Armstrong Powerhouse Update Discussion Thread

no one is using you as a punching bag I was correcting you points. Your well known in these forums to come here and comment negatively on AP and Alan Thomson sim the issue with you is you don’t like getting corrected or called out when your in the wrong. Why is it every time a product is released or announced my AP you have come to these forums and be negative about the price or the content itself.

 

And there goes your altered version of reality again, YOU brought me into it by quoting me directly, you know I get a notification when I'm tagged or quoted right? That's how this forum works.


I was quite happily ignoring you till you made such a daft comment that I was directly quoted and notified in.

As always though when you go off on one other people need to reply or set the record straight and you'll instigate a thread derailment time and time again, next you'll report it to the Staff and they'll lock a perfectly good thread without reading or understanding what's gone on.

Yes, you are entitled to your opinion no one has suggested otherwise certainly not I, your opinion that the pack is only worth £5 is just that, your opinion, what was incorrect and what I picked you up on was that you stated that it was and I quote "a lot of money for textures" which is incorrect, I steered you towards the facts (Youtube and a .pdf) and now (as per usual) you play the victim, it's getting old cyclone very old.

 

I can see this topic getting locked because as usual someone has to take it of course and turn it into an argument a perfectly logical thread which as soon as someone comments it turns into a debate because they take it off course and have to bring the negativity in as always because its about AP. Just ignore any further comments Reef if it does go off topic as usual just report the posts and ignore thats the best way let the forum admin deal with the comments.

Back on topic of the great Signal pack ATS has 2 scenarios up already by the community for FREE that make use of the pack i have done the first one and highly recommend it.
https://alanthomsonsim.com/downloads/2k25-0950-hayes-london-cannon-street-2012/

this one also utilizes the pack. https://alanthomsonsim.com/downloads/1a87-1410-paignton-to-london-paddington-2/

 

Last I checked, you mentioned "the windy one". I'm not going to continue this either, I just hate when people say things like this because it only provokes a reaction.

 

and that is exactly what you wanted to do with your comment here



you said "i dont think i posted about the signal pack yet. And its probably better i don't" you should have left it at that and moved on but you just wanted to turn a post negative because it has AP's name on it in the hope the admin will lock it so people can stop talking about developers you seem to love debating about on here (which i hope the admin WILL NOT lock this thread because it was perfectly fine until you comment the above to provoke people and get a reaction). But rather than do that and just leave you comment as it, you then go on to say "Good lord, thats a lot of money for textures" Which that last sentence just proves you were trying to get a reaction and cause an argument. That is trolling.

You then got corrected by Reef and then played the victim card as always when it didnt go your way and you got corrected by Reef. You do this ALL THE TIME you cause drama then go running and play the victim stop it for the sake of the forums please. We know you dont like AP and ATS you dont need to cause drama in every post you can that mentions them. If you dont like the price of something then dont pay it and move on.

 

Oh look.... a new AP product... and Oh, look.... an argument about how expensive and pointless it is. Imagine my surprise.
Those who don't think AP products are worth the money, here's an idea... Don't buy them... and then just be quiet.

 

I didn't even plan to say a single damn word. If there had not been a reference to me, I never would have even now. Frankly, the problem is people provoking a reply in that fashion.

And look what a comment about something being overpriced does. Leads to all-out war. Let opinions be, I say.

 

the problem is the way you portrayed your comment you said and i quote again You ORIGIONAL comment which you have since edited to try and make out you were not fishing for a reaction,


This is not the first time you have appeared on threads related to AP products where you complain about the price you seem to be known for doing it each time a new release appears to get a reaction.

 

Can you two please take your arguing elswhere. I am, and im sure everyone else is, sick of seeing you arguing on every single thread.

 

Well that's an outright lie..

3 questions, factual answers only please..

Q1, What date did I post the "windy one" comment?
Q2 What date did the Signals EP drop?
Q3 What date did you feel the need to not mention the AP pack?


Cheat Sheet:
Q1 (That was the 12th of January)
Q2 (Saturday)
Q3 (That was Tuesday the 17th of January)

Want to keep digging a hole or are we all done here?

 

If I get told I said one thing then I'm going to defend it, I know it's annoying I get it, it was my point originally we've asked Cyclone many times to stop derailing threads, he just has to poke and prod, idk why.

This threads definitely locked it just doesn't know it yet.

 

Hopefully not as it is an valuable thread for the forum. Hopefully what they mods will do is read through the comments and see the edited comments which kicked this all off and take the correct form of action as it is a regular pattern from the same member every time a new product is released by AP or ATS with the same agenda. IE to cause drama

 

The really interesting thing, is that I didn't name anyone in my post.

