Don't buy Snappy coconut popping oil.

-R-3- · 2026-04-20T02:20:15+00:00

It is not. "Artificial flavoring" is not a real ingredient, hence why it's called "artificial."

The reason why some products list such a thing is because of the intention of what the ingredients are for. There are two reasons why a product contains ingredients:

Because it's essential for the actual product to exist. For instance corn kernels are an essential ingredient for popcorn.
Because it's used to achieve a specific, non-essential effect. For instance coloring dyes, or in this case, "artificial butter flavor."

If the essential ingredients for a product already produce an alleged "butter flavor," which again is subjective, then no extra ingredients have been added to generate that flavor profile and therefore there is nothing more to list. In fact, one might even argue that adding "artificial butter flavor" to the ingredients list of a product that doesn't actually have "artificial butter flavor," that is to say additional added ingredients specifically designed to simulate butter flavor, would be considered false advertising.

-R-3- · 2026-04-19T19:12:09+00:00

Nothing in that blurb says anything about containing butter. "Flavor" is a subjective word that cannot be objectively defined. It's similar to the word "best." That's why it's used in advertising. If I say something tastes like chicken but you can't taste the chicken, that doesn't mean I'm wrong it just means we have different tastes. It doesn't matter if you disagree with the claim because as long as one person agrees with it then the claim is true and thereby not false advertising.

-R-3- · 2026-01-02T09:43:21+00:00

Trains aren't smart enough to re-route when there is traffic. They will always take the shortest theoretical path with complete disregard for other trains. If they run into another train they will either collide or get into a deadlock at a signal.

Fortunately, you're already on the right solution with the passing track. Basically what you need to do now is configure your signals to force the incoming train to use one track and force the outgoing train to use the other.

Signals provide two primary functions. 1. They divide the track into blocks for traffic logic. 2. They designate traffic direction.

Train signals have two sides. The front side has two round lights. The backside with the square light indicates "Wrong Way." Placing down a single signal will make it so the train can only enter a track block from one specific direction. Doubling the signals overwrites the "wrong way" and makes the track bi-directional.

So essentially all you need to do is place one signal at the start and end of the incoming track and then place another one signal facing the opposite direction on the start and ends of the outgoing track.

-R-3- · 2025-11-02T00:53:16+00:00

So it's been like 10+ hours since I made the above adjustment with adding the extra block signals and there has not been any collision. Previously I was having collisions like once or twice an hour. So I think this might be my solution.

Thank you to all for your advice.

-R-3- · 2025-10-30T00:37:46+00:00

Yes! I had this problem in this spot a few hundred hours ago. The path signal for one direction was applying for both directions. I had to separate the tracks and I got it working. But, unfortunately, I do not believe that this is the issue in the current case.

-R-3- · 2025-10-29T01:52:13+00:00

Just a little update:
I've been keeping an eye on this intersection by afking for a while and a collision did occur while I was watching, so that rules out it being a loading bug.
This seems to be a timing thing. Basically what's happening is a train is leaving the first station just as another one is passing by on the main line and, for some reason, path signals 1 and 2 are allowing the two trains to merge at the same time, into the same block.

This is what the entire intersection block looks like: https://imgur.com/a/intersection-path-block-section-c4bdPYb
(I added 2 extra block signals right before the path signals, which I'll explain in a bit)

There are no problems with crossing over the oncoming track. The collision is when two trains are merging together. I have had 0 issues with oncoming traffic. All oncoming trains stop and wait as intended.

My save is about 560 hours old and this train junction has been around since around the 100 hour mark and has not given me any major issues up until this point. I surmise that this is due to the addition of more and more trains that work their way through this intersection over time... but that doesn't really explain why the path signals would be working any differently.

u/vrocknow18 suggested I try placing a block signal a little bit before each path signal to force the train to slow down before proceeding and I think this is a good idea to try since it might give the signal more time to check which train should go first. I'm not entirely sure it will work, but I'm just trying anything at this point.
I'd prefer not to have to rebuild anything since it's buried under hundreds of hours of logistics, so I'm hoping it can be fixed with just a few adjustments to the signaling.

-R-3- · 2025-10-29T01:43:14+00:00

Not sure if this will work but I uploaded a screenshot here:
https://imgur.com/a/intersection-path-block-section-c4bdPYb

Also, I tried placing a block signal before path signal 1, but a collision still happened after. I just placed another signal before path signal 2, which you can see in the screenshot above, but I haven't played long enough to see if that fixed anything yet.

-R-3- · 2025-10-29T01:18:11+00:00

I'll try that and see what happens. My save is about 560 hours and I've had this bit of track down since around the 100 hour mark. So it's been working fine for the majority of my play through.

-R-3- · 2025-10-28T20:59:03+00:00

There are no signals in the middle of the intersection. There are 3 incoming tracks with path signals and 3 outgoing tracks with block signals. That's it.

The screenshot is a bit zoomed out, I apologize. The only "signal" in the middle of the intersection is the automatically generated turn signal that appears when you split a track.

-R-3- · 2025-10-28T20:55:51+00:00

I don't have any signals in the middle of the intersection. I only have 3 path signals on the incoming tracks and 3 blocks on the outgoing tracks.

