Bikes and Taxis: do you use them?

[ethansprang 41]

I've been playing with taxis and bikes, and... what do they add?  I mean, aside from the appearance that there are taxis and bikes now.  Taxi stands - why?

Since bikes will use sidewalks and ped paths, why do we need bike lanes?  They don't appear to have a better speed limit, and so far I haven't seen an congestion issues that one of them handles better than the other.

What do you use them for?

[Judazzz 1,936]

I've placed some bike lanes and taxi stands, mainly because I wanted to see them in my city, so haven't really checked if they had any noticeable impact on traffic. To be honest, I doubt it had any serious consequences though, traffic density and flow seem pretty much the same as before the update (although I can't say that with 100% certainty, as I also ditched Traffic++ in favor of the Enhanced AI mod when After dark was released).

So for now I treat them purely as visual additions (love seeing bicyclists race through traffic like suicidal maniacs :D)

  Edited September 29, 2015 by Judazzz  

[ReneXL 16]

I dislike bus & bike lanes albeit firts I was exited about them: no trees. So I allow my cims to bike on pavements - they get a long fine with pedestrians

[Linoa06 1,374]

I like bus lanes a lot. They also make me use those wide roads more - I dislike those three lanes roads but with bus lanes they're only two lanes

Cycles and taxis..I'm not really sure. I see a lot of people coming from my airport in taxis, but how do cycles work exactly? I suspect they work best the more cycle lanes you place, right?

Also I have to agree with ReneXL - why no trees? XD

  Edited October 3, 2015 by Linoa06  

[ReneXL 16]

Yeah - we needs TREES on those special lane roads

I like taxi's a lot. From my view and experience, the amount of taxis goes on par with population. 

Like if one has 150k pop, then the city is satisfied with 6 taxi depots (each having 25 cabs). 

Provided of course that a city of that size has at least some kind of adequate public transport system.

[Linoa06 1,374]

My taxis go unused, but I suspect I have too good a transportation system. :/

Then again everyone seems to use cars

[SilentMage 22]

I recently added my first taxi depot in my city of about 30k.  I spent about an in-game day watching the cabs to see where they went to pick people up and, more importantly, where they were dropped off.  I placed two taxi stands at two highly trafficked locations (based on some cabs going to those areas through the course of a day) - the stands are on nearly opposite ends of the core of my city, though I haven't seen the cabs use them.  Note that I don't yet have any forms of mass transit in place yet, though I've been planning to implement buses in my next session (I've carved a space for the depot next to a highway junction for easy access to the core city).

I highly doubt the taxis are making a dent in traffic - 25 cars is a drop in the bucket - but I do think they are a cheap first step towards planning more expensive bus and subway routes.

[ethansprang 41]

My taxis are always losing money.  I'm not sure they help to reduce traffic much, which is the reason for mass transit, and tourists don't provide much income.  So I'll usually build one because I feel like I should, but rarely more.  It's not like there's a big problem in my cities where "MOAR Taxis!" is the obvious solution.

[SilentMage 22]

My taxis are always losing money.  I'm not sure they help to reduce traffic much, which is the reason for mass transit, and tourists don't provide much income.  So I'll usually build one because I feel like I should, but rarely more.  It's not like there's a big problem in my cities where "MOAR Taxis!" is the obvious solution.

Ohh, good point on the "losing money" part.  I wonder if taxi drivers make more or less based on the wealth level of the person being picked up - if that is true, then taxis likely can break-even or turn a profit for you in tourism-heavy districts in a city.  That said, it costs me $192/week for one taxi stand, and my cabbies haven't even broke $100/week yet. 

That said, the incredibly low cost to manage, coupled with the lack of profits, likely brings the benefit of making the city more tourist-friendly, especially if you don't have a comprehensive mass transit network.

[Lot Creator 304]

I have about 10 taxi stations on a 115K city. Suffice to say, they always seem to spawn  and go about getting lost, generally I don't really know what they do. My city was already built around a railroad system and was already too large to implement taxis. Quite frankly I would like a larger depot or something to muffle the noise a bit, the other day I checked the noise levels city-wide and it was 71% from all of the railroads.

  Edited October 5, 2015 by Lot Creator  

[SkyeSilence 0]

I would use them if I knew how to, since I'm newish to C:S.

