Xander1986, I agree with you here. I am in the camp of safety systems on by default, with an option to cut them off. Also don't understand how people can get the full enjoyment out of the sim without knowing the basics of the country's safety systems, though there are those who do and I don't fault them for this.
On, but with an easy way to turn them off without wasting too much precious time, is the best idea. I can say at this point in time that I know enough (but never all!) about LZB/PZB to drive in Germany and while it is satisfying to get the hang of it, it's also nice to always have the fallback of playing a train *game* and not necessarily a train *sim*. For example sometimes I'll be taking an IRL bathroom break under LZB on Kassel-Wuerzburg and couldn't be arsed about the realism aspect of ....just having to press SIFA. That doesn't add fun to the thing, so it'll be off for me. Afterall, I just like darting through Germany with an ICE, I don't get paid to do this =p
100% true! For me please always on by default... I think the most users use it! Otherwise an option in the settings would be also a good solution so that you can choose... Default on or off.... DTG Matt Can you give some inside here why this is not there? Is there any requirements from train companies that says "no please not on by default" and if it isnt the case and there is no big problem can you consider the option to make it possible via a setting that you can choose the preferred option for on of off by default?
The issue is simply one of the vast catalogue of content really. What does "safety sytems on" mean exactly on any given loco? There are no switches marked "safety system switches" anywhere, just a bunch of switches that have various meanings and scripting associated. So the game wouldn't know necessarily what to actually do with that - which combination of things, what order things might need to be done in, when they *shouldnt* be done e.g. perhaps cold starts should leave them off? Had it been done like this from the start, it would have been quite straightforward to add a setup command which simply asked each train to turn its safety systems on or off according to the setting - but retrofitting that to the entire catalogue is no small task. It is something i'd like to do but - in the mean time, it's also not that hard to just hit ctrl-enter, shift-enter if you have a keyboard, or to flip the switches if not, so it's also not breaking the game, and meanwhile, there are a few broken things that need to take priority. Matt.
Oh mind you, I was more going on about what is ideally the best idea rather than asking or expecting, here. On the other hand, far too many of these "had this been done like this (consistently) from the start" instances lately seem to come up related to vastly different aspects of gameplay involving vehicles so that, really, the whole approach that was taken instead, that of compartmentalizing them related to their own DLC (because otherwise an update to the general one could break stuff and need to be verified in multiple DLCs)...I don't know for sure, not being a dev, but it seems like it's not turning out to be that much less work and definitely not as much quality impression from the userbase. So, I don't know, perhaps not the greatest decision?
I guarantee you that in whatever decisions you make in life, there will be many that you go back to think "with 20/20 hindsight, we could have done this differently" but hey, that's life. There are many aspects of TSW that I would do different if I had the time again, but wishing to travel in time feels like a pointless endeavour so I try not to spend much time doing that. We got a lot more right than we got wrong. Each loco being its own standalone DLC is unavoidable, otherwise how do you create products of them all? If there were no products to sell, we wouldn't be here talking about this at all. If you put a ton of stuff in the core, in some misbelief that you can then make a change in one place and it magically benefits everything, that means you're going to need to retest *everything* every time you make *any* change to *anything* - and faced with that prospect, you *will* decide to not make many changes at all. Features won't be added, bugs won't be fixed unless critical. Separating them out makes practical pragmatic sense in the long run. Having "one instance" of each loco doesnt help either, for the same reason, just not quite on the same scale. It also doesn't really help this discussion at all either, because even if you only have one instance of each loco, there are still a heck of a lot of locos to go through and add the extra scripting on, re-test, re-certify, re-deploy. It's not about trying to save work, it's not about trying to find the shortest path, it's about trying to find the most pragmatic path. Nobody's shown me a way to do this in a better way. Every time we've put some thing in core, it's later bit us in the backside. You know the problem with gangways stretching out like crazy making big gray walls on SEHS recently? Caused by an unrelated bug fix for the M9, which has "common core" shared gangway code... a fix on the M9, broke the 375. No changes made to the 375, nothing to indicate the 375 might be affected by the change or any other train for that matter. Only way to guarantee that doesn't happen in future? Retest every train any time we touch anything on the gangway code. Gantry assets which suddenly got modified on a route that hadn't received any updates... ruhr sieg or rro i think it was, had no updates to its files, wasnt even rebuilt and re-uploaded - and yet suddenly some of the overhead gantry assets became misplaced and middle of the track. Why? Because those gantry assets are in core, and someone scaled them to fix an issue on a different route, not realising the assets were core assets, and not realising the implications for those assets anywhere else they'd been placed. That one's a bit more easy to identify but... the point is not everyone's a seasoned senior dev and sometimes even the senior's can't quite grasp the complex interweb of dependencies that exist in what we *do* have - let alone what some of you think we *should* have. Honestly, you really do need to give the team some credit, they're good at what they do, and whatever the compromises have been along the way, never in one single instance has it been "meh cant be bothered", there's always a good reason behind it and taking the "lesser evil". No development is perfect, but as I say - the vast majority of things in TSW are "engineering done right" even if it's not clear why - or even seems obviously not the case - and i'll back them up every time on that. Matt.
