#openttdcoop

Following is only for these who wants to read a lot… and comprehend some simple math. I figured, that in light of recent conversations about coopetition concept, there is a need to develop a decent criteria for evaluation game performance with having coopish aproach in mind. In game scoring mechanics and profit by itself are not enough to define a successfull and efficient network as far as i am concerned…

Things that I consider most important for a cargo game is amount of units delviered on one side and running stock used to do it on the other. Profit in first place can be accounted for network performance and efficiency of routes, but it also affected by such factors as idle and stopping trains, efficiency of junctions, lane balancing, appropriate train length, sufficient width of mainlines. Essentially, what I am trying to say is that a good network “has just enough properly sized and shaped trains to carry as much cargo as needed”. And hence the criteria to define a good network would be something like: yearly_profit * delivered_cargo / number_of_wagons. I specificaly do not want to use train count and length due to the fact that these are part of network design and if network can cope with whatever is the amount while goals are being reached it doesnt really matter. At same time, if the number of trains is too high – profit will be hurting, since there will be jams and stops or idle trains that only waste money. If trains are too long – they will be loading for longer at stations and will require larger/more complex network, if they are too short – need more of them, and again more complex networking in a different way. Setting volume criteria such as delivered cargo yearly as the goal – eleminates it from rating calculation. So it can be as simple as profit / cars.

Passeger based games, in my opinion, have different goals and criterias. Effeciency of company can be defined by reach of pax network and amount of delivered happy customers. By “reach” I imply ratio between transfered and possible passengers (and mail in case if that is rulled in). Say a city can produce X amount of passengers per month, a good network would be one that moves as close to X as possible and makes as much money as it can in that process. This gets more complex with increased size or number of towns, especialy with obstacles such as unfriendly landscape, authorities or set rules. Delivered – is same as for cargo game – units yearly, while happy – promply movied to destionation and as result well paying. Hence, the efficiency rating can look like: sum(transfered_passenger_per_city/possible_passenger_per_city) * yearly_profit * delivered_cargo / number_of_wagons. And in case if delivered cargo used as an game end criteria: sum of passenger ratios * profit / cars

A special note on counting cars – for railroad these are cargo wagons as well as engines capable of carrying something, For road vehicles it is a simple head count aside of articulated ones – where each wagon should be counted (only affects some trams at this time). Despite the fact that road vehicles seem less profitable than trains, if counted per car/wagon and used appropriately they both can be efficient and contribute to score close to equaliy, especialy for pax games.

All this only makes sense if apples are compared to apples: same map, same train set, regulated network features (track sharing and number of drops). I did some studying of games I have at hand, especialy these that I have different version of (I like continuing to optimize public games sometimes, which did not exhaust all posibilities to improve in my opinon). And there are other factors to be considere if scores are to be compared across diferent landscapes, shapes, network and rail types. For example. such important characteristics as average vehicles speed fgor trains is factored into profit already, where as maximum speed can be used to debunk game results based on faster vehicles so scores can be comprated across different types and sets.

The exact rules for competative gaming are yet to come, hence scoring also remains without strict definition, this is a start of conversation on what coopetition might look like eventualy.