Train nomenclature

[Ian D]

As part of the tweaking currently in progress, I'm planning to improve
the later G-trains by, amoungst other things, adding a small station
or two to their capabilities. For example, the 3G will now be able to
run to up to two dot towns, in addition to the three big cities and
mine as before.

The problem is: what to call it? 3G+2 or 3+2G? (or something else?)
The "+2" will be in a smaller size text, I expect.

The problem gets worse with the top G-train, which I envisage will run
two big stations, a mine, two small stations, all doubled (and can
skip big stations as desired). Something like 2G+2+2 is far too
confusing; how about 2G+2D, (2G+2)D, or 2+2GD? (D = doubled).

The 3+3E will do the same as before but be called a 3D.

Opinions/thoughts/suggestions - anyone?

Ian D

[Chris Shaffer]

You're getting to the point that I would consider calling them by their historic names, rather than their in-game capabilities.  You could provide a chart printed on the charter or map showing what trains can do what things at what stages of the game.

--
Chris

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "1812 playtest discussion" group.
To post to this group, send email to 1812-playtes...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 1812-playtest-disc...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/1812-playtest-discussion?hl=en.

[J C Lawrence]

On 03/09/2010 09:55 AM, Ian D wrote:

> Opinions/thoughts/suggestions - anyone?

A friend (Aliza Panitz) suggests: 3-freight, 3-cargo, 3-passenger

-- JCL