are just too small for the higher capacity simulators.  BTW, the RTMT GLR station capacities are what they were long before Simulator Z arrived.

Ah... that explains things... Should I set my stations to the network capacity as listed on the simulator?

A lot of station builders don't realize that with RTMT-style stations, the station usage counts all traffic going through the station (except subway traffic).  So RTMT-style stations need to have their capacities take this effect into account.  Cogeo did this from the beginning, which is why there has been no need to change the capacities of those stations.  Also, most people don't understand how station congestion works, largely because it is misrepresented by the game.  Stations can go over capacity into the yellow, orange, and even the red with no service degradation whatsoever.  The only time service degradation occurs is when stations hit a certain multiple of their nominal capacity.  Different experiments have given different results for the value of this multiple, and so it probably varies due to unknown factors, but the lowest multiple observed was four, by RippleJet.  If a station hits this hard limit, service doesn't simply begin to degrade; the station simply won't accept any more traffic above that limit.  Since this limit includes all traffic from its feeding networks, this puts an artificial cap on those networks around the station.  The results can range from mildly inconvenient to very nasty, depending on how much the demand for the networks exceeds the station's capacity.  For this reason, you definitely want to avoid stations (especially RTMT-style stations) with very low capacities.  Network congestion, on the other hand, is a lot less calamitous than it may appear; regardless of how congested a network is, the speed of the network never declines below 30% of its nominal speed.

Well... the GLR stations act somewhat the same being on top of the network (unless I happen to use one of my 1x1 which are not transit-enabled).

The NAM is currently working on a set of specs for NAM-compatible stations.  I have urged that station capacities be part of these specs.  Things are moving somewhat slowly here, so we'll have to see what happens.
As for figuring out recommended capacities, the RTMT stations are a good guide to follow, but only for RTMT-style stations.  Transit switch entry costs for road and avenue stations should be .02; for everything else, they should be .96/(travel type speed).

Thanks... I see there's some progress being made.

- Allan Kuan

[z]

Ah... that explains things... Should I set my stations to the network capacity as listed on the simulator?
...
Well... the GLR stations act somewhat the same being on top of the network (unless I happen to use one of my 1x1 which are not transit-enabled).

Whether or not a station is transit enabled actually doesn't matter.  The 1x1 RTMT T-RAM bus station, which is not transit enabled, still counts all the traffic going through it, including the trams.  What counts is whether the traffic going through the station is governed by the transit switch point or not.

So at first blush, it may seem that transit stations that don't have networks going through them are safe from this effect.  Unfortunately, this is not true.   A prime example is the Maxis 2x3 train station.  You'd think that since the train doesn't actually go through the station, the station wouldn't count its passengers who don't start or terminate their journeys at the station.  If the station had been built properly, you'd be right.  However, like all Maxis stations, it comes with a Transit Switch Entry Cost of zero.  That means it's faster for the passengers to get off the train at the beginning of the station (actually, there is no train, but that's a different story), cross the station in no time at all (because of the zero TSEC), and then reboard the train at the far end of the station.  You can see this happening if you click on the train track right outside the station with the Route Query Tool.  As a result, all the train's passengers are counted, as the empty (and nonexistent) train passes by the station.  And this even happens with the Maxis bus stop too, as has long been known.  So this effect is far from limited to RTMT stations, although it can be eliminated from many by setting the TSEC properly.  (It should be .02 for any roadside station, and in Simulator Z, it should be .0055 for a GLR station, and .0048 for a train station.)

Now as for capacities, at this point, setting them properly is still more than an art than a science.  But for reasons pointed out in my last post, it's better to err on the high side.  Doing so makes no practical difference in the game, except it may occasionally save you from unrealistic, catastrophic service degradations.  There are many formulas for calculating capacities, but I haven't seen any that work perfectly for all stations.  Cogeo has one that seems to work especially well for GLR stations (I used it to set the capacities for the T-RAM stations); you can find this formula and a complete explanation in the RTMT ReadMe file.  Using this formula based on a Simulator Z (Medium) GLR network, you would get a station capacity of 27,000.  But if you ever move from a Medium to High simulator, you would need bigger capacity stations, and existing stations would have to be bulldozed to get any bigger capacity that you set.  That's why RTMT is moving to a model that uses only two capacities - High and Low.  The High station capacity is based on Simulator Z's High network capacities, which also works well with Simulator Z (Ultra).  For a plain GLR station, this would result in a capacity of 48,000.  This may seem high, but when I was testing the RTMT T-RAM stations on a tile zoned almost completely medium density, I would routinely get station usage approaching 40,000.  And in another one of my cities, I have a rail line with a total daily usage of 114,000.  Even using the Ultra simulator, this line is congested.  The problem is that some GLR lines may have very little traffic, and a station capacity of 48,000 may seem ridiculously big.  I think the solution here is to use different capacities for stations of different sizes.  For example, the 48,000 capacity could be rephrased as 12,000 per square, since a standard standalone GLR station seems to be about four squares long.  Then shorter stations with lower capacities could be used on less active lines.

I hope this helps.  In the mean time, RTMT is doing its best to provide stations with the most accurate capacities we can determine.

[pierreh]

May I return to this issue? In the course of implementing my first trams, I have done some reading, some searching and some experimenting. It seems to me that non-RTMT tram stations are being left behind in terms of capacity. The new RTMT stations, and some adapted stations for tram-in-avenue (for example the SFBT Dentei stations) are all OK, their capacities are quite generous even with Simulator z (which I use). Unless I have missed something, no 'plain' tram/GLR station, i.e. a station on a tram section in its own right-of-way, has been adjusted.

Tram-in-avenue and tram-in/on-road are all very fine and I like using them. But there are cases where tram on own right-of-way, be it even on the side of a street, road or avenue, are also useful - and correspond to real life situations. Are there any plans to provide tram stations on own right-of-way with capacities similar to those of stations on avenues and roads?

I am aware that stations can go over capacity without any adverse effect up to some factor with a minimum of four. Still, I am not at ease with the idea when querying a given station and seeing its usage at 223%.

[Chrisim]

From Cogeo's RTMT Readme (where you find more details):

In the case of road-top transit lots, the traffic simulator adds the through car and pedestrian traffic to the stop's or station's usage. Therefore, the total capacity must be higher, so as to offset the effect of the through traffic. The result cannot be perfect, it is only an approximation. If the road has less traffic than anticipated the stop or station will enjoy extra net capacity, while if the road traffic is heavier this will put a burden on the stop/station, possibly degrading the quality of service. Also, the service quality degradation (due to overuse) is proportionately less serious.

For pure tram stations, there is neither car nor bus through traffic, therefore the capacities are set smaller than for tram-avenue or tram-road stations.
Anyway, you can easily change the capacity of a station using the reader (edit the buildings exemplar file, the property "transit switch traffic capacity")