I've been thinking about how train robberies work outside of story mission set pieces. The way the law shows up immediately and the amount of bounty you get versus the amount you are able to rob seems to make it pretty useless, right? Not to mention I would usually get shot down pretty quickly and die anyways. I wonder what they intended that to actually be like? Also the janky way you rob the safes where sometimes the door doesn't blow off makes me think they didn't really finish off the way they wanted this to work.
It seems to me a good solution would have been to use the same or very similar AI on lawmen as they use on bounty hunters, where they spawn a ways off and you can see them on the map slowly tracking you down. Then it would become this race against time to see how long you think you can linger before running, and you could gradually improve and/or find better places to stop the train to hold them off longer.
I've noticed this with Rockstar games especially since they took out property ownership in GTA for instance. They're afraid of giving you ways of making more than just meager amounts of money in the open world because they don't want to break the story, but then they give you more than enough rope to hang yourself by letting you rack up a $300 bounty in a open world gunfight with the law, so then they have to overcorrect by showering you with cash in the story in case you want to pay off the possibly multiple $300 bounties you've racked up while trying to make money on your own.
Apologies for the rant towards the end there, but TL;DR why not use the slow tracking from bounty hunters during train robberies? Do you think they made them unprofitable on purpose for balance or was it just poorly implemented?