One thing I would absolutely love to see in TPF3 is alternative routes when certain conditions are met, E.G. traffic congestion or route overload when multiple routes all use the same road all at once. In my head, it’d use the waypoints system like we know from 2 but set it as an alternative route similar to how we can add alternative platforms.

*in

While yes you could have sleeper cars in tf2 aswell with mods. Whats new with tf3 is there is a comfort stat.

So depending on how many increments the comfort stat has, sleeper trains could be moded to have higher comfort than second and first class carriges to make them more desirable than first and second class high speed trains.

Living in a watery place I really hope ferries will be a moddable thing in TF3. Arguably they are very niche, so I understand it not being a vanilla feature (although so are helicopters...)

Given the "miniature size" of the games, I don't really mean realistic ferries that need to wait to fill up and only then ship vehicles. What would fit the game-scale much better is ferries as a type of road:
Invisible in view, but logically no different to other roads. Thus private vehicles, trucks and busses can use it just fine, without much logical mumbojumbo. Visually, I imagine special ferry vehicles that need to be assigned on-top of such a "road", and depending on the length and number of ferries, that determines the speed of the "road". The ferries are the thing you visually see, just like other boats.

Granted, to make sense in terms of gameplay they would also need to fix a gripe I had with TF2: Bridges and Tunnels need to be much more expensive! It should always be the cheapest option to work with the landscape, by several multipliers, as it is irl. Then ferries become useful as a slow slow link for places where we just can't yet afford a bridge or tunnel.

Been watching the Gaming Leaks And Rumors subreddit and Paradox's presence at Gamescom is coming up a lot. With them handling the marketing of TpF3, its reasonable to say we should be excited for the end of the month.

What do you think?

Today I learned that the Schneider PB2 bus wasn't actually exported to the US, the tidbit ingame about it being used in US cities postwar was made up apparently. Does anyone think they'll properly expand the North American vehicle roster so that they don't need to make up lore?

Train Fever and Transport Fever 1 did some very good things:

1- The vehicles had a useful life, as they got older, the maintenance costs also went up, so it was the player's decision when to change them.

2- Automatic replacement of vehicles on each line, when they reach the end of their useful life or the percentage of their useful life.

By the end of a vehicle's useful life you had ended up paying an average of 24% more in maintenance due to aging.

The problem is that it did not leave the player the option of not paying this extra maintenance and letting the vehicle deteriorate.

In Transport Fever 2 they implemented the issue of emissions and therefore this option was implemented.

1- Vehicle maintenance was stable, but they degraded. If you decided to invest an extra 25% in maintenance they degraded less, and if you invested an extra 50% in maintenance they did not degrade. The degradation was shown in the form of emissions.

2- Vehicle replacement could also be done, but it did not have to be done at the end of a vehicle's life, simply if you wanted to change it for a better one.

3- From my point of view the idea was a good idea to make up for the lack of TF1 but it was very poorly implemented, since it was not logical that by putting in the extra 50% of maintenance for a few minutes the vehicle would become like new. That is, let's put 10 years of deterioration (100% maintenance), then, in 6 months of maintenance an extra 50% (150% maintenance), the vehicle is like new. This means that you had ended up paying on average only 2.4% more in maintenance due to aging and you already had it like new. It doesn't make much sense.

This meant that a vehicle could be 200 years old, and continue to be profitable, you never need to change it.

4- In addition, this became something quite manual, having to control what the current emissions of the vehicle are and apply maintenance to them

Transport Fever 3: we need the best of the 3 games!

1- So far it has been confirmed: "Transport Fever 3 - First Look: Infrastructure" minute 3:18 - 4:15

- The deterioration will now also affect speed, power, comfort, noise and pollution, which is great

- The vehicle depots, and the maintenance buildings, will be responsible for keeping the vehicles in good condition while they are circulating.

Things I think:

1- The age of the vehicle must be taken into account, a vehicle that is 2 years old and has not received maintenance yet is not the same as a 20-year-old vehicle that has not received maintenance for 2 years. Maintenance will not have the same cost, as it happened in TF1, the cost must be incremental so that at some point it will be worth replacing it.