But there's a logical problem here - since there is a common set of key commands to activate safety systems, then why can't the game be programmed to automatically press shift-enter and ctrl-enter when a service is taken over? Also regarding compartmentalisation, I'm fairly certain that it's actually a matter of some debate in the development community and "compartmentalise everything for fear of breaking stuff by accident" is not unambiguously the best choice. Also, it's not like fixes for old content are thick on the ground in the first place...! Edit: Oh, and let's not forget all the content DTG has broken in the past and then not fixed...
I've never not given enough credit to the team and I'd say that purchasing almost everything from German-speaking countries (my only interest) shows I don't care to the point of avoiding the content, but some other claims, however adapted they may be to this game's history of development, current team inner workings and so on, are flat out wrong if we're pretending them to be absolute. The gantry discussion is just a bad example as it is exactly one of how not to act when you have the relatively stable "core" version of ...something, so while it's understandable that such a problem may have arisen....what does that prove here? Nobody says there can never be a new addition to a base bunch of...hell, what do I know, common gantry models, but...how's that bad practice happening proof of anything? As for what to sell, imagine any other game, imagine a car game where this or that Mercedes sedan DLC has no horn function alone, or does not turn on its engine if you were to use the same button that does it in any other model ingame, or....its lights do not illuminate the track ahead because the development is a continuous buildup of features that never get backtranslated to...what is the greatest part of itself, really. Really, imagine any other game devs needing to make sure if (the newly released DLC of this Formula One car of choice) works on (the circuit of Spa) or not because (its tires compenetrate the ground because it was given a different grip property exclusive to that circuit but the devs made sure to also edit the three cars that came out with the circuit DLC at the time so that those work) or other unheard of examples. Often it may be a matter of selection of what can realistically be in a core data entry of say, a locomotive, and what is free to then get modified on top of it, so perhaps this Taurus has that country's electrical system available to choose and this other one doesn't, but there should NOT be one single 185 out of the bunch of identical ones where AFB only works from one cab. Yes, it's work to set it up this way, work fit for developers of a train sim game in this case, with all the knowledge that comes from being that. If a bug that is in the LZB code of "the core 185" gets fixed, and things are done right, there won't be a need to check if the LZB that works on KW now also works on LR, there really shouldn't, because why should there? And if going back to fix (fix an error, not rescale a base asset) breaks something in few places, good, that usually signifies that how things were handled in those places was either reliant on said bug, or unoptimal. By all means, this is what we have now and I'm still not at this point intentioned to stop getting the content as it's good enough for what I do with it, but the frustration is there, so if you can't time travel as none of us sadly can, at least let us vent. Maybe consider the approach differently for when it will be time to start over with ...Train Sim Universe?
First thanks for you're reply first off all! This is a simulation and in the rail world is it absolutely prohibited to turn off such things and driving around so its an intensive brake down to realism here. The most people use it so the question is it so difficult to press the keys is here already awnsered i guess and not a simple meaningless thing.