 

Come on all lets just all move on lifes to short and we all have a passion for trains

 

I know. I am just a bit rankled right now.

 

Thank you JD.

A small update I noticed in the log regarding a patch of the Signals EP, info in the usual "Updates Only" thread. > https://forums.dovetailgames.com/th...pdates-for-info-only.41703/page-2#post-591962

 

I'm going to put my developer hat on here and talk about just how much control, from the limited perspective I have so far, this gives scenario authors over the content they produce on routes using the UK Pro based signals.

It isn't just about getting proper approach control functionality in the sim or fancy new graphics, it's about taking control of the railway with a dispatcher hat on. For example: Train leaving early despite its non passenger stop being timed from a loop? Throw in a Force Red at the signal in the loop, set the Time it should free up to a clearer aspect to the desired time and maybe add in a bit of randomness and oila, 1 looped service suddenly behaving itself (without the need for 1000 and 1 forced hidden stops!)

There is so much more than that, I've barely only scratched the surface of what this pack is truly capable of I intend to use it a lot going forward in my private freeware projects (which one day might see release lol!)

 

I feel this pack will be more of use to Scenario Writers than the players who don't modify scenarios.
The players will still get the advantages of this pack but not all the benefits.

 

Exactly my reason for getting the pack was I can see this pack being another great addition to the sim like the sky and weather pack. Scenario creators are going to be using this like the weather pack when making scenarios and to get the most from the pack and for scenarios to function correctly it’s a no brainier to buy it. Do I think the cost is high. No I don’t. 14,99 for the amount of hours I will get out of scenarios using it is nothing.

 

Thank you for not locking the thread after it got taking off course as usual. However it’s a regular pattern here as soon as a AP product is released.

 

Exactly. This was my point. I can't justify the price from the perspective in which I use the app. In no way am I saying it's a bad product, just that it's not in my category. If I move to scenario writing, maybe I will be more interested. I would hope some people here stop trying to misunderstand me; I'm not against anyone here.

That's the last I'll say about that, moving on. Looking forward one day to having the 87 as well.

 

I think what people are failing to realize about this pack, is that if a scenario author uses the pack, it will be an ESSENTIAL requirement to play that scenario. As in the scenario will probably fall over if you try to play it and DON'T have the pack.

 

Exactly this is why I purchase it and to be honest after playing 2 scenarios that have the pack as a requirement as well as those that done the price is fantastic for what it is

 

But thats the same with any other AP Pack (except for the Weather and Track) if you don't have it then the scenario won't work as the author intended.

 

So it's not possible to go in and edit whatever instruction it was to operate differently? I thought Richard (or someone at AP) stated that the signals were based on existing signals so people can still play scenarios without the pack? Or are the signal scriptings so different that a scenario literally will not function?

 

Have a quick look at the manual you will see new features the signal pack comes with. A scenario creator were to use for example a “force red” asset block and a person played the scenario without the lack the scenario is going to get confused so to speak as the way the ai and player train are timetabled won’t function correctly withiut the force red feature. The scenario will
Load and it will function just not as intended. It’s like the weather pack if a scenario requires that for say heavy rain at night. The scenario will load but will be bright daytime and clear glue Skys as it can’t load the weather script. So to use scenarios fully if the scenario pack is listed as a requirement then it’s best to have it rather than run the risk of running a long scenario getting near the end and run the risk of not being able to complete the scenario.

 

It's only essential in the sense where the scenario creator has used force reds/yellows/whatever.. to hold/slow the player train because old scenarios would have used a blocker to achieve this whereas you can now control it via the signals, obviously the scenario creator isn't going to use a signal and a blocker to do the same job, but they could if they wished to keep it compatible for both AP signal EP owners and non owners, so apart from messing up timings the scenario would still function I believe

 

More around the track Markers. Can cause the signals to play up if the scenario is completed without the SigEP installed.

 

Not sure what track markers have got to do with signals but ok, as always I check my sources to the best of my ability, not saying I find all relevant supporting content but I give it a shot, here's what I've based my prior statement on..

 

I was refering to the Track Markers included with the SigEP. the Force aspect, Approach control and Calling on ones.
The manual states as per below.

However from a Route Building point of view it wouldn't affect the end user experience as route builders won't need to use the track markers.

 

Odd that AP called them a track marker when I've always known them as "track linked objects or triggers" a track marker (in my understanding) is a green or orange ribbon that names a station or siding, not saying I'm right and he's wrong, just saying that's how I understood it.

