All I Want For Christmas Is Bug Fixes

Again, London to Peterborough wouldn't showcase the Azuma, which was the whole point of the route.

 

What do you mean that it wouldn't showcase the azuma. The azuma runs on that part of the ecml

 

The Azuma stops at Peterborough and occasionally Stevenage, the 700 and 387 stop at those and other stations in between.

The HST on GWE stops at Reading and occasionally Slough, the 166 stopping at those and other stations in between.

Notice the difference? They're exactly the same. All your doing is swapping the HST for the Azuma and the 166 for the 387/700.

 

Why is that an issue? Obviously they are meant to stop less frequently than the regular commuter stock.

 

It's a long distance high speed train. Of course it would stop less compared to a commuter train just like the Amtrak Acela Express. How is that a problem?

On Peterborough to Doncaster you will only stop at 1, 2 or 4 other stations. Just because a route has more stations, it doesn't mean it's interesting

 

This is DTG sir...

 

Given the similarities, I could imagine people would complain that they just made another GWE.

People already complain when multiple commuter routes are made. The reason? They're all similar to each other. The same applies in this case for ECML.

 

The same case can be made for the HST, ICE 1 and 3, Acela and a bunch of other trains. If it wasn't an issue for those it won't be for the 801.

 

I think people are missing the point. The ECML route had a focus on high speed.

Between London and Peterborough, you'd basically be going into full power until you reach 125mph and then constantly braking and accelerating to keep that speed until you end up at Peterborough.

Between Peterborough and Doncaster, there are many varying speed limits, which makes it challenging driving a high speed train.

If the focus of the route is high speed, then it makes no sense for most stations to be only used by stopping commuter services.

 

That is just a terrible excuse that makes no sense whatsoever. There are countless routes in TS and TSW that juggle limited-stop and commuter services perfectly fine. There is no such thing as a 'focus' on an aspect of a route. If there was, there would only ever be one type of service on any route, making each route indefensibly boring and pointless.

GWE has four different types of service (commuter, semi-fast, fast, freight). Riesa to Dresden has shunting, freight, commuter and fast services. Karlsruhe to Strasbourg in TS has freight, commuter, express and high speed. Munich to Augsburg has S-bahn and ICE services, literally opposite ends of the passenger spectrum. You can't seriously say that the reason DTG didn't want to do London to Peterborough was because it would mean (somehow) sacrificing the express services on the route.

 

i think what people are saying is that it shouldn't of been.

instead of being just the fast & straight section with only the azuma (and some small layers), it could of been something more interesting such as newcastle-edinburgh which has a lot more changes in speed and more of a variety of trains & services. or london-peterborough which would give the class 700 a better route to run on, and other commuter traffic with the 717, 387 and maybe even more if the route was backdated. instead the route we have is too far northern to have any of the london commuter traffic, but too far southern to have all the cross country and transpennine express traffic that would add variety.

the ecml is so much more than the 801 azuma, and i think the focus on making the route ideal for a fast and straight run on the train is why its not very thrilling

 

How is it these guys get away with this year after year... Tsw is a SCAM. They release a broken game, add dlcs never fix issues and then 12 months later ANOTHER installment and the previous instantly removed from storefronts.

 

All I want is the class 385 to be fixed which I think most of us are still waiting for, I know that it's not a DTG job but Class 385 from rivet isn't even the only train that is broken from them. But a 3rd party like skyhook have but in effort to upgrade the route, with the help of London midland of course.

 

You can't seriously say that the reason DTG didn't want to do London to Peterborough was because it would mean (somehow) sacrificing the express services on the route.[/QUOTE]
How can you have a high speed route with a majority focus on commuter services. LNER serve Kings Cross and Peterborough, occasionally Stevenage. That's it. the 700 and 387 focus on those and every other station in this section. Therefore, the majority of services would be commuter focused, not high-speed focused. They weren't focusing on the commuter side, otherwise the route would most likely have been backdated with a repainted HST.

There are more speed limit changes between Peterborough and Doncaster than Kings Cross and Doncaster. That means you aren't just putting the throttle into full power until reaching line speed, as there are more speed limits to take note of.

There is plenty of service variety between Peterborough and Doncaster just with the Azuma alone, there's varying speed limits, and more than the typical A-B run, which would be the case if the route was been Kings Cross and Peterborough.

 

The routes I listed managed it perfectly.

 

How many routes only have high speed? Apart from ECML the LGV route comes to mind.

 

How does the majority of services being commuter services detract from the high-speed services?

 

If most stations are only served by commuter services.

 

Why does that detract from the high-speed services?

