You've been accusing people of worse things left and right this thread, so it's no surprise to me that you'd resort to petty attacks ("I WONT SAY IT BUT I WILL SAY IT LOLOL") instead of actually discussing what the 'right balance' might be, or why Rail Crossing or wherever would be worse off if they were built more conveniently. Given that I'm clearly addicted to this game and love many aspects of it, I'm not sure why you'd prefer to fling shit, but oh well.
Look, here are my own thoughts on this, independent of this thread and any petty squabbling thereof.
It takes time to get places in this game. I know this as well as anyone, and probably better than most: Between my three and one-quarter playthroughs of Underrail, I've been on nearly one hundred merchant runs. I know this because I've made twenty batches of Super Steel since v1.0, I made something like nine batches during my last EA playthrough, and during my earliest complete playthrough (prior to the implementation of Super Steel), I accumulated well over 40,000 Charons. I've also fully upgraded the Core City house, which costs something like 40,000 Charons all told.
Because traveling takes time, you have to plan where you'll go in advance and ration out that time, and this (along with merchant buying limitations) also means that you can't just use a spare moment to dump an enormous pile of loot onto one merchant with infinite money and then go on your way. I'll admit it's difficult to explain exactly why I appreciate this, but it's a sort of roadblock that enhances the game by ensuring that nothing's too quick or easy. Carrying capacity and encumbrance are another such limitation.
In terms of world building, it makes sense to me that not every station has its entrance set three inches away from the metro for the player's convenience. To me, that feels more organic and genuine. Likewise, not every station has a compact and convenient layout. Foundry and Core City are huge and sprawling, while SGS is the epitome of convenience. Foundry and Core City also have a lot of little cubbyholes, rat's nests, and alleyways to explore, and I feel the inconvenience of backtracking through them later is worth the tradeoff for the feeling of immensity and exploration potential they initially offer.
Let me put it this way: If every station layout was convenient, that would come through to me in a negative way. It would eventually be obvious that the world had been designed with the player's needs and conveniences in mind, and that isn't good world building. That applies in many contexts, not just map layout, although map layout is part of it. Good world building causes the player to feel as though he is one entity in a (somewhat) living, breathing world that perhaps is largely indifferent to him, rather than the whole thing being a stage constructed for his benefit. It's an illusion of course, because the game was in fact constructed for his sole benefit, but it's a crucial one.
As an example of how Underrail features good world building, take Foundry's large and slightly inconvenient entrance yard. It's Foundry's train yard, used to transport people and goods. There is a large fenced-off area containing cargo crates, there's a crane to move cargo, there's a depot next door to the cargo yard staffed by a woman who handles some of the incoming cargo (as well as dealing with traveling merchants in search of metal), there's a small shuttered warehouse by the gate where presumably valuable materiel is stored, and there's an entire tier for the guards complete with turrets, a surveillance room, and a guy watching the monitors...
none of this has anything to do with a quest. It's there because the game's developer built a city with its own internal logic rather than just a themed set piece for the player.
Yes, backtracking through cavernous areas can be boring and annoying, but again, it's a tradeoff. I feel it's worth it.