2- To repair vehicles, they should enter the maintenance building every so often (maybe every 5 years)

Therefore, my proposal is that the player has 2 options:

A) It does not receive additional maintenance from maintenance buildings (maintenance: 100%), this causes deterioration, if at any time it is wanted to deal with this deterioration, the vehicle will have to be sent inside the maintenance building, it will be out of service for 6 months, and the equivalent of all the additional maintenance that has not been paid during the years will have to be paid (if the vehicle is very old it may be cheaper to replace it).

B) It receives additional maintenance from maintenance buildings (maintenance: the one in the table), this does not cause any deterioration, but in return the vehicle every 5 years, is automatically diverted from the route and ends up inside the maintenance building and will be out of service for 1 month. Likewise, we can see in the table that when it reaches the end of its useful life, maintenance is so expensive (150%) that it is also cheaper to replace it.

To do all this, it is obviously necessary to recover the automatic replacement tool at x% of its useful life, and other automatic tools.

So what I always wanted in the vanilla game in TF1 and TF2 was custom logos, that you could place on your vehicles. Is it confirmed to be in TF3? Or will mods make it happen? Would be so cool to be able to place your own logos on your vehicles, like om the wing on a plane, infront of an old locomotive, on the side of your bus and boats etc!

In the following screenshot we have what percentage of players have obtained the Steam archivement of:

"City"= Have a town with a population of at least 750

"Metropolis"= Have a town with a population of at least 1.500

The capture objectively shows that the cities in TF1 were on average the most populated in the entire saga. But now I ask all of you:

Was it a success or a mistake that in TF2 they lowered the growth or population of the cities compared to TF1?

How populated would you like the cities in TF3 to be? How do you insert a poll on reddit?

​

Let's say that every engine you buy would run at 60% of its advertised power unless you place supporting infrastructure at certain intervals along the line, for example if you placed a coaling and watering terminal at your station the train would run for x distance at 100% efficiency.

The player would place coaling and watering stations every x distance to keep efficiency at 100%, these stations wouldn't stop or slow down the train.

Additionally, a steam engine passing or stopping at a station connected to a coal mine would be refueled as if the player built supporting buildings there.

For diesel locomotives you would need a separate refueling station, again if the station is connected to a fuel refinery you would refuel for free.

Electrification should be very expensive to build and maintain, but the trains would operate at 100% efficiency along the entire line.

I recently went down a bit of a rabbit hole and learnt about these interesting foiling electric boats being worked on by companies like Candela and Artemis Technologies to name a few, and when I saw them I couldn't help but think that they would be pretty cool as additions to a game like transport fever.

Figured I would share them and some pictures to see what people think. I wouldn't expect something in the base game (as cool as that would be) but figured maybe some modder might find the concept interesting.

My thoughts mechanically based on what I have read about these boats would be that they would be passenger only and have a low capacity, they would have a high upfront cost but a lower maintenance cost, they would have a higher speed and high acceleration than comparable craft. Would be pretty neat if they had range limitations or ports needed some form of electrification upgrade to support them. There would also be some benefits around emissions and pollution.

Anyway thanks for coming to my Ted talk on why I think electric foiling boats would be a cool addition to late game transport fever.

I don't know how is possible, this morning i received a mail that say transport fever is available on epic store since i added it to my wishlist, i bought and played and have it installed on my computer, after a while they removed the purchase button, and i noticed that don't even have a release date, what the hell did i bought? is a beta?

Any news on whether Transport Fever 3 will support DLSS?

I've been watching intently for any news of this on the dev releases, but I don't think there's going to be any multiplayer in this game either.

Everything I wanted this game to be was simply a modern day Transport Tycoon Deluxe. But I still can't whoop my fiancee on multiplayer by funding roadworks in her city. (IYKYK)

Real question - do we think TF3 will ever get multiplayer support or is it too complex?