I’ve been playing this route for a while now and while it’s a great length and I love the many stations along the route sadly the game crashes a lot at Salzburg HBF. I’m playing on the PS4 (old I know) but somehow every time I end a service at Salzburg the game crashes (just when the service is complete so not when you enter the station) this is not the biggest problem in the world. But you do miss the medal and you have to restart the game. It’s a weird bug but sadly not uncommon with the newest maps that my hardware simply Bugs out when it’s a little overwhelmed. (Instead of just dropping the FPS what is used to do annoying but not game breaking
Thats the result of the old hardware on the PS4! What i advise is to lower your'e graphics in the settings menu!
Sadly you can’t change your graphics in a console. If I could I would play this game on a nice pc but I’ve spend so much money now on DLC on the PS store I’m not going to change machines
PS5 console Maybe someone has already pointed this out. In Rosenheim, special lighting effects shine between the platforms. It seems to be related to the subway that is in that place.
When researching the timetables for BR111 and the reason why it is strangely shown there three times, I found the following 1) Some train numbers and service names are listed incorrectly. 2) I'm still checking the last two trains from Rosenheim, 0:36 and 0:40. When I'm in the in foot mode and start for example at 0:30 ... they don't come through at all. In the same way, I found out that services exceeding their duration of midnight are not displayed in foot mode, with a start time of 0:00 and so on..... I don't know if this is a feature of TSW Anyway, it is unusual for the BR111 and 766.2 services that there are a couple of last connections starting after midnight listed at the end of the service list, not at the beginning, and that could also be the problem of not displaying even these services in foot mode
it helps if you show the train numbers. but here are a couple trains I know are not prototypical and most likely changed by DTG to make it work ingame. (not including that ingame you will have a different experience than irl so to the real timetable you will be about a minute delayed.) A lot of the trains ran with N-Wagen instead of dosto's. I am wondering why DTG decided to not include those as it's really obviously shown on the official timetable and any pictures on the route of 2013. I get people are sometimes a bit sick of seeing dosto's everywhere but here is a missed oppurtunity to one stay to reality and two keep the dosto spam lower. As you mentioned the BR111 I'll only include the RB and RE services. not the complete lack of S4 or REX services. or the two freight trains at freilassing that are standing behind each other the whole day. because I doubt anything will ever be fixed or even looked at. Edited trains: Drive empty from Freilassing to Salzburg even though they should start at Freilassing 79004 79006 Missing: RB 59416 (Freilassing - Traunstein - Ruhpolding) BR 426 Just flat out wrong: RB To Salzburg should stop at track 2 instead of 1, RB out of salzburg should stop at track 4 instead of 3 RB 27097 as 111 RB Landshut - Salzburg? That is a diesel line and should have a BR 628 RB 79048 (Salzburg - Aschau) also a diesel line. ingame a Dosto service ending at Prien and an invisible service to Rosenheim. in real life it takes the diesel line to Achau. so I think that's a 628 as well but I can't find any pictures of it. Your services that you see three times might be the depot move of that train and the actual service since those are split into different services on the route.
And those trains that do not appear in the In foot mode with a start time of 0:00 and beyond, are always the last three trains in the list, both for BR 111 and DB 766 BR111 Timetable and problems train RE79045, RE 59417 and RB 59417 DB 766 Timetable and problems train RB59418, RE 79045 and RE 59417
I can't test the on foot mode but I suppose that is because of the timetable starting over at midnight probably. I'm not sure if it's a 24h looped timetable. To your problem of the three same 111's. I think you got that answer on another thread I saw somewhere this morning. that has been a problem since launch and apparently not a priority to be fixed. I recall someone saying the duplicates coincide with the problems trying to use it in formation and livery editor. no idea if those still stand. since it isn't game breaking, and even if it were like a few infamous incompletable scenario's. don't expect DTG to fix these problems ever. it doesn't make them any money to fix problems.
Yes, I put it in the Feedback thread for the record, because I consider the disappearance of trains after 0:00 to be a bug ...... and yes, sometimes I expect DTG to fix at least major bugs ...