 

Does anyone even listen to what I'm saying.

ECML focuses on high speed and the Azuma.

Most services between King's Cross and Peterborough are commuter, that's how.

 

He's asking you a specific question. On a mixed-traffic route with both express and stopping passenger services (and freight), how does the fact that high-speed services don't stop at all the stations detract from the high-speed services?

 

those services are just extra services which take advantage of the 4 track railway south of peterborough, its not like you are sacrificing azuma services for some commuters.
everything between doncaster-peterborough run between peterborough-kings cross, its still a high speed railway but with an additional 2 tracks used by slower services that run parallel.
similar to the s-bahn lines that are between duren & koln on SFS koln- aachen route which run parallel to the faster line

 

Why would they even bother create a new high speed train for a high speed route when said high speed route runs alongside commuter services.

 

I never said it does.

 

I am always rather bemused by complaints that diss a route because it isn't a different route.

 

Because is results in a fun and varied route with several type of services? I don't see the issue with the concept.

 

Why have a high speed route be yet another boring A to B run?

 

The ECML as it is has service variety. You don't need a mixture of service types to have variety.

 

How is London-Peterborough a "boring A to B run" and Peterborough-Doncaster isn't?

 

You reach line speed in the Azuma and there's no more significant speed changes until you get near Peterborough.

 

There aren't that many significant speed changes between Peterborough and Doncaster either...
And from TSC London-Peterborough isn't a straight 125mph shot anyway...

 

No, but there are more speed limit changes.

 

I'm struggling to believe what you're trying to suggest Jack. You've completely ignored what I tried to explain earlier, that there have been many routes in both TS and TSW that competently have multiple types of services. I shall try to explain again in detail how your logic doesn't work.

• Great Western Express has the HST, until recently Britain's main intercity train, running fast and semi-fast services on the route. The Class 166 operates stopping commuter services, with some semi-fast and fast services as well which they did in real life. The Class 66 operates freight trains on the route. That's four different service types, excluding depot runs, and none has more or less focus than the other.
• Kassel to Wurzburg has fast ICE services provided by the ICE 1 and ICE 3, with night time freight services as there are in real life.
• Meanwhile, Marseille to Avignon in both TS and TSW have only one type of service. Being a dedicated high speed line (which the ECML is not at any point), few if any freight runs run on the line, and most of the time the only thing other than TGVs or other high speed trains will be maintenance trains.
• SEHS has stopping services provided by Class 465s and 375s, with the former usually stopping at more places. Freight services are provided by the Class 66 although with the absence of Class 92s there is no HS1 freight. And of course, the Class 395 operate the high speed services which become semi-fast services off of HS1.
• Riesa to Dresden has commuter services, express services, freight trains and shunting. At least four different types of service.
• Cologne to Aachen has ICE services and stopping trains. If my version of the ECML was done, this would be the mix of services on it, although London to Peterborough would have semi-fast services as well. This route manages it completely fine (as does Munich to Augsburg). Saying that it would ruin the 'focus' is copium at best.

London to Peterborough would provide a 125mph fast service for the Class 801, which would get slower the closer to King's Cross you get. This would fulfil your arbitrary need for speed limit changes. Then, the Class 700 and 387 would provide a completely different experience, with semi-fast and stopping services and also adding significantly more variety to the route. While there's no 717 and therefore we couldn't have the Moorgate services represented, I'm not sure this is that much of an issue. Throw in a freight locomotive (please not another EWS 66 like every British route nowadays) and you've got something much more interesting and with a lot more variety than the slop we got.

 

How many times do I have to spell it out to you. The ECML was to focus on high speed.

High speed with no other types of services.

 

Again, why does the existence of other services detract from the high-speed services? Your claim isn't even true because ECML comes with freight services out of the box.

 

There are more LNER services than freight though.

 

People complain when a route does not give them what it is the want in the sim. In your case it is clearly not high speed service runs and local runs.

 

I like both, but I also like it when they're separate from each other.

Nothing wrong with that, is there.

 

SKA has high speed services. New York to Trenton has high speed services, Boston Sprinter has high speed services, HMA has high speed services. Southeastern High Speed has high speed services. It doesn't need to just be only a high speed for a route to be interesting. How would a mixed use route be less interesting?

 

Im quite the fan of high speed and mixed has always been better for me.

 

They ironically put tsw3 back on the steam store. Perhaps due to tsw4 having less players overall on steam compared to tsw3.

I admittedly had tsw2 but played tsw3 on Gamepass but managed to get tsw4 at a lower price. I don't think that there really was a need for tsw4 looking back but my guess is they did it to increase sales.

