The Most Profitable City Bus Routes? (Updated Oct 2017)

Overview

In this guide I test several different ways of routing buses in towns. Looking at circular and point-to-point systems to work out which, over five years, generates the most profit and enables growth in connected services.

Intro and Disclaimer

A comparison of different types of urban bus routes to work out which might be the most profitable way to transport passengers between residential (particularly those coming in on a train), commercial, and industrial areas.

All testing is done without any mods but I am using a user created map – the South West England Map created by Painful Agenda: [link]

There is only a single train line to connect two towns on the map, Plymouth and Torquay. The secondary town has a single bus route to enable traffic to and from all three zones in that town. I have also created two cargo routes supplying food and construction materials into the main town, Plymouth.

In the main town I test seven route variations to determine how much money they make over a period of (nearly) five years. With the exception of two scenarios all routes go through a bus station adjacent to the intercity train station on the basis that it is inter-city travel that promotes the urban development:

1. Two separate circuits through all zones, one clockwise and one anti-clockwise
2. Single bi-directional circuit
3. Two separate commercial and industrial routes each including a residential stop (there are two variations on this, one with the residential stop before the commercial or industrial stop, and one with the residential stop after the commercial or industrial stop)
4. Three strictly point-to-point routes (to residential, to commercial, and to industrial) all going through the main bus station
5. Two strictly point-to-point routes one to commercial and one to industrial with no additional residential services
6. Two strictly point-to-point routes one to commercial and one to industrial plus an additional route that links the residential area with the commercial and industrial zones but does not go through the bus/train station hub
7. Variation on the previous scenario, adding a second internal residential route and more bus stops. The residential lines do not go through the bus/train station hub.

Please read the comments section for some extra insights. There are some good alternative strategies highlighted by several other players and there is discussion of a few other considerations, such as frequency, that aren’t mentioned in the body of this guide.

The results I am presenting are from a five year period with new routes and new towns, results in much larger, busier or more diverse towns may be different although I would expect the same basic rules mentioned in the Conclusions to hold true.

This test was conducted in August 2017 and so makes use of road waypoints and terminal/platform assignment to manage the routes and prevent any changes as a result of the dynamic town development.

I have not looked at or tested any code or scripts, these results are from purely playing the game as shown in the images. 🙂

The Scenarios Tested (Outline)

The test town, Plymouth, is a good size (RCI numbers are 619, 164, 133) and the three areas (residential, commercial, and industrial) are reasonably well separated and, most importantly, the shopping and working buildings are quite a distance from the railway station. The second town, Torquay, is smaller (RCI: 132, 41, 42) and I have removed the road link so any travellers will have to use my train line!

The railway station in Plymouth only covers a small residential area to start with so, in addition to the nearby bus station, there is a second bus stop for the rest of the residential zone.

NOTE1: One significant change in my test setup for this revised guide is the addition of cargo routes into the main town. There is a line bringing Food Supplies in for Commercial development and a line for Building Materials to promote Industrial growth.

NOTE2: I did adjust the number of cargo trucks and train carriages throughout the test period to meet increasing production/demand and also paid down the loan to a lesser or greater extent in some scenarios. These variations will have had some impact on the map total profit to a different degree in the different test runs.

NOTE3: Purely to aid visibility I changed some of the line colours in the route setup images, despite the difference in colours the setup and results image are from the same test.

Scenario 1: Two Circular Routes

My “traditional” Train Fever setup of one clockwise route: Station – Residential – Commercial – Industrial and another anti-clockwise route: Station – Industrial – Commercial – Residential.

This setup worked OK, both routes became profitable and there was modest growth in the network. Interestingly this setup gave the biggest growth in Plymouth’s population, up 30 to 649. Line usage of 18% in Plymouth was also among the highest.

The combined profit for bus use in Plymouth in the last four years was $211.17, the second highest figure and the total for the whole map was $1616.4.

Scenario 2: One Bi-directional Circular Route

I have used this setup a lot in Transport Fever, it keeps the number of routes manageable and is easy to manage: Station – Residential – Commercial – Industrial – Station – Industrial – Commercial – Residential.

This setup also worked OK, but it took longer to generate good profits and the total revenue for the whole map was significantly less than the previous scenario.

Scenario 3: Two Direct Routes With Additional Residential (first)

In this setup I had separate routes for commercial and industrial but both went to the additional residential stop before going to their final destination, so one route went : Station – Residential – Commercial and the second route was: Station – Residential – Industrial.

This was a much less successful arrangement. Both routes came into profit but one (in his case Commercial) took much longer than the other so overall revenue was considerably down compared to the other scenarios. Though particularly poor I should say that the map profit figures could have been down to inadequate management of the loan interest.

It is also worth noting that the population of Plymouth declined dramatically and we saw the smallest increase in Commercial property.

Scenario 3a: Two Direct Routes With Additional Residential (last)

This is a variation of the previous setup. In this example the buses go to the Residential zone after their Commercial or Industrial stop, thus two routes: Station – Commercial – Residential and: Station – Industrial – Residential.

This was, relatively speaking, surprisingly successful. By no means the best overall but it did indicate that the sequence of a route through the zones can make a significant difference to revenue. For those who like to micromanage this test helps emphasise that if you examine exactly where your passengers are going, within town or to another town, you can design routes to get them delivered quickly and profitably.

As in the previous example by the time I ran this test I was paying more attention to keeping cargo routes efficient and also paying down the loan as quickly as possible which probably contributed to why this scenario saw the best cumulative map profit figure!

Scenario 4: Three Direct Point-to-Point Routes

In this setup I created three zone-specific routes for residential, commercial and industrial, so one route went Station – Residential, one went Station – Commercial and the third Station – Industrial. Note that all three routes went to the main train/bus station hub to accommodate local residents wanting to use a bus to shop or work in Plymouth as well as those travelling to Torquay.