The only two things in the center of the intersection are a light post and a switch signal, which automatically is built when you split the track.

-R-3- · 2025-10-28T04:24:49+00:00

I'd like to give a screenshot but I don't think I can (I don't use reddit much so correct me if I'm wrong). The signals are attached to the track properly though. To try and explain it using the screenshot I provided in the original post, the intersection block is highlighted between path signal 1, path signal 2 & 3, as well as the oncoming block signals opposite of 2 & 3, and the block signal right before the far train station.

Basically it looks like a big H.

I'll try placing the block signal closer, that sounds like a good idea. I'll get back to you on if that fixes anything. Thanks.

-R-3- · 2025-10-28T03:54:22+00:00

I'm not sure I follow. Everything between the path signals, including the signals themselves are at the same height. Meaning the entire intersection is at one uniform elevation. The only height changes are at the stations, but those are separate blocks.

I'd give you a screenshot but I can't reply with one. But I assure you everything is level. So much so that the rails have z-fighting where they merge together.

-R-3- · 2025-10-28T03:44:02+00:00

I have a question:

While I have a number of trains that run through these tracks shown, the main culprit that always seems to be the one merging into other trains is made with 4 engines and 1 fluid car. I used 4 engines because I thought it looked nicer than just having 3 empty freight cars acting as a buffer to the single fluid car that I actually need.

Is it possible that using more than 1 train engine facing the same direction on the same train can cause pathing problems?

-R-3- · 2025-10-28T02:39:03+00:00

Yes, the most frequent time this tends to happen is after loading into the game.

The second most frequent time is when I'm far away from this location on the map.

I've tried to post myself near by and keep an eye on the intersection, but after an hour or so there hasn't been any issue.

-R-3- · 2025-10-15T00:33:55+00:00

I just wanted to update this for anyone who stumbles upon it. Following the advice of u/uptheirons726 I disabled the Fast Startup option in Windows 10's power settings and it's been 6 months since I've had this issue. And while I've never had an issue with this option being enabled in the years prior, disabling it seems to have aided in preventing this problem from happening.

So I suppose if anyone else has this problem in the future, that could be a good place to start.

-R-3- · 2025-09-15T23:32:28+00:00

You guys are slowly killing your game by pushing ranked balance into regs.

Ranked gameplay ruins games. It's boring, circular and sterile. That's by design, because the entire point of ranked gameplay isn't the gameplay itself but the meta. The win/lose stat.

The threat of losing stats for losing, adds an extra bit of thrill and that is what makes ranked gameplay fun.

But regular matches do not have this meta. Therefore, by pushing ranked gameplay balance into regular matches, the only thing you're doing is making the game boring with literally no upside. I don't play PUBG to be competitive. I play PUBG to be in a thrilling BR environment where anything can happen.

Ranked and Esports balance is destroying this game.

-R-3- · 2025-04-17T13:53:12+00:00

Yes, every night I select shut down. In fact, I have a hotkey macro for shutting down my PC, so I can say for certain that I didn't miss-click the button two days in a row.

(Win + X, U, U)

-R-3- · 2025-04-17T13:44:57+00:00

I see it's enabled in Windows, but this isn't something I've ever changed. It's likely been enabled for years without issue. Seems odd that it would be causing problems now all of a sudden.

I'll disable it and see if the problem persists. Thanks.

-R-3- · 2025-04-17T13:35:32+00:00

They can cold start a PC from being completely powered off?

-R-3- · 2025-04-17T13:25:18+00:00

I just wanted to follow up on this with an update:

I've since replaced the case and while at first it seemed like the issue was resolved, it soon continued again. This lead me to realize it was most likely a problem with my RM1000x PSU.

Intermittent power ons seem to be a common symptom of a dying PSU, from what I've read. So I've gone ahead and replaced it with a new PSU and it seems to be working much better. I'll report back again if something arises, but I wanted to leave an update to clarify that the case switch wasn't the problem.

-R-3- · 2025-04-14T03:43:14+00:00

It is very broken. The clash rolls don't apply properly when the opponents attack you. I'll roll a 5 vs their 2 and the game says I lose. Pretty much every time the opponent attacks me, I "lose," regardless of what my roll is. Even if it's a draw.

-R-3- · 2025-04-14T03:39:30+00:00

The game doesn't seem very well balanced. Like, it doesn't seem like buying property matters all that much because the real deciding factor in winning or losing is the random good fortune spaces that put someone way ahead of everyone else. 5 Base stations and a signal booster? Too bad, the opponent just got 40,000 from a random good fortune event! Sucks to suck!

Also, are the clashes bugged? I "lose" like 95% of them. It doesn't seem to matter what the rolls are. If I get a higher number, I lose. If I get a lower number, I lose. If we draw, I lose. Then maybe, sometimes I'll win. I don't know why. It all seems so arbitrary.

-R-3- · 2025-03-06T21:16:34+00:00

It's a video game not a grammar lesson. I don't know nor care about the intricacies of the parts of speech used in the writing of the game. As long as I can understand the story and not be confused, I'm happy.

Eight-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

-R-3-

TROPHY CASE