Rail Australia [Quenched]

[Kaplowitz]

I think you should mix up the resource pairs a little bit. Like have some in different continents to make it a little more interesting.

For example put the PHL Port in like KTN or something.

[cairnswk]

I think you should mix up the resource pairs a little bit. Like have some in different continents to make it a little more interesting.

For example put the PHL Port in like KTN or something.

Oh dear Kaplowitz....that'd bugger the Australian mineral boom up completely.

Sorry, but the ports apply to the mineral areas that need the ports for export and the rails provide the links. Can't undo this reality.

put the phl port in the middle of the country...balmey, absolute shockers Kaplowitz....that's the worst suggestion i've ever seen you make. if you mean something different, then please explain away.

[Kaplowitz]

I meant like switch the colors a bit so that the matching ports+minerals are not in the same continent for some cases.

but i forgot accuracy!

[cairnswk]

I meant like switch the colors a bit so that the matching ports+minerals are not in the same continent for some cases.

but i forgot accuracy!

sorry...but the corresponding colour mineral and port icons need to be in the same states.

[Coleman]

As I said in qwert's topic. I can't see photobucket at my present location, the only thing I know for sure I can see is imageshack.us images. So while I suspect this is moveable, I need to wait tell I have time at a photobucket friendly location.

Sorry about the delay.

[Night Strike]

The rails between SYD and NWC are nearly impossible to see.

Several of the normal lines in the bottom right are really skinny, and orange is almost washed out.

[cairnswk]

As I said in qwert's topic. I can't see photobucket at my present location, the only thing I know for sure I can see is imageshack.us images. So while I suspect this is moveable, I need to wait tell I have time at a photobucket friendly location.

Sorry about the delay.

no worries coleman...thanks for the info

[cairnswk]

The rails between SYD and NWC are nearly impossible to see.

can probably do something there....

Several of the normal lines in the bottom right are really skinny,

what colour?

and orange is almost washed out.

that is tasmanian rail and i think you must be blind if you can see that orange...or are you talking about the south australian red.

[Night Strike]

Sorry, I wasn't clear. Both Tas Rail and Vic Rail have very skinny normal lines compared to the other colors (by the way, I'm defining normal as the non-long distance lines).

By washed out, I was meaning the orange line in the ocean is partially covered by the dark ocean color. The color itself is just fine.

[cairnswk]

Sorry, I wasn't clear. Both Tas Rail and Vic Rail have very skinny normal lines compared to the other colors (by the way, I'm defining normal as the non-long distance lines).

By washed out, I was meaning the orange line in the ocean is partially covered by the dark ocean color. The color itself is just fine.

How right you were with the thickness...my bad

The orange line from LNC to MEL is a sea ferry of connection of course so it is segmented dash.

Corrections in next version.. thanks

[Night Strike]

You call that a segmented dash???

It may look more like one once you thicken the line. I'll wait for the next update.

[Tieryn]

Suggestions:

Put a little ferry between launceston and melbourne.

Change the sleeper spacings or colours for different long-distance. Currently it looks like the indian pacific goes through adelaide towards melbourne. Different coloured sleepers on these tracks would make it easier to distinguish on a quick glance. Also a different spacing could also work, take out every second sleeper perhaps on the overlander.

With the territ list down the bottom, you need to be careful that people don't think you only need to hold the territories listed, state that all stations on the line are needed

I really like the new colour scheme. Very outback. Very aussie rail-scenery.

A possible change of kink/direction in the PGA-ADL link, or perhaps some bend, to show that it passes alongside the adelaide station then heads back up to BHL.

Perhaps you could put "termination point" graphics at the start and end of the legend, and then the on the stations? (not sure where they would fit...)

Should the WYA [P] be in the top right like all the rest? could you move the rail line slightly left to go past this? (i figure it's been moved cause it was covering up the rail?) this is a little pedantic, but hey!

Are you going to have an Apple Port in Hobart? How else will they run the Sydney to Hobart yacht race?

Anyway, there's a few balls to bounce about the table.

[cairnswk]

Thanks Tieryn...i'll see what i can do.

[Coleman]

I don't know why this was kept here so long. Sorry for my low activity.

[oaktown]

welcome to the foundry, yet again.

Question - to get the mineral-port bonus, do you just have to hold the two territories, or do you have to connect them? Because connecting them would make more sense, as the idea is that you're getting the goods to the port, but there are many, many possible routes in which you could connect them.

