SmatZ wrote:

It would either mean copying railtype, all signal info and do not-simple checks in code, or duplicate trackbits too. Also, those two tracks could have different owner, so another 4 bits are needed. It would probably fit in the map array, but the added code complexity is hardly worth it. (pathfinders, signal propagation, train controller, pbs, ... also, convert rail, querying track owner and many more things would need to be updated, causing slowdown and harder code maintainability)

This comment was imported from FlySpray: https://bugs.openttd.org/task/2730#comment5779

Belugas wrote:

I do agree with Smatz. Even if it MIGHT look like a good idea, the downside of it is way too big to be of any value.
Plus... we do have GIGANTIC maps. Why should we have a feature that scrambles 2 rails in such a tiny space?
Dunno... my opinion

This comment was imported from FlySpray: https://bugs.openttd.org/task/2730#comment5780

MrMann wrote:

I appreciate that it would be a hell of a lot of work ;). I guess it's one of those good-on-paper, not so good in practice things...

This comment was imported from FlySpray: https://bugs.openttd.org/task/2730#comment5781

andythenorth closed the ticket.

Reason for closing: Won't implement

2 types in the tile, TMWFTLB.

This comment was imported from FlySpray: https://bugs.openttd.org/task/2730