[ethansprang 41]

My taxis are always losing money.  I'm not sure they help to reduce traffic much, which is the reason for mass transit, and tourists don't provide much income.  So I'll usually build one because I feel like I should, but rarely more.  It's not like there's a big problem in my cities where "MOAR Taxis!" is the obvious solution.

Ohh, good point on the "losing money" part.  I wonder if taxi drivers make more or less based on the wealth level of the person being picked up - if that is true, then taxis likely can break-even or turn a profit for you in tourism-heavy districts in a city.  That said, it costs me $192/week for one taxi stand, and my cabbies haven't even broke $100/week yet. 

That said, the incredibly low cost to manage, coupled with the lack of profits, likely brings the benefit of making the city more tourist-friendly, especially if you don't have a comprehensive mass transit network.

Taxis fares are per-mile.  That's it.  And that's the crazy thing - my taxis are always in use, they never sit at the taxi stands. But they don't cover their costs - how can that be?

[Turjan 1,048]

Taxis fares are per-mile.  That's it.  And that's the crazy thing - my taxis are always in use, they never sit at the taxi stands. But they don't cover their costs - how can that be?

As with most services, they are unfortunately not assigned by distance but by order of request. This means that your taxis spend most of their time driving empty from one end of your city to the other. Try a four tile city, then it may become profitable.

Anyway, I don't think public transport is there to make money directly (with the awkward exception of metros, which are cheap to build and make tons of money). Buses are somewhat in the plus if you build them right. Rail loses huge amounts of money. However, altogether, they make the city more efficient, so they are well worth the money you spend on them (maybe not the passenger trains, but I love building and watching them).

[Linoa06 1,374]

Taxis fares are per-mile.  That's it.  And that's the crazy thing - my taxis are always in use, they never sit at the taxi stands. But they don't cover their costs - how can that be?

As with most services, they are unfortunately not assigned by distance but by order of request. This means that your taxis spend most of their time driving empty from one end of your city to the other. Try a four tile city, then it may become profitable.

Anyway, I don't think public transport is there to make money directly (with the awkward exception of metros, which are cheap to build and make tons of money). Buses are somewhat in the plus if you build them right. Rail loses huge amounts of money. However, altogether, they make the city more efficient, so they are well worth the money you spend on them (maybe not the passenger trains, but I love building and watching them).

Yeah metros are kinda broken. :c

[BlakeMW 84]

 Anyway, I don't think public transport is there to make money directly (with the awkward exception of metros, which are cheap to build and make tons of money). Buses are somewhat in the plus if you build them right. Rail loses huge amounts of money. However, altogether, they make the city more efficient, so they are well worth the money you spend on them (maybe not the passenger trains, but I love building and watching them).

My experience is the only mass transit which is a true money making venture is busses. The reason is you only need 1 bus depot regardless of how many busses you have in service. This means you can earn 10's of thousands with only the 1080 monthly cost for a single depot (with +50% budget).

Metro only seems to be profitable if you don't make extensive use of busses (this forces cims to take more and longer metro rides), and it can't be grossly profitable because you do have to pay for every metro station, also it's harder to exploit the +50% budget thing and run with a profit.

In a way the less effective your mass transit is, the more profitable it will be. Highest profit is from only busses, second highest profit is only metro and bus/metro combo will usually cover its expenses with the bus making a profit and the metro making a loss. Frankly I'm not sure if it's worth using any other passenger transport options, other than to ease traffic in and out of the city.

[BlakeMW 84]

As for bike lanes.

I am bepuzzled by the bicycle path which is a counterpart to the pedestrian paths. Cyclists seem perfectly happy to ride on pedestrian paths (including through parks), and if you place a bike path and ped path side by side, they seem indifferent as to which they use. So if a bicycle path is just a ped path which ped's can't use, why wouldn't you just use ped paths?

[Turjan 1,048]

In a way the less effective your mass transit is, the more profitable it will be. Highest profit is from only busses, second highest profit is only metro and bus/metro combo will usually cover its expenses with the bus making a profit and the metro making a loss. Frankly I'm not sure if it's worth using any other passenger transport options, other than to ease traffic in and out of the city.

I'm fine with your first sentence. This is obvious. Using only one depot and keeping the number of buses below the number needed to transport everyone who wants, is of course the most profitable approach if you look at your transport budget in isolation. This game allows for many different approaches at city building, and if you build a automobile-centric city with a completely efficient road system like you find them in the American West, you probably don't need any public transport at all, except for triggering industry upgrades.