[lord voldemort]

id say connecting would be better...also more logical.

[cairnswk]

welcome to the foundry, yet again.

Question - to get the mineral-port bonus, do you just have to hold the two territories, or do you have to connect them? Because connecting them would make more sense, as the idea is that you're getting the goods to the port, but there are many, many possible routes in which you could connect them.

1. Most of the port & mineral pairs only involve two stations.

2. There are a couple that have three stations, and one that has four stations.

What you say Oaktoiwn does make sense, but will that not throw the gampley out of balance.

Also.....consider this. This is a rail map, using trains.

While i initally agreed to it, i think in retrospect that having the ports connect is outside the realms of this map.

What does everyone think?

[edbeard]

I'm not sure if you guys are on the same page.

This is my interpretation

1. Oaktown was wondering if players needed to 'connect' the ports to their Minerals by holding rail stations that make a line from Port to Mineral

2. cairswk thought he was talking about making the ports connect to each other?

I could be way off base but that's what I think you guys were talking about.

Either way, I don't like either of these ideas. 1. would be very difficult to do XML wise unless you specified the path. 2. is outside the realm of a 'rail' map

[cairnswk]

I'm not sure if you guys are on the same page.

This is my interpretation

1. Oaktown was wondering if players needed to 'connect' the ports to their Minerals by holding rail stations that make a line from Port to Mineral

2. cairswk thought he was talking about making the ports connect to each other?

I could be way off base but that's what I think you guys were talking about.

Either way, I don't like either of these ideas. 1. would be very difficult to do XML wise unless you specified the path. 2. is outside the realm of a 'rail' map

Well edbeard before everyone gets totally confused, he is what my intention was.

1. Several pages back someone suggested that ports should be able to attack each other. i.e TSV (Townsville) could attack DWN (Darwin) via an "implied" shipping route, not a rail route.

It is this in the legend that refers to "all ports connect" (to each other), even though it is not clearly spelt out....my bad, that will be fixed.

I think that is a bad idea as i stated it is outside the scope of this "rail" map.

2. I think the same coloured port/mineral pairs plus stations en route should be held for the that +1 bonus to be given.

This makes most of those pairs fairly easy to get, but as stated a couple have three stations and one has four stations....a little more difficult to get those few bonuses.

[edbeard]

so you need to hold that direct path to get the bonus? In a couple places, it is possible to hold both the M and P territories AND connect them, but not via a direct path. Are you intending these NOT to count for a bonus?

I don't think you would be able to since the XML would probably be horrendous in a couple cases.

[cairnswk]

so you need to hold that direct path to get the bonus? In a couple places, it is possible to hold both the M and P territories AND connect them, but not via a direct path. Are you intending these NOT to count for a bonus?

I don't think you would be able to since the XML would probably be horrendous in a couple cases.

Edbeard, all port/mineral pairs will have the bonus, they are:

KTN(M)-DRW(P)
MTI(M)-TSV(P)
EMD(m)-MKY(p)
MRA(M)-GLS(p)
NEW(M)-PHL(P)
PAR(M)-DAM(p)
MLL(m)-GLT(p)
FRK(M)-NWC(P)
LEN(M)-ESP(P)+KLG
LHC(M)-WYL(P)+PGA
BKH(M)-SYD(P)+PRK+ORG

I thought those would have been clear by tthe colour codings on their symbols.

There is no difficult xml in this, not from my thinking anyways.

[edbeard]

I think you're misunderstanding me.


I was asking if you needed specific routes (which you have provided) because in some cases, you can connect the mineral and port without taking those paths which you have specified. But, I'm guessing you will write these paths onto a legend so there is no confusion.

[cairnswk]

I think you're misunderstanding me.


I was asking if you needed specific routes (which you have provided) because in some cases, you can connect the mineral and port without taking those paths which you have specified. But, I'm guessing you will write these paths onto a legend so there is no confusion.

for the sake of three pairs, no they won't be written on the legend as i don't wan tthis map any more cluttered than it already is. The notation will prob be

coloured mineral & port pair stations plus stations en direct route +1

[cairnswk]

Fellow Aussie Tieryn has offered to do the xml for this map, and it's OK by me.
Thanks Tieryn.

[gimil]

Interested in RAIL AUSTRALIA?

Yes 63% [ 23 ]
No 36% [ 13 ]

Total Votes : 36