Route Peak Forest Railway: Ambergate – Chinley & Buxton Feedback Thread

DTG Matt,

This is what I was referring to when I mentioned some assets don't look like they've been baked, if that's the correct term. They don't fit with their surroundings or the ambient lighting;

 

Equally, I've been a bit blown away by this route so far;

 

Thanks for the response Matt - it's really appreciated.

One possible solution I would offer for the 4F / local services problem is to have the 4F set as something like a 20% likelihood substitution for the Jubilee. All local stopping services could be included and if you particularly wanted to drive a local service with a 4F, you could select it as such from the menu, and otherwise they would be represented in-game by a semi-appropriate mix of locos set by the substitution likelihood. If a more appropriate loco is added to the game later (say a Black Five or 4MT), then the substitution ratio could be adjusted accordingly with ease.

(Speaking of the 4F - I think the steam generation rate may need to be checked as even at full power on banking services I'm regularly blowing off. I think steam is generated far too quickly which isn't necessarily due to the superhuman fireman - could this be checked please? It's notably worse than the 8F and Jubilee in this aspect.)

You may have seen the sheet I'm making detailing which services are currently missing from the 1963 timetable - it would be really good to see all of the missing services added. I'm working on a more comprehensive version that also includes AI-only passenger services at Ambergate, Chinley and non-stoppers through the whole route to add a bit more flavour. When I'm done I'll post it here and hopefully it will be useful for your gameplay team, or at least enlightening for everyone else.

Some further brief timetable feedback, on top of the missing passenger services:

1) All of the 8F mixed freight is in the Up direction (Ambergate > Rowsley > Gowhole) with nothing in the other direction. I'd expect a similar amount of fast freight traffic to be going in both directions over the course of the day?

2) The All Mixed Up scenario is a perfect example of why local pick-up/drop-off goods trains should be included in the timetable, breaking them up into multiple parts if needs be to accommodate the rest of the traffic. This could be another activity for the 4F, assuming it can handle the consists over the gradients.

Two key reasons these should be in the timetable rather than just a scenario - a) it adds more life even if you're not driving, (maybe you're stopped at a station with a local passenger while a 4F shunts the yard etc. - very atmospheric!) and b) it allows us to play them in any weather at any time of year, which can make a big difference to the challenge and the 'feel' of a service.

It would be normal (as far as I'm aware) to have either have one of these services per day in each direction, or if the yards can only generally be shunted in one direction then perhaps once a day in the Up with a corresponding extra fast freight in the Down direction to move wagons the other way once they had been picked up if necessary.

3) I'm not sure if any of the light loco movements off-shed involve any coaling or watering - this would be good to include if not, the one I've played so far has not.

It's excellent to hear that proper conversations are being had regarding green diesel additions to the route - can I ask if the reason that third parties are your first port of call is that you think they may be able to deliver these sooner than an in-house development?

I'm also going to say that it's actually good to hear about how there wasn't enough time to include a green DMU and that conversations were at least had prior to launch - that's absolutely fine IMO as it's at least an honest reflection of the project limitations. It would have been good to have it in the base pack but as long as it comes at some point (hopefully not too far in the future), I'm happy enough.

I hope I haven't come across as pointing fingers at your team - I know they (and you) work incredibly hard and that there sometimes just isn't enough time, which is something I hope might change in the future. Regardless it looks like feedback is (visibly) being taken on-board now which is really great to hear - thanks to you and presumably JD who is also communicating this stuff internally in the background.

Again - this route isn't that far from being one of the best in the game, 'just' needs some diesels, a bit of light bug-fixing and a timetable revision

 

Potential signalling bug found, or it could be prototypical - I'm sure the DTG signalling guru can tell me

Once I clear this signal at the Down direction entrance to Dove Holes Tunnel, the small arm clears and it looks as if another train would be cleared despite me still being in section.



I've checked the map and it appears green there too.



This has happened on at least two services now so I don't think it's related to a specific service.

 

can you tell me why the freight train on all mixed up have a guards van when the consists are all fitted. i see no need for a guards van.

 

Yep, it’s my first entry into Steam and I’m blown away by the route! So well done everyone involved!

Just look at it!

 

DTG Matt
Thanks for the response to issues back across the previous page.

First of all think it's fair to say the majority of players are thoroughly enjoying the route and most of the issues are niggles or gilding the lily.

The number one for me remains the lighting, which did not get any feedback in your post - in bright mid-day sunshine it is washed out and shiny, as I've said previously looks more like Unity (in fact the rocks at that time of day start to look like what was on Derail Valley initially, before they updated the game). Suspect this is more of a core issue but if routes like Niddertalbahn can get it looking right, why not here?

Timetable, well much of this seems to go back to the decision not to go the extra mile (well 9, actually!) and run through to Derby. When the project was whiteboarded and given the green light, someone surely looked at the timetable and must have realised that few trains actually called at Ambergate. So frustrating to commence an express run and find the journey either starts or terminates at Matlock. Hopefully something can be salvaged here.