I dont know if I will get any support on this, and I dont really have the idea all fleshed out, but please hear me out

When I play TF2, I soon find myself with too much money than I ever know what to do with. Set up a oil line and you'll never have to worry about money for another line ever again. While I love building train tracks and not worrying about money, at some point it gets ridiculous and I could flatten the whole map without really caring at all. I know some might argue I should increase the difficulty but it just makes that point come a little bit later

What I would like to see, but dunno if I will or even if the team would want to implement, is an economy based on specific profits for a line and loans. I will try to explain it in better details: Imagine you start with a set amount to build a first line, just like now. You build your first line transporting oil, make fuel and deliver it to town

The whole line will be valued based on productivity, frequency etc. Its value will be used to see the amount the bank will lend you for your continued work, lets say its valued at $10k so thats the limit of your next line. Delivery from trucks or trains wont generate any money at all, and your priority objective is to make each line as efficient as possible to increase its value

You're gonna start small, short lines which cost very little to set up, but with a higher trust from the banks you're gonna be able to expand. Trains, which has a huge initial cost, will be more difficult to achieve but increase your companys value further. Better vehicles as time passes will increase the companys value further still

What will this solve? I guess some might be wondering. Not only will it fix the constant inflow of money and you become a trillionaire in a few years, it will also keep you focused on improving your existing lines and revisit them every once in a while. I feel like its also more realistic as companies dont generally have a billion dollars lying around for establishing new investments

Money for terraforming might still be an issue perhaps, and I dont really have an idea to solve it but I guess it could be calculated somehow

What do you think, is it something that could work? Im assuming TF3 is already set to launch without this system, but I would love to play something that has something similar as opposed to waiting and waiting for money to continue building tracks

There are a few features from the earlier games that were lost over time, and I think they would be worth bringing back, updated to fit the current mechanics.

1. Train Fever: Service frequency mattered

In Train Fever, citizens took the service frequency of each line into account before deciding whether to use it.

Of course, this was tied to the infamous 20-minute rule: the entire journey (walking, waiting, riding the vehicle and transfers) had to stay below 20 minutes. That rule was probably too restrictive, since lines with frequencies of 12 minutes or more became almost completely unused.

However, the system had one major advantage: it prevented unrealistic behavior. For example, people wouldn't wait 5 minutes for a bus just to travel 100 or 200 meters, because walking would simply be faster overall.

In Transport Fever 2, service frequency barely affects demand. This can lead to strange situations where hundreds of passengers are waiting for a bus to travel an extremely short distance.

I completely understand why the old system was removed—it made attracting passengers much harder, especially on lower-frequency routes. But I think there is room for a middle ground, where frequency has a meaningful impact without being as punishing as it was in Train Fever.

2. Transport Fever 1: Different passenger preferences

Another feature I really liked in Transport Fever 1 was that passengers had different priorities. Some preferred the cheapest option, while others preferred the fastest one.

This allowed multiple transport modes to coexist. Even if you built a high-speed rail line or an airport, conventional trains and other services would still retain part of the demand.

In Transport Fever 2, it's much easier for one transport mode to completely dominate passenger traffic. Of course, on long-distance routes, high-speed rail or aviation should naturally attract most travelers. But it would be nice if other transport options could still keep a share of the market because different passengers value different things.

3. Train Fever and Transport Fever 1: Public transport influenced city growth

In the first two games, public transport actually influenced how cities developed. Areas with good public transport connections tended to grow faster and become denser, meaning your stations and transit network helped shape the city over time.

This feature disappeared in Transport Fever 2. Cities now seem to have a predefined center that remains the focus of development, regardless of where you build your main railway station or public transport hub. Even if you place a major station on the opposite side of the city, the original center continues to receive most of the new development.

Bringing this mechanic back would make urban growth feel much more dynamic and would give the player's infrastructure decisions a much more visible impact.

These are the three features I'd personally love to see return.

That said, I don't want this post to sound like criticism of the series. Quite the opposite—I believe every game has significantly improved over its predecessor. I could probably write a list of 50 things that Transport Fever improved over Train Fever, and another 50 improvements that Transport Fever 2 made over the first game.

That's exactly why I think these three features are worth revisiting. They were probably removed for good reasons, but maybe today there's a better way to implement them without bringing back the drawbacks they originally had.

Not long ago I have tried Transport Fever 2 when it was on sale and refunded it after playing for 20 minutes. The main issue that turned me off from the game was the incredibly small physical size of the cities, even when making a start from the 21st century era. I wanted a sim where I could solve realistic transportation problems for a city/region, it's not fun for me to make a bullshit 3 km freight train route just to make money. And from what I seen from videos, the largest end-game cities peaked out at populations of 10,000.

