Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Puzzling routing behaviour with cargodist #5918

Closed
DorpsGek opened this issue Feb 18, 2014 · 2 comments
Closed

Puzzling routing behaviour with cargodist #5918

DorpsGek opened this issue Feb 18, 2014 · 2 comments
Labels
flyspray This issue is imported from FlySpray (https://bugs.openttd.org/)

Comments

@DorpsGek
Copy link
Member

andythenorth opened the ticket and wrote:

Have a look at Poodleston Port - it puzzles me why so much cargo is assigned to the Tinklebury destinations, and so little to Jingleville.

I have tried adjusting the distance effect setting, and I have tried waiting this out for a year or two to see if it rebalances.

Is this expected behaviour? Do I need to adjust my expectations? Or is it a bug? :)

Save requires a few non-bananas newgrfs - compatible versions provided in the zip.

Attachments

Reported version: trunk
Operating system: All

This issue was imported from FlySpray: https://bugs.openttd.org/task/5918
@DorpsGek
Copy link
Member Author

fonsinchen wrote:

The route to the stations that attract most of the cargo hasn't been properly served for a long time. That's why there is so much cargo waiting.

A secondary problem is the algorithm by which cargodist assigns the demand for cargo. That algorithm is based on tile acceptance, meaning that Jingleville is expected to get less than half the amount of cargo each of the tinklebury stations get because the coal mine has only 9 tiles while the other stations cover 18 and 20 accepting tiles. However, as the algorithm allows for a configurable inaccuracy, the actual distribution is 12 crates per month for jungleville, 30 for tinklebury south, and 19 for tinklebury pit. With a distribution not weighted by tile acceptance and the same inaccuracy setting one would get (a little later in the game) 15 crates to jingleville, 24 to tinklebury south and 17 to tinklebury pit.

This comment was imported from FlySpray: https://bugs.openttd.org/task/5918#comment13082

@DorpsGek
Copy link
Member Author

fonsinchen closed the ticket.

Reason for closing: Not a bug

We keep tile-based demand for now because it adds some variance.

This comment was imported from FlySpray: https://bugs.openttd.org/task/5918

@DorpsGek DorpsGek added flyspray This issue is imported from FlySpray (https://bugs.openttd.org/) Cargodist labels Apr 7, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
flyspray This issue is imported from FlySpray (https://bugs.openttd.org/)
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@DorpsGek