Jubilee to me still isn't as good as the one in TSC. Sounds become muffled particularly once you get up to any sort of speed.

Green diesels - yes please! A Class 45 and Class 101 reskin/retro interior would be a start. £30 here ready and waiting if you throw in a Class 25 and Class 104 DMU.

4F safety valve sound level - hopefully on the to do list.

Finally, without getting on the soapbox again, this route demonstrates two further core improvements desperately needed...
1. Improved and more sophisticated scenario planner or at least access to the spawn and takeout portals.
2. Reverb with all those tunnels and tight cuttings the sound field is dead.

 

All freight had guards until 1969. On steam hauled freight the brake van was the only place a guard could be, so providing a brake van is correct for this era. For diesel locos they'd sit in the rear cab.

 

As An Ex Freight guard in the early seventies I can confirm this.

 

Just want to say I'm loving the route, especially the freight services.

Agree about reverb being notably missing on this route. The whistle on the 4F has it weirdly. The ICI freight wagon sounds are really nice, though. The overall sounds in TSW are consistently inconsistent lol.

Disagree on the lighting- it's supposed to be really bright in full sun- i think the issues on this route and SOS have to do with the physical properties on some of the rock and ballast textures that make them appear too shiny in overcast lighting and especially when wet. Should be a relatively simple fix...

 

You could be right. I've noticed that in Trainz too while working in Surveyor, turn the camera so the light is angled a certain way and it's like the textures were suddenly sprayed with an eggshell coat of gloss. Not a PBR thing either as some of the earlier non PBR textures were prone to it.

 

I'm loving PFR so far. I've completed the scenarios, all of which I thought were really enjoyable. The 4F is great fun as a loco and the scenario All Mixed up was the most fun I've had in TSW.

Quick question, are there really only 2 achievements associated with PFR? (Peak Performance & Snow)

 

Yes, good to know that the feedback on the timetable and a 45 and dmu are being listened too. I can't hold off buying this much longer as I do love Buxton and this whole area of the country and in honesty will probably buy it tomorrow after work or Sunday. Thie doesn't mean that my wallet is shut for this route after that as I still desperately would like to see the 45/0 and a dmu, be it a 101 or 104. Also as said by someone above a 25 would be a great bonus as well!

 

Yes, Matt, but whether the distance is measured from the front or back of the train is not always intuitive, so it would be nice to have a specific front/back indication showing.

 

Thanks to very informative and detailed tutorials, my anxiety about driving a steam locomotive has decreased considerably. So far, my only problem with this route is keeping myself from running through all of the numerous shunting activities. I do wish (as always), that DTG would make a thorough route guide available. Rudolf Heijink's excellent 2002 Steam Drivers Guide for TSW2 is, as usual, very helpful, but there seem to be a few differences between the earlier Spirit of Steam route and this one.

 

I wouldn't have thought 39A is a huge challenge to the tech guys? I was hoping that PFR would have the tech to pull off signals on approach - a similar script exists in the newer colour light approach control signals, which is excellent.

 

Well it's nice to hear that you are thinking about how to implement it.
Hats off though - the signalling is a feat in itself that must have taken a LOT of work - I've not managed to break it yet :p

Also I'd like to thank you for listening to my concerns about some SOS signalling a while ago, it seems the problems were patched in the TSW3 build

 

Do you see what I mean about the much improved tree (dithered?) LODs and ground foliage draw? So much better than previous routes. I pray this stuff is here for all new DLCs. I'd love to know what changed with draw distance.

 

Definitely, it’s much better. RobS hit on a very good point about the type of grass used in some routes vs others. That definitely has something to do with it.

 

Just a quick heartfelt plea - please make a new dmu (104?) and don’t recycle the 101. Again.

 

So what you're really saying is that the 101 should go in room 101

 

Something is definitely askew with the lighting on these Churches;

 

Guard vans/brake vans were required on all trains until sometime in the ... well, can't recall, but long after 1961. Except on double-cab freight trains.

 

Had my first go with the 4F earlier and loving it, well apart from the safety valve which is a known issue. It also seems to permanently show one unit of blower on the HUD even when off. However it has a lovely exhaust bark and doesn’t seem to muffle up so much as the Jub and 8F.

Although many of the timetable runs are quite short, seems in practice these follow a sequence so can be chained together by returning to free roam, at least ithin the same session given we still lose the objective data if you save and resume on a subsequent service.

 

Totally. It would have been nice for the Fowler to sub onto some of the shorter (5 carriage?) passenger workings. It's a delight.

 

What I mean by "Warning Arrangement" is simply the delayed clearing of the signal, as a reminder that all is not clear ahead. In some places this was even used to substitute for the lack of a calling-on arm for permissive working. Green flags don't come into it.