Now I also tested it on the Bremen - Oldenburg map. Timetable ICE1, where the last connections in the list start after midnight, or are on the way at 0:00 and it's the same... if I start In foot at 23:55, they are on the route, if I start at 0:00, they don't go ... This seems to be a system property
I suppose it has something to do with the day "starting over" and something going wrong. seems like you have a second bug report
When one of the active services in "Service/Timetable" mode starts after 0:00, for example at 0:20 etc., the other current trains on the route will be displayed during their service
once again, services with BR101 with complet empty trains Wtf where is the update? rush hour style not loading .... even with 30% discount way to expensive
Thats rather because the routes, not related to a loco / train. Right when tsw3 released it was clear that DTG botched literally the entire passenger system: - invisible passengers - empty trains - empty stations - train arrives overcrouded, 200 people get out at the 1. Station and nobody was getting on board (for the entire service) - DTGs silence of the usual ignoring (everything is fine....blabla) This + a lot more came with the introduction of tsw3, as they broke most tsw2 routes. A few got an update, but bakerloo trains were running entirely empty. (Not sure its resolved now). Now with TSW 4 routes im kind of ok with the passenger boarding, also they updated the variety a lot (umbrellas, phones, coffe..luggage, etc). Looks random and convincing to me, since im not focussing 200% on their behaviour. Some players might still thinks its "unrealistic", but from here time is probably better spent elsewhere for improvements. Thats why im totally against Tsw5. DTG is not capable of delivering a new iteration without braking tons of working systems on older content. Makes them look very amateurish....
Got this route in the recent PS Store sale, the only issues I find with this route concern the Dostos cab car: The accelerator taking an eternity to restart after idling it, and that you have acknowledge SIFA manually, the circle button only acknowledges PZB signals.
Sifa is confirmed with the circle button at the moment when the Sifa indicator lights up on the display.....not the happiest....
quick question - why some google searches say Salzburg to Rosenheim is 69 km and others 89 km (actual length of the railway line according to WikiPedia)?
(PS5) Anyone found out 111’s bremszylinder gauge acting weird? After aplication of train brake, the arrows raise, then suddenly fall down to zero (while still aplied pressure to brakes). After releasing the arrow rapidly comes up and releases as it should. (After basic forum search I didnt found it mentioned)
The "Buckets of rain" scenario has a discrepancy between the introduction message and the actual time of day in the scenario.
Also why does the game stutter like crazy at Salsburg HBF? Its fine facing away from the terminal but looking backwards causes a crawl.
Im having real trouble on some routes since the last few patches especially the core summer one. Before then i had smooth game play. Now im getting stutters all over the gaff. Rosenheim is unplayable as certain parts of the track drop to about 10fps. What have they done?
Try reducing your quality settings. Hardware is constantly evolving and I have the impression that DTG is optimising their newer content for more modern hardware. I have an RTX2080ti and have now realised that after more than 5 years since its launch, this is not high end hardware anymore compared to today's standards. Play a bit with the graphics settings and you'll soon find a setting that's better suited for your system and allows you to experience fluent gameplay with only a slight visual degradation.
13th August and the SIFA/PZB issue on the 766.2 issue for console players is still there ... What an annoying feature !
All scenarios with the 185 are suddenly broken. The locomotive only runs in one direction. After changing the driver's cab, nothing works anymore. I'm on PS5..
Same here on my PS5, the locomotive wont have traction in Cab2. Even suspension bouncing is not working for me.
PS5 console 766.2 DostoCabCar have problem with confirm SIFA on SPAWN mod, circle button is not active for SIFA. On Timetable mod is it correct ....why not for spawn mod? issue?
Is it possible that random usage of liveries from CC doesn't happen at all on Salzburg-Rosenheim? On Semmeringbahn the 1116, Bmz and 4023 occur often with downloaded liveries in timetable mode.
Just had this problem while playing the International Aid scenario in Steam (PC), TSW 5. Please get this fixed DTG. PS: Additional info. It seems after you switch to cab 2, the train only accelerates up to 2 Km/h. After that, looking at the minihud acceleration indicator, the loco seems like fighting between acceleration and braking so it stays at 2 km/h. PS2: Pressing the "I'm stuck. Reset train physics simulation" button in the game menu does not fix the problem.