It's a shame that many issues crop up over and over again though and that certain core features don't work still.

 

I never said a mix wouldn't be interesting, otherwise SEHS wouldn't be my favourite.

But how often do people here complain of the number of commuter routes? Too many to count.

Is it really bad if a route focuses on just high speed and nothing else? No, it isn't.

 

Finally a post that focuses on the issues and isn't emotive, nor groupthink.

Good work!!

There is always the dilemma of using resources to build new routes (which all of us want) and to slow up development and fix bugs that almost no one notices.

I have thought about compiling a small wish list.

One item is the headlights. There is no focused beam as in real life. Instead it seems to be a flood light of some 160 to 170degreres.

Going back to route for a minute, the new ones keep getting better and better. Higher quality.

I have come to like Main Spessart Bahn and Koln Aachen lately and in Main Spessart Bahn there seems to be empty fields where in real life there is something there.

Northern Trans Peninne has this where about 5 miles out of Manchester you see towns with buildings and it looks like the scenery team has just had to leave it 20% unfinished (that is 80% of scenery missing). Those were the early days. The player base is getting bigger and the quality is getting very good now.

With the preservation crew they fixed a lot of the scenery in older routes but it was stopped.

Have you made tickets for each issue?

You have also made your points without seeming to complain which is excellent. And if you stay above board and refuse to get personal (as some resort to when their groupthink is threatened) then you will have more credibility.

I am all for getting bugs fixed. But it needs to be in the process that DTG can handle because they are focusing on high quality routes now and improving the core.

Thank you.

 

On almost every main railway route in the world there are more passenger trains than freight trains. It does not prove anything.

 

End of Train Device on the front cab, none on the back. Dumb dumb dumb (Horseshoe Curve ES44AC 652 S Fork-Baltimore Coal)

 

I thought I was imagining it but obviously not. I would be interested in an explanation. I mean if you bought TSW4 only because they said that TSW2/3 wouldn't be available any more, and now they are available that would feel a bit odd.

They also have actually been issuing patches for TSW3 so something is definitely different compared to last year. Could it be that an annual release is too much? Perhaps it is because the entitlements for core routes are too much of a pain...

 

If they did London-Peterborough during the days of 801, 700, 313, 387 that would be amazing 3 of the trains we already had. DTG did the easiest section they could just so they could say 'We have given you the ECML' They didnt go to York simply because they couldnt be asked

 

This is the first time that I know of there has been a drive to update the previous game. TSW2020 and TSW2 still have fixes that were promised but never released.

 

Solved today by spawn on foot at Ashford int, at 18:10 And take service when the javelin for St. Pancras arrives few minutes after. This way was right to solve this issue without no permanent red outside Ebbsfleet int.

 

Maik, I appreciate you taking the time to respond to my concerns about the G6 DLC. However, as a customer who paid real money for this product, your responses leave me dissatisfied. Whether the fault of DTG or the G6 DLC team, the fact remains that this product is not working as intended or advertised in TSW4. The G6 Journey Mode cannot be completed due to these bugs. How is the seller of this product going to make this right for the customer? When you accept money in exchange for a product or service, you must provide the product or service to the buyer. Doing otherwise amounts to a form of fraud.

If the G6 had been offered as freeware or discontinued entirely, there wouldn't be anything to talk about. Instead, it is currently sold for $20 on the Playstation store. The buyer who purchases it today will be just as ripped off as someone who bought it last year because it has a core feature that can't even be completed.

Google defines fraud as "wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain". So if you know this product isn't working correctly, have no intention to fix it, but continue to charge money for it, are you committing fraud? In my book, yes you are. That's not directed at you personally, Maik, but that's how these situations feel as a customer. We report major concerns. The issues are ignored or never fixed. We feel ripped off!

Ultimately though, the issue I have with TSW bugs and DTG's lack of bugfixes isn't about money at all. I'm here because I love trains and love train sims. I want to drive trains and complete journey modes because it's a blast to do so. Nothing bums me out more than a service or scenario that can't be completed due to bugs. Where do I send my money if I want the G6 DLC fixed? What will it cost me to make that happen? I often wonder these things because I just want things fixed and working as intended.

It's blatantly obvious that TSW products have a quality control problem. I'm sorry if that upsets anyone who has worked on a TSW project. I wish DTG could find a solution. Increased prices? A yearly TSW release like Madden? Create a subscription service for priority bug fixes? Those won't be popular ideas, but I'm open to anything that will get more TSW bugfixes to myself and other players. Businesses seem to find a way to monetize everything these days. At this point, I wish DTG could find a way to monetize bugfixes just so we could get things fixed!