A newly teased Loco DLCs by TSG have been broadly discussed on their Facebook page and an interesting point has been brought up with additional layers for these types of DLC. A question about whether the DB Br 420 could add layers to more than one route has been asked and the answer was basically that "you can't ask players to have more routes for the use of a mentioned DLC". (discussion in german below) On one hand, there is definitely a point to it - players shouldn't need to own 4 routes to get the loco DLC, on the other hand, I think there is definitely some possibility to improve in this regard. If the DLC could have a "main connected route", where you can expect the basic functionality (3 scenarios, timetable layer), then it should be possible to have "benefiting routes", where another layer would appear as well. Example: Br 204 has been criticised a lot for a very low amount of services (7 if I'm not mistaken). But if a 363 DLC added about 20 services to RSN and then smaller layers like the one of 204 to other routes, it would greatly improve the value of the DLC and would create a little benefit for people owning other routes, while not being mandatory. We've seen some reusability with 155 and 182, which however only substitute 185 on its services when MSB adds a new layer to new routes. This is not wrong but shunters are a different story as they cannot replace a mainline running loco so easily. This way the 204 is stuck with very little to do and other loco DLCs might have the same problems when restricted in such a way. It is also now clear that Br 420 will have only one route it will add to (probably HMA), while frequently appearing on at least three routes already in the game (HRR, SKA, HMA).
Are you telling me I won't be able to use the 420 on RRO in service/timetable mode? I'm fine if its main route is HMA, but not even a substitution for RRO? What a huge huge shame this is...getting tired of driving the 422 and was hoping for a bit of variety there... what can I say? My disappointment is immeasurable and my day is ruined. First we can't use the 423 on SKA then this... what's changed since we were able to drive the 143 on all 146 services? Less choice is not good
I think the issue with the 423 is that it is clearly a München furnished train and just does not fit. I get what you are saying though, personally I would not mind seeing that München-Br 423 around Köln, others might not so much want this due to lack of authenticity. In terms of the 420, since it is developed by a small German team, maybe they don't have the workpower/capacity to make the train available on other routes via timetable. I honestly don't know nearly enough to argue about whether it is possible, or if DTG has to do the part of making it a substitution train. Maybe this is one of few downsides of having third party content. Of course it is all possible to do with scenario planner, but they take quite some effort to properly set up without running into issues, and it takes away the random encounters since you know which trains you entered.
S19 operated by 423 on present day (at least is less wrong than the 422 which never operated there, or at least I can't find any video or pictures of them) Also found this. As I said, I don't want more layers, but at least a substitution (like the freight locos or the 143/146 on SKA and RRO, don't know about HRR), I don't think I'll buy it if its HMA exclusive.
Well, as speculated in this thread, the upcoming Br 420 may be for SKA. We‘ll see I guess. Edit: The WIP picture of the Br 420 this is based on is in that thread.
Then it would only make sense to tie the 420 to RRO (how it should be in my opinion) since no RRO no S19, no 420 which doesn't make sense with what's been posted by the OP in this thread, unless the 420 itself adds the whole Duren S-Bahn layer and will make the 422 a substitution
The whole layering and substitution system should be overhauled to offer more flexibility. Any route should have a full timetable with all kinds of services, and for each service defined what trains can run on it. It's silly that I need to own a specific route to be able to use a loco DLC on any other route. It's also silly that timetable services need one specific train to be owned in order to be able to operate other locos as a substitution on that route. Those are limitations created by DTGs layering & substitution systems. I think it's not up to the loco & route developers to fix it. This is a core thing which DTG should look into. The current limitations are making any loco & route add-on considerably less valuable to me. I'd be more tempted to buy add-ons if they can be used on multiple routes, in timetable mode. I know the scenario creater offers more flexibility with off the rails mode, but it's still too much hassle to create a full fledged scenario with more AI. Considering TSW doesn't have a Quick Drive mode, I'd love to see this flexibility (and ease-to-use) in Timetable mode. Scenario mode shouln't be used as an excuse not to further develop Timetable mode.
The scenario creator should not exist in its current form, not quick enough for it to be a quick drive, not good enough to be called a scenario creator, and also if I do my own scenario I feel like I'm not progressing in the game, I don't get a tick on a service or a medal, I just lost some time Ps While the system doesn't make much sense we and the devs have to work with it... as I said, the best choice for the 420 in my opinion is to tie it to RRO, so it can substitute the 422 there and on SKA. As stated above also 423 should add a substitution for SKA, so you can decided whether you want the correct train with incorrect writings and interior or the wrong train with correct writing and interiors, also the 420 should be available everywhere IMO. I suspect they wouldn't want to do that since they also want to appeal to the people that do not own TSW1 and/or any preserved collection, so I think they will end up attaching it either to SKA (so everyone who has TSW2 can buy it) or HMA...
In order to stop this spiraling here I will just cite one of the creators for this train from the german forum: "there will be exactly one version and that is the modernized train in use at München at this point of time" (translated of course)
Exactly why I wanted to put that quote, people are so enthusiastic that they often set themselves up for disappointment. But I also heard that they cannot use any logos like "s Bahn München" or "vrr" due to licensing issues, so the train might end up neutral enough to function as a substitute. But wild speculation surely doesn't help, so I will wait until we get more info on that.
I mean I don't see an issue having a layer in every route for a specific loco. If you own a route, you are happy and can use the loco, if you don't have it, then you cannot use it there (but on other routes you have). I don't see why that could possibly be an issue. Wouldn't that even increase sales of both route and loco DLC's rather than being a deterrent? Sometimes I have the feeling that the Scenario Planner is used as a cheap excuse to cut down on dev time by making less and less schedules, and then only for one route. Sure, we can use Scenario Planner, but for that to properly work the Scenario Planner also needs some big improvements, otherwise it is not comparable to what you get in timetable mode.
OK in another thread of the suggestion section, Maik, who is one of the team working on the new German 3rd party content, said the following about the 420: "I will try both variants. Substitution is a thing tat will work definetly and also makes lots of sense. Extra layers i dont have any clue yet how it can be done and if it will work. That's something to discuss with the team at DTG at a later time. The train is already in developent and it will need alot of time anayways. So dont worry yet about those things." I guess that can get you in a better mood overall, but as he mentioned, don't expect it to be too soon.
I have to be honest, as long as the driving experience is the same, and the train is the same I don't really care if it has written "Munchen S-Bahn" or "Ruhn-Rhein S-Bahn".. that's why I'm so upset about the 423 as well, at least give the players the choice, if you care about the writing and the interior more than the train you are actually driving, fine, drive the 422, if you don't then what? As I said, I know I'm the only one, but the lack of a 423 substitution is the only reason I didn't buy HMA on release... shame it will be the same for the 420, I was really looking forward to that, love the old '70s and '80s rolling stock. Hopefully if they manage to fix the layers for HMA on console by choosing what layers you have we can talk about those slightly unrealistic substitutions so the purest of purists can eliminate them while I can play at least with more trains on more routes and have more fun (also spend more money too).
The 420 and 423 need S-Bahn Köln Design and the Train Need to be reworked from DTG inside and need Destination Boards for the correct route