This setup really did not work! I am not at all sure why but while the Commercial and Residential routes were moderately profitable, the Industrial line never came into profit and the overall map figures were the lowest of all tests.

Likewise the population of Plymouth also declined dramatically in this scenario and we saw the smallest increase in Industrial property.

Scenario 5: Two Direct Point-to-Point Routes, No Residential Service

In this test I did not offer any service to the main residential zone in Plymouth, there were just the two separate routes for Commercial and Industrial, Station – Commercial and Station – Industrial.

This was a surprisingly successful setup, although the Industrial line took a time to start making money the Commercial route turned in good profits quite quickly and the overall figures are very respectable.

Interestingly, this very limited service saw the largest increase in both Commercial and Industrial populations and there was certainly no negative impact on the other town, Torquay. I’m thinking that this basic setup really works for inter-city traffic which can be generally good but the lack of a local residential service not only denied me revenue for those journeys but, as the table shows does not encourage local population growth (there was a small loss in Plymouth population). So, this could be a way to encourage a town to focus on purely one type of land use?

Scenario 6: Three Zone-Specific Routes, Local Only Residential Service

In this setup, like test 4, I created three zone-specific routes for residential, commercial and industrial but in this scenario the residential route did not visit the main train/bus station hub. So one route went Station – Commercial another Station – Industrial and the Residential line went Residential – Commercial – Industrial so it connected all local zones but residents wanting to travel out of town on the train would need to change buses.

In terms of profit this worked incredibly well! Both the Commercial and Residential lines were making money quite quickly and I could easily have added another bus (or two?) to each line to soak up the demand. The Industrial line took longer and the profits weren’t great but were quite respectable enough.

The ‘trick’ with this setup was that Plymouth residents would use two buses to get to the train station and so generated substantially more revenue. Also with the town at this size, with only one stop in each zone, practically every passenger on every leg of the journey gave me money – there were no buses full of passengers travelling past multiple stops.

The combined revenue across all routes in Plymouth was significantly up on other scenarios and the map overall showed a marked increase in the final year profit. Although town population was only average, we got the best line usage figure for Plymouth and Torquay was also very good.

For the map as a whole, this scenario also gave some of the best total revenue figures.

Scenario 7: 2 External, 2 Internal & Extra Stops

This particular variant is based on suggestions from SBGaming (see the comments section) who recommended adding many more stops in the town and not rely on just one passenger stop within a catchment area. The idea being that the sims are more likely to use your buses the less distance they have to walk to find one.

It’s essentially an enhancement of Scenario 6 in that there are two lines from the train station station to bring external traffic to the industrial and commercial zones. There are also now two internal lines to take the local residents to the industrial and commercial zones as well as link up with the lines that would take them to the station to travel to the other town.

This setup worked rather well. Both the Commercial and Industrial lines came into profit quite quickly but both the local routes struggled for several years. However, the combined totals for the map as whole where better than all the previous tests and local line usage reached a high of 29%, by far the best result.

Watching the routes develop and the changes in passenger numbers I suspect that if I had adjusted the numbers of buses on each route, adding more on the busy ‘Direct’ routes and only providing enough to meet demand on the ‘local’ lines the profit figures could have been improved further. I hadn’t done that in previous tests so doing so here would have compromised the comparison.

I think one key ‘take-away’ from this test (for me, at least!) is that more frequent passenger stops are worthwhile and should improve profits by reducing the walking distance the sims consider acceptable.

The Conclusions

As the screenshot below shows the simple zone-specific point-to-point routes tended to work out the most profitable. This may not make sense in the ‘real world’ but it suits the logic of the game.

So, some observations on the game mechanics:

• Citizens only travel between home and work or home and shopping
• There is no travel between residential zones?
• Citizens going from home to work/shop will not get off in a residential zone unless that stop is the closest to their destination
• Putting in more stops will give the residents less excuse to walk and so increase rider-ship
• People will use multiple lines to get where they’re going, if organised well these will get lots of extra revenue from each traveller
• Using common ‘hub’ stations will work but may not offer the best revenue opportunities
• Routes will automatically change if the game alters the road layout in the vicinity of a stop – use waypoints and terminal selection to maintain your preferred routing

So, while it means you will have many more routes to manage, to get maximum revenue you will probably want buses going point-to-point for each specific land use type to enable direct travel between homes and work or shop. However, be aware that when the road layout changes as a result of the dynamic town development your routes may also be changed so you should keep an eye on them to ensure the best roads are used. The July 2017 update helps a lot with this, allowing you to set road waypoints and set specific platforms or stops for road vehicles to use.

Stops which cover a mix of commercial and industrial should also work but, like all routes, their success will depend on capacity and demand.

Oh, and with the dynamics of town development in mind it is worth saying that:

Your Mileage Will Probably Vary! 🙂

If you’ve read this far, please also read the comments section for some extra insights. There are some good alternative strategies highlighted by several other players and there is discussion of a few other considerations, such as frequency, that aren’t mentioned in the body of the guide.

The Video Presentation

In the first edition of this guide I had a video showing how I got the numbers for each of my test scenarios but when I started work on a video for this new version it came out at about 60 minutes which I think is far too long for most people to listen to me nattering on about revenue streams!

I have added many more images and details to this new edition so, hopefully, a full video version is not necessary. However, if you would like to see and hear me talking about the one route setup that I have classified as ‘second best’. This basic design I think offers the best profit opportunities but as I later discovered (in scenario 7) it can be improved by the addition of more stops and, possibly, extra internal routes …

If you like to see the same commentary on all the other route configuration tests, just let me know and I will try to cobble them together in a moderately entertaining fashion. 🙂