I mostly build dense cities with a network of small roads (honestly, my highway system is only that good because the game makes use of only three hospitals/clinics for a whole city), and buses have the disadvantage that they put stress on your road system. If you get bus bunching, the buses also tend to clog all roads they run on, as every stop only holds one bus. It's, often enough, beneficial to keep buses away from important roads. I'm also very happy for bus lanes. No, I don't have a single bus line running on a bus lane. Buses only block those. However, ambulances and police use them, which is a real boon and solves many traffic issues. My only problem here is that they still double as turn lanes for the general traffic, but it's okay, as long as you don't have buses go on them.

The real advantage of metros and trains is that they put much traffic on a different traffic layer that does not interfere with road traffic. Metros jump start development, and people reach their destination much more quickly, which means they are less time in traffic, which in and itself reduces traffic, even that of public transport. It's easy to run your metro system with about double the income of what it costs. You need feeder bus lines to achieve this, which I'm fine with as long as they run a slight plus. All of this promotes city growth and increases your income indirectly.

So, the competition in this specific category is between metro and train. Here, metro wins single-handedly. It costs a fraction of the train upkeep, and this is combined with the fact that a metro station only takes a few blocks of land to place and has a use radius that starts one block away from its center. Train stations, on the other hand, are themselves traffic obstacles and often hard to reach for pedestrians. They also have a huge noise radius. I think my train system costs 7 times more than it earns in income. Funny enough, that does not have any negative budget consequences, if you don't do frivolous things. Okay, I built a few frivolous lines that are more there for show than for actual use, so I had to raise taxes to 10-11%. However, it's a difficult map where efficient solutions are hard to achieve, plus I mostly avoided the metro "I win" button this time (plus the specific problem that I built two metro lines mostly for tourist purposes, and my tourism bugged out), so I'm fine with that .

As for bike lanes.

I am bepuzzled by the bicycle path which is a counterpart to the pedestrian paths. Cyclists seem perfectly happy to ride on pedestrian paths (including through parks), and if you place a bike path and ped path side by side, they seem indifferent as to which they use. So if a bicycle path is just a ped path which ped's can't use, why wouldn't you just use ped paths?

Hmm, I guess bike paths are more of an afterthought, as there were a few vocal players who wanted those. There's a city policy that bans the bike use on sidewalks (common in Europe, also commonly disregarded), so it's probably for people who want to "follow the rules".

[Linoa06 1,374]

Well yeah, metros and trains are grade-separated though trains also tend to take space. I wish metros were trickier to build however, as right now I feel they're a bit of a cheat.

[hbn 244]

I use taxis. Cycle lanes I have used on occasion though the lack of one way roads with cycle lanes doesn't help me use them. Bus lanes not so much because it usually starts messing up turn lanes. I have used solely bus roads for bus station access to help traffic flow (even though no zoning has issues there as well but that's about it.

I have noticed mind that cyclists will just cycle along the pavement anyway if there is no cycle lane. I'm not sure if there are any benefits or drawbacks other than aesthetic, but then in the UK anyway cyclists are usually not allowed to cycle on the footpath at all unless necessary (pedestrianised area for example), they cycle at the side of the road.

[Q-Tips 37]

I use the taxis much and like to see them in the traffic, as it look more realistic with them. Wether theres much help with them? Not much, but they help getting the people from my airport and helps release a packed train. I simply couldnt add more train going from the airport without adding more tracks who would take up to much space. Except from that, taxis increse the traffic on roads, as they give some the choise of taking taxis instead of using own car or other public transport. If they use their own car, they take one trip from point A to B, but a taxi would first have to drive to point A. The taxi's dont coordinate with each other and i have noticed one taxi going from one edge of city to the other edge to pick up a passenger while a second taxi is going the opposite way to pick up another passenger.

Maybe i am wrong, but it looks like more people choose to use cycle when there is a cycle lane then without. However, if there ther is no cyclelane, they who choose to use a cycle, use the footpath. So maybe not a big deal what you choose?

  Edited October 18, 2015 by Q-Tips  

[Linoa06 1,374]

 Anyway, I don't think public transport is there to make money directly (with the awkward exception of metros, which are cheap to build and make tons of money). Buses are somewhat in the plus if you build them right. Rail loses huge amounts of money. However, altogether, they make the city more efficient, so they are well worth the money you spend on them (maybe not the passenger trains, but I love building and watching them).

