This is very true! Its not a particularly bad route since the update I will concede. As with all earlier Rivet routes it just lacks substance in terms of the original timetable and playability. The scenary before the update (in the original release) was pretty shambolic though. Rivet do seem to be heading in the right direction over the last few months, and with the Inter7City HST coming along, Tyler may have made a full working timetable to match it (one can hope). I feel Skyhook are also frustrated as the timetable has been with DTG and will now most likely be replaced again by the Inter7City one. For players though, this will be very good however.
We don't know who is making the Inter7City HST or if it will have its own timetable. It could be Skyhook, considering they have an actual HST model to work with. Hopefully we find out next week on the roadmap.
If the new HST is already in this timetable that could indicate that it won't get a new one - hope it does though!
Was thinking about the scotrail hst earlier, and with the confirmed Rivet timetable pack, both use stock modified from stock they used; 170 and 171 from the original 170, and 377 likely used from the wcml one. Rivet never made a HST. Skyhook, however have... This is just speculation so take it with a grain of salt.
That's how i read it as well. I think the HST will slot into this Sprinter timetable and that will be that. Honestly feels like this route is a bit cursed Shame too as it's an interesting one to drive despite it's flaws. Multiple paths and service patterns, Firth of Forth Bridge is very cool, etc Bringing the ScR Class 170 up to standard would go quite a ways imo. Really disheartening to once again have to drive the worse version of a particular train because of.....timing, idk? The sound mix in particular is all over the place- reverb and engine sounds are extremely loud while running sounds are so quiet you can only really hear them in exterior cam, and the train announcents haven't been updated at all from the original release- you can barely hear them most of the time- maybe they only come from the speakers in the passenger compartment idk?
Having 3 timetables for the route would be silly. Hopefully they can just sort the 158 timetable to make it to today’s real timetable. Can appreciate why the newer Leven via Dunfermline services weren’t originally included but if there’s a I7C coming they’ll surely have to look at the code anyway so just make it modern day. Do that above and sort the apparently already sorted 170 sounds(in terms of dev work already done), signals, announcements and it’s pretty much a great DLC. Yes I know there are still some scenery not quite right but overall that’s never gonna be perfect. The frustration is with this snd the Edinburgh to Glasgow route is it is fairly easy fixes preventing them from being very solid routes and that was never revisited so fear this will likely be the same.
Having the 220 would be nice also, but you can't fault Skyhook for that considering it didn't exist when they made this.
One can hope with talent like Tyler onboard they will revisit E2G and FCL and update the scenery even more. They'd both be sound routes if they were given the relevant love. Edinburgh to Glasgow has the potential to be a great commuter route... But along with the scenery needing a touch up, the 385 desperately needs to have it's sound improved. The 3D modelling is great on it, but unfortunately it doesn't have sounds to match!
I'm a little more invested in this route given its my home route. So im more disappointed about this one than other DLC's. The route has bags of potential. Variety of scenery, track and destinations, varied stock using the lines. But its been fumbled badly from the start and it does feel like they've just given up on it. Yea they have made some improvements to the scenery, which is welcome and the 158/170 combined are great. But its missing the HST which is apparently coming with the HST pack. Given the delay I thought adding the 220 might have been a possibility and I was hoping that maybe we might have got Azumas playable. Theres gaps in the timetable in the morning and at night. The Leven train stops are still well back from the buffers, I'd have thought that would be a straightforward fix and seems to sum up the apparent lack of effort that's been put into the route. Also the 158 seems to struggle with acceleration above 60mph unless its going down a hill. Has a bad habit of rolling back when you're trying to leave North Queensferry heading to Edinburgh, even when its dry and unlike the 170 I don't think there's a hill start feature.
Put the brake into step 1, apply power and then release the brake when the revs have built up - works like that in the MML one anyway. Same goes for any 2 handled unit that I can think of.
Wouldn't work since we only have 801, not the bi-mode 800. (801 only has a singular diesel engine for emergency use only, and as such, diesel performance is atrocious) Leave it in brake step 1, apply power, then fully release brakes.
The route isn't that bad. Quite scenic in parts; far better than the dull ED-GL. Probably Rivet's best route aside from Bernina.
i think this is absolutely spot on, usually there'd be an article showing off all the work that's been done over the past year on this, showcasing all the new playability and giving information on things like new service levels and total playable/AI count of the timetable.. it speaks absolute volumes that this was practically hidden away at the footnotes of a wider patch release, as both DTG and Skyhook knew exactly what the reaction would be when those who have waited patiently for this very release see just how little has improved, and in all honesty just how much this timetable, which has been many, many months in the making, is actually a huge step backwards. Unless this is improved (which i doubt will ever happen now given just how long this 'improvement' has taken), any faith and goodwill i had towards Skyhook has gone completely, i just don't see how this offering can even remotely be justified.. especially given the timetable standards of other recent releases. The route visually was markedly improved by Rivet after release, credit where it's due for that.. but from a timetable perspective this is a massive, massive let down, it's literally worse than the previous original timetable and i don't know how this has been passed fit for release, i really don't
I agree, and actually I think that the large amount of fragmented timetables that we’re getting in general is a little annoying. I understand why it has to happen, because it’s hard to slot things into timetables and simulating them to test takes a lot of time. But like for example with the cargo line packs, we have a separate timetable on WCMLOS for a military freight wagon, and there’s about to be another separate one for the nuclear wagons. It’s not a great experience. But more related to this case in particular, I wish that DTG would give us the ability to hide timetables that we don’t want to use, and disable them from being used in Quick Play, for example. Also just because if we did theoretically get a third timetable for this route, which I don’t think is going to happen personally, but if we did, that’s two timetables that become redundant in my mind, and now every time I want to use the route I have to make sure I select the correct timetable. Maybe it seems like it’s not such a big deal, but I just think the user experience could be improved by letting us hide timetables that we don’t want to see. Back to the overall point, I do hope that Skyhook revisits this timetable. Even if it was based on real train timings, it’s clearly missing services that both existed before this timetable was set, and existed after this timetable was set. I don’t think that emergency timetables should be used in place of full timetables, even if it was technically correct for the short span of time in which this timetable is based on.
In regards to you saying about the 801 not working as it’s not the bi mode version. There’s still AI Azumas running north of Edinburgh which are 801’s (801234 I saw which doesn’t even exist) so you think they could have made them playable in some form.
Koeln - Aachen has three. I agree with the post above - it would be nice to be able to remove them and hide from quick view, as I have no use for the older two, same goes for routes like Cross City, East Coastway, etc
Just had a quick run through the menus and guessing, in addition to the other issues listed, SHG didn't bother setting up (or expanding the existing Sprinter Express) Journey mode for this timetable? A tad disappointing...