There may well be detailed nuances to the signalling regulations that could conceivably be added. However, I think it's worthwhile to implement the simple, generic rule I suggested (within 200m and under 15mph), since that already adds information in a plausibly realistic way, and most players won't be able to distinguish that from a maximally correct implementation. Making the HUD more informative has to be the first priority, though; presently you simply never get a yellow indicator in the HUD in semaphore territory, and that would give even novice players useful information under both the 1947 and 1960 versions of the Regulations.

 

I don't really understand why almost all the mixed freights terminate at Rowsley. What happens to them then? Rowsley is a small village with an MPD - it did not generate or consume much freight.

In reality stopping freight trains served local goods yards at each station. Any trains that terminated at Rowsley would be broken down into trip or pick up freights for other local stations. None of these workings exist in the game.

It's one thing producing an inaccurate timetable. It's another producing one so ridiculous that it makes no operational sense to any railwayman.

 

Just did a scenario planner run with the Class 101 from Miller's Dale to Buxton in the late afternoon and it was glorious

You can see so much more of the beautiful scenery from the cab and you really have to rag it up the incline - I'd urge you to try it. Here are the parameters I used:

- Miller's Dale P5 to Buxton P5
- 2 car 101 (loaded)
- start at 16:00

Winding your way up the valley with the engine revving hard, then letting the speed melt away as you coast uphill towards the bucolic little terminus nestled in at the top surrounded by peaks - absolutely superb. The best bit is as you pull into Buxton at the end, the early evening light through the glass roof is dappled all over the cab controls as you come to a stop at the buffers. Let's get that green DMU in as soon as possible!

(regular scheduled programming/timetable nerdery will resume shortly)

 

Couldn’t agree more. Seeing the route from a diesel loco or DMU cab is totally different from looking down the long boiler of a steam loco.

 

It's such a pain to drive though... I don't mind the gears, those are fun, but the brakes are just stupid. Why can't they automatically return to "Lap" after being applied, like they do in, say, the BR363/365? Without the benefit of tactile feedback, like the driver would have on the real thing, you basically have to constantly look at the dial/HUD instead of where you're about to stop. And with the auto-return, there would no longer be a need to have a notch in the "Lap" position, which currently slows down the player's ability to adjust the lever. So, for gameplay purposes, I think the brakes should be reworked on the 101.

Still, if having it on this route is a historical must, that would trump any gripes about its driving procedure.

 

Did exactly the same. There's a nice CC scenario available, btw but imagine if this was in the timetable.

 

Or you can just use the ‘return to lap’ shortcut.

 

Huh. You learn something new every day. It's still a pain, as it's an extra unintuitive button press, but certainly an improvement. Thanks for the tip.

 

DTG have implemented this well, there is no spring forcing the handle into the lap position.

I drive no hud, never had problems to brake. I like it because its also challenging.

 

Out of curiosity, what is the undocumented key command?

 

I’m pretty sure it is documented, at least in the controls menu, but off the top of my head (not used it in ages) it’s the / key (or \, whichever is on the right side of the keyboard)

 

and on controllers, I think it’s operation shift+L1.

 

I find driving the 101 with a controller very enjoyable! Seems to work very well

 

This is present on Sherman Hill and I believe also on Horseshoe Curve and Luzern-Sursee.

 

I agree and I would add, it's not just the volume: It's the proximity. It sounds like the steam safety valve is 4 ft away, and the chuff from the loco is 40 ft away. Also the rail friction sounds are even louder (closer) than the chuff. I imagine a software mixer is used with sounds, if so, these more prominent sounds could be simply mixed down in the overall sound.

 

Matt's response sums up the difference between Jane Skyhook and DTG, Skyhook is actively improving MML and listening to players and taking advice on board to the point we are getting a new DLC essentially, where as Matt and DTG are like "We could have done that but decided not to so suck it up, there may be stuff in the future". This may well be the first UK DLC I do not purchase.

 

Yep, ever since the immersion controls came about, the 101 is a joy to drive with a controller.

 

Just played the scenic stopper content creator scenario by CAA (if I got that right?) was definitely fun ragging the 101 up and down the gradients while trying to stop in the right places at stations and also thanks to whoever it was for mentioning the "return to lap" key, I didn't even know that was a thing, anyway here's a some screenshots from the scenario. Such a scenic route, DTG Matt if I remember correctly in one of the streams didn't you say that there is a section of the route where you can walk along a footpath for some of the route? if there is whereabouts was it? Then again I might have misheard on that one, not 100% sure

 

Having only discovered Peak Forest as a railway destination to visit a few years ago, I must say the route really captures the look and feel of this still busy route, albeit all freight these days. My interest is solely diesels and so I'm creating my own Scenarios for Green Diesels, and would like to add my thoughts and requests. I'll echo the previous request for a Class 25 for this (and NTP) and would also like to see the Class 40 able to haul all the 8F's stock and the Class 20 all the 4Fs stock.. The early days of Diesel were still very must based on a steam-age railway so fit in ok with the scenery and population, although I'm sure there should be far fewer passengers at most stations. Peak Forest was like Waterloo at rush hour!
Oh, and while you're at it, a BR Crest or 2 for Livery designer please.