My experience is the only mass transit which is a true money making venture is busses. The reason is you only need 1 bus depot regardless of how many busses you have in service. This means you can earn 10's of thousands with only the 1080 monthly cost for a single depot (with +50% budget).

Metro only seems to be profitable if you don't make extensive use of busses (this forces cims to take more and longer metro rides), and it can't be grossly profitable because you do have to pay for every metro station, also it's harder to exploit the +50% budget thing and run with a profit.

In a way the less effective your mass transit is, the more profitable it will be. Highest profit is from only busses, second highest profit is only metro and bus/metro combo will usually cover its expenses with the bus making a profit and the metro making a loss. Frankly I'm not sure if it's worth using any other passenger transport options, other than to ease traffic in and out of the city.

That is because if you feed your buses to subway stations your subway will become a lot more interesting than if it competes with plenty of bus lines also heading in the same direction. The key to an efficient and profitable transit system is multi-modal interchanges, though I suspect that's because cims also pay for a bus fare THEN for a metro fare, too.

(The Tyne and Wear metro literally forced everyone to commute to a subway station while travelling downtown or even to the village next door when it first opened, which probably contributed to its success)

[Turjan 1,048]

That is because if you feed your buses to subway stations your subway will become a lot more interesting than if it competes with plenty of bus lines also heading in the same direction. The key to an efficient and profitable transit system is multi-modal interchanges, though I suspect that's because cims also pay for a bus fare THEN for a metro fare, too.

That's the CiM approach to traffic and monetary success: metros with short bus feeder lines. It's a bit more difficult in this game though, as Cims are less likely to change mode of transportation. Also, they are happy to save any meter they have to walk, so they prefer bus over metro and metro over train. They will also prefer the train on the closest platform and then change lines the next station.

[Ltw 401]

I use bike-lanes a lot. I have to say that bike-traffic still doesn't have a big share in overall but it really helps in decreasing certain problems with congestion. Even though my bike-lane network is extensive citizens still prefer metro instead. I'm happy that they do because that costs me a lot. I'm actually earning quite a lot on my metro-system so I see bike-lanes more as an addition than a replacement.

I like using bike-lanes because it is very cheap to build and maintain and it could really help decreasing traffic congestion locally. Basically I'm using the bike-lanes from the parks-menu for long distances. I'm building those bike-lanes as bridges so that cyclists don't have any troubles with crossroads. Every few blocks you could get off this bridge and continue via streets with bicycle-lanes. This looks a little bit like this:

Furthermore I try to build this network as efficient as possible. Meaning without losing real-estate. Especially in already existing areas this is important in my opinion. By building bicycle-lanes on top of highways, railways and next to bridges you could really safe a lot of real-estate. Next to that it looks quite nice.

At last I'm using roads with bicycle-lanes a lot. I usually build one road with bicycle-lanes every two blocks. However, even then there are a lot of parts of my city that don't have that much roads with bicycle-lanes. Mostly because I've built this before After Dark got released.

Since I've been doing this I've noticed a decrease in traffic-intensity at some places. One part of my city got quite a lot problems because there weren't that many connections to the rest of the city via road (two bridges, however there were a lot of connections via metro). Problems with congestion decreased significantly. For example the bridge on the last picture used to be completely congested, now the problems are almost completely solved (just some congestion at some crossroads but that's it). Thus bicycles could really help in improving traffic in your city.

[BlakeMW 84]

Interestingly cims at least sometimes carry a bike in their pocket (okay, they also sometimes carry a car in their pocket, but with bikes it makes sense). You can see this because cims often bike to/from metro. Also sometimes a pedestrian (especially if forced by a bike lane being the only way to get to where they're going) will pull a bike from their pocket and turn into a bicycle cim.

Cims do seem to be willing to bike further than they are willing to walk, at least I've had some bridges which attract bikes but not really pedestrians.

So if Cims will bike further than they walk and can use bikes as part of mass transit it is quite likely that bikes really do help to reduce congestion - I'm really not sure if bike lanes do a whole lot, but the road with bike lanes is just as cheap in upkeep as the standard road and it eliminates parked cars so I like to use it extensively.