Is there any way to readily filter out Standard scenarios that won't run? As I've accrued more Workshop items, DLC routes, reskins and trains, I've got ever more standard scenarions - but it seems that every other scenario I load I end up with an empty line, as other requirments are obviously not there (like the main train). I think DTG stuff tends to come more with career scenarios only, and I can pretty much guarantee that when I load a career scenario, it has everything needed to run. I guess there's no way to filter out oall the standard ones I can't use (save for taking a note of them, and deleting them)?
You could check the scenarios with TS Tools before you run them That would highlight missing items including the player train and you could then swap in something you do have.
I deleted all the Railfan scenarios using TS Tools. It took some time to go through all the routes but freed up a lot of what for me was wasted space.
The one or two I've tried see to be basically looking around or standing on a platform waiting for trains to pass.
That's all they are. Couldn't believe how much space I managed to free up. Only downside is that if I ever need to verify my install at any point, they will automatically be downloaded again.
That is the idea behind them Like a Railfan/ Railway Enthusiast you are watching the trains go past Something people do in real life
I started a similar thread ages ago about this. I reckon there should be a feature in the game that checks this BEFORE you try to run a scenario. If TSTools can check in seconds, then surely the game could be made to. Would save an awful lot of time. Less important now we have fast load, but still, it would be a great feature. For some reason I was shouted down though... (shrug).
PookyHead But TS does check every scenario as it starts up – that's why if it won't start you suspect a faulty scenario - and no it can't detect all OOM scenarios. Unfortunately, TS_Tools cannot identify scenarios that will give you an OOM when you try to run them in TS20XX. I can open/edit a scenario fine in TS_Tools – but when I try to run it in TS20XX – OOM. IMO it probably won't happen in TS – Mike probably uses a mixture of DOS and windows to open and edit files - fast and less affected by any file fault/anomaly. TS has to use its own code and that could be slow due to the complexities involved. The scenario editor via the Build menu will definitely show any OOM scenario - but that is the virtually same process as trying to run the scenario normally. Double shrug!
Another problem with TS Tools is the false positive you can get when checking a Scenario. Say you install an AP Sound Pack - like the 101-121 Dmu pack. It installs new *.bin files in the required folders even if you don't own that train. One it installs is the BR Blue 117, withdrawn for some time, and TS Tools sees the *.bin and thinks you own that train. When the scenario starts there is no train to show.
What it does, (or at least did prior to Fast Load) is load it... then brings up the scenario failed window, which used to take anywhere between 30 seconds and 2 minutes depending upon what route you were using. What I mean is, it could check BEFORE you starts to load. Also, not loading so you SUSPECT a faulty scenario is hardly an elegant solution, is it? I never mentioned OOM errors. I've no idea why you are talking about them. What I mean is, in TS Tools, you can go into the scenario editor, and it lists all required assets and tells you if any of them are absent or problematic.. in seconds. Clearly it is possible to quickly sort through the requirements and match them against a list of installed assets. If TS did this prior to actually trying to load it, it would be a great feature. Probably not, no. My point was that the last time I brought this up, I got a list of objections, mainly from you, as to why it was a stupid idea, when patently, it is a great idea... possible or not. The objections were not of a technical nature, but seemed to be that it was just a stupid idea that wasn't necessary.
PH I apologize unconditionally if you thought that my previous post where I posted my list of objections about you having a "stupid" idea! Please give me that link and I will add an apology and a rider. I only try to offer objective posts - but I could have been having a bad day. Sorry. pH