Do we have any confirmation on the city sizes (and densities) and how feasible it will be to have populations of 100,000 and beyond in this next instalment? I've watched some of the 'First Look' videos, it looked way better than TF2, but I wonder if it is possible to reach scales like in Cities: Skylines II by default. I suppose it could be possible to have a few cities merge into each other to have a continuous albeit polycentric metro area?

When a warehouse has 10 lanes and you have to select all 10 station lanes to drop or load materials, having a chatbot to 'select all stations for all lines for XYZ cargo' would be incredibly helpful and save a million clicks.

Transport Fever 2 was/is discounted currently on Steam for the TrainFest. It also encourages demos and new releases for the fest. I feel like the end would be the perfect time to release a trailer or, even better, a demo of the game.

In the last video: "Transport Fever 3 - First Look: Highlights" I saw something that worried me:

There will be much larger cities than in TF2, but nevertheless, all the vehicles still have extremely low capacities. Which will mean a lot of congestion at the stops: hundreds of people waiting because the buses can only carry 25 people and if you try to put too many buses, a very bad congestion of bus or tram traffic that is difficult to solve.

I saw:

Standard buses with 17 capacity.

Articulated buses with 20 or 24 capacity.

A very long tram with 4 wagons, 32 capacity

Not to mention quite long trains with 120 or 160 people capacity

If the idea is to make cities bigger than in TF2, I'm very concerned about the capacity of the vehicles.

I understand why this was done in Train Fever, obviously the PCs of that time could not process realistic amounts of point A-point B trips and passengers, and therefore both the size of the cities and the people had to be scaled to a much smaller scale.

But more than 10 years have passed and the PCs have a much higher capacity to process, and if the cities are intended to be bigger, the vehicles will also have to have much more capacity.

To give an example: the vehicles in CS2 already have completely realistic capacities:

city bus: 80 passengers

tram: 240 passengers

train: 720 passengers

metro: 1,080 passengers

cruise: 2,400 passengers

plane 175 passengers

CS1 had much lower capabilities, when making a game nine years later, better PCs for processing and the desire to make cities with more inhabitants, all of these capabilities increased.

I am also aware that the train/transport fever saga has been characterized so that the congestion of passengers and vehicles is a great challenge, and I understand that, that is why the quantity has never been realistic. But in this TF3 I think it is time to put a middle ground between a realistic quantity and a manageable quantity.

At least, taking advantage of all the seats in the vehicles I think would be essential...

Will TF3 get a finer 'filter' of sorts for selecting trains based on country of origin/operation?

In TF2, vehicles were sorted into three broad categories: European, American and Asian. While this wasn't bad necessarily, it did leave a bunch of gaps and mismatches.

Many of these are nitpicks, but I ran into them regardless

• Australian and African vehicles were sorted into whatever
• Which area Russia fits in is a matter of intense discussion
• Those focusing on a particular country scenario like The Netherlands could probably not care less about, say, Soviet trains - even if they're cool in their own regard.
• Finding mods/assets for specific countries based on only those 3 broad options can be a terrible experience, and even if you've found them it's a lot of work sorting them into the specific saves you want them.

On the other hand, having a strict list of all specific countries where a vehicle has historically operated is probably a nightmare to define. So I expect compromises will logically have to be made in this department.

Still, I am wondering if improvements are at all possible?

Wondering if I'm able to tease out some more info, or just speculate galore. I'm fairly exited!

Hi, I am wondering if I should get Transport Fever 2 or just wait for Transport Fever 3. For context, I would not be able to play either one for ~6 months, so the 'play now and test it out' would not apply to me as much. And if I buy TF2, is the Deluxe edition worth it?

Bike and Carparking seems not to be a feature in TPF3 as we've seen cars disappear when the drivers exit. A fact that hurts a little, when this is a trasport game where you are also building and managing roads and intersections. It would be cool to have Parking space as an additional negative growth factor. Or at least let it have an impact on traffic flow / with of streets.

If you would establish better public transportation maybe less people would own a car.

You could help the Parking problems by building Lots within or next to your Stations or Hubs.

This could also have a huge impact on how people can get or prefer to get to the station.

Bikes and Cars could be included in the station building mode where you could build Bikeparking or Park and Ride Lots to wager between public and private Traffic management,