 

I doubt you can go in and edit something that comes as part of a pack if you dont own the pack you wont have the "assets" to edit

 

The instruction has to default to something else, though, doesn't it?

 

Correct and like has been said earlier it possibly wont function as the creator intended as the sim default cant force a red can it hence the script in the AP product

 

true. It can get confusing when different people have different names. I too would call the ribbons "track markers". I guess its easier to say than track linked objects/triggers despite that being a more descriptive name.

 

Until somebody makes a scenario using this pack and releases it then we cannot be sure what the effect will be.
"probably fall over " is my underlining
Already AP has issued an update because the signals in a scenario did not work as expected.

Also they have a "Invisible Signal Track Marker" to divide a Signal Block.
If the signal is invisible how is the driver expected to see what indication is showing?

 

From the manual:

"If sharing a scenario or route which makes use of a track marker, the end-user must own the Signal Enhancement Pack for the correct behaviour to be exhibited. If they do not the own Signal Enhancement Pack, signals immediately around where the track marker is placed may act unpredictably."

As to the new signal:

It functions in exactly the same way as the JT AI only signal as I understand my reading of the updated manual. That is to say the signal acts only as a block separator to enable realistic situations such as a train being parked awaiting departure in Temple Meads Platform 10 whilst another is allowed to permissively enter Platform 9, stopping short of the train in 10. (A similar thing happens at Plymouth irl, or at least did until an incident involving an HST and a 150.)

It essentially should solve things like static consist clashes in un-signalled yards as well

Also from the manual :

"The invisible signal marker allows a signal block to be divide. An example of using this is on a platform where you wish for two trains with driver icons to be present. Ordinarily, doing this would produce an error in the scenario editor, but if you place this marker between the two trains, the simulator now thinks there is a signal dividing them and allows it. Stopping points are useful for stopping trains in exact positions for this purpose. Invisible signals are visible on the F3/F4 HUD but can be ignored. Apart from that, they are invisible to all other signals around them and do not affect their operation"

 

"which makes use of a track marker" - If the scenario does not have a track marker then would the signals work normally?

 

Of course they would. But that IS NOT (bolded and capitalized for emphasis!) the point. Using (in this context) the track pack means making use of the markers.

 

Taking the question that's been posted in the updates thread as this is the discussion thread:

This was posted in the info thread.

As all we can do is speculate, my suggestion is right on the Update Log. "Unless specified, the Branding Patch or Extra Stock does not also need to be re-downloaded." If anyone finds anything different, please comment further here.

 

I just re-install everything just in case. It only takes a minute. Main asset.. extra stock... branding patch.. assuming those things were a requirement originally.

 

thanks Buddy I normally do the same but just checking.

 

It doesn't hurt to do that. In reality, a branding patch in my experience is a single texture file on each skin. It's probably safe either way. That said, if you have problems, redownload and reinstall. If you still have problems, please see your do-...uh, contact AP Support.

(EDIT: Another good hint is to look at the dates of the downloaded files. If the "modified" date of the files inside the downloaded archive is newer than yours, reinstall. I just checked for the 150 branding patch, and it says September 2, 2023. On this basis, I would reinstall the branding pack if you update the train files.)

Extra stock packs, if replacements are required, can vary across packs; I've seen skins for AP products hiding in free packs for other products. Nothing wrong with that, of course. It just takes time to figure out which pack a certain skin comes from. For example, the old 92 sound pack extra scenario stock features reskins for the AP Class 66, under FL-501_AP, GBRf-705_AP, and GBRf-707_AP.

 

I don't know if the extra stock packs are also updated as they can cause problems.

 

No issues so far here. The only issues I've had with updates is the recent 37 Vol1 updates breaking third party reskins. I've rolled back to the previous one until the reskins get an update.. if ever.

 

I'm a bit old fashioned and I don't always do updates if I don't have a problem with the current pack.
So the repaints that I have for the class 37s still work as they should.
It might be a problem if a newer repaint comes out that I might want.

The Class 150/156 tread brake improvement is not something I have bothered with so far.

 

I noted last night that vulcan productions had updated some class 37 reskins to make them compatible. They also updated their Birmingham cross city patch (apologies if I'm using the TSW name for that route).

 

Thanks. Looks like the creators of the skins are sorting it out then.

 

I would have thought newer ones in the future would be made with the newer version in mind. You'd be on to a poor start if you made a reskin for an older version of an asset most won't be using, so I reckon you'll be ok going forward.