for me it’s “pickup - copper”, or “drop - iron plate - iron beam”. That way when I am assigning routes to trains, I can sort by pickup and drop-off easily. Took me a long, long time to realize that stations could have the same names and the trains would just go to whichever was most convenient.

Ah, I think I may have used in/out inversely to you when I set up trains.

“copper in” is where copper is put “into” the train system “copper out” is where copper is dropped

I had a very short and consistent scheme for a while. No text, just icons.

{materiel icon}{chest icon}

For example, one station provides iron plates to the rail network (loads onto train), the other requests crude oil from the rail network (unloads from train):

Downsides: Some uncommon icons can be hard to read. Some liquids are similar in color and hard to identify when seen alone.

So later we changed to a better readable format. Examples:

[L] Iron Plates

[U] Crude Oil

I also use “in” and “out”, in combination with rich text. For example, iron ore stations might be:

[IRON ORE RICH TEXT] 1-4 Iron Ore - Out [IRON ORE RICH TEXT] 1-4 Iron Ore - In

Where the “Out” station is at the resource patch (ore comes out of the ground) and “In” is at the base (ore goes in to the factory). I also include the train type in my station names (1-4).

See https://lemmy.ml/comment/686775 for what I mean by rich text

I am usually doing [Station purpose] - [resource] [in/out] E.g. iron ore smelter - iron ore in iron ore smelter - fuel in iron ore smelter - iron plates out (where iron ore and fuels is going INTO the station, and iron plates are going OUT of the station)

Makes it pretty clear, and has never failed me yet.

I normally do [Function] - [Location/Base Name]:

• Iron Pickup - SE
• Iron Pickup - Northern Defense
• Iron Dropoff - Main Base

Gets more and more important as the number of bases increase.