Route Hopping

I’m still a bit confused on how this works. What’s the difference between route hopping and route merging ???. Because they sound very similar to each other.

 

With route hopping you just exit your current route and load in the same position in the next route. Route merge would be joining both routes into a single one.

Example:
Route Hopping between London-Brighton and ECW at Brighton. You are standing in Brighton in the London-Brighton route. You do route hopping to Brighton in the ECW route. You stop being in the London-Brighton route and are now standing in Brighton in the ECW route.

Route merging London-Brighton and ECW. Both routes are joined. You do not have a London-Brighon route and ECW. Now you have a single route that contains everything from both routes.

 

The idea behind route merging is basically the two routes becoming one. For example if they had "merged" Antelope Valley and San Bernardino you could drive from Lancaster to LA then jump on a train to San Bernardino without ever stopping the game.

Route hopping sounds like its basically a quick way to jump between different routes that happen to share terminals. So you can go to LA Union on Antelope valley, walk to a specific location and press a button which allows you to "hop" to LA Union in San Bernardino line, but you are leaving the Antelope valley version of LA Union and spawning into the San Bernardino version of LA Union.

You can already sort of do that but you'd have to quit the game you're in, go back to the main menu, select the other route and spawn into it. What this is doing is eliminating all those steps to make it a more immersive experience and feel like you're continuing a long journey but they are still two separate distinct routes.

 

That explains it very well. Thank you so much. Route Merging would be amazing. Probably won’t happen anytime soon but hopefully in the future it becomes a thing. Thanks again for explaining it in better detail.

 

I'm glad this is coming. I suggested this feature as I noticed many UK routes seem to be connected in some way. It makes it easy to make very long trips. It might predict a lot of "extensions" to "merge" routes are coming?

 

It is a first step to route merging. I remember roadmap or something last year where Matt mentioned this would be a way to start things moving forward in this direction and they would look into it. I Should really listen to the roadmaps and matts charity streams with more of a future feature thought process in my brain. Would help predict things better.

 

I love the sound of this feature, its an absolute gamechanger.

 

I assume it wont matter which timetable I am running right? Even if its one made by the community and not dtg

 

This will involve some loading screen I imagine? If you are on the Bakerloo you can't walk from the lu platform upto Paddington national rail?

 

Good question. I would think so.

 

It's basically a shortcut which replaces you needing to exit to main menu, select another route, spawn on foot using the date, time and weather you left the previous route.

 

Think of it like those scenario markers you can find at the moment. You walk up to the marker, press E, select route, loading screen, and continue from there.

What I am interested in is if the time and weather carry over. Does the time to travel between London Paddington and London Victoria factor into it?

 

What would be great if it would also provide the list of services starting from the "hop" point on the outhe route, and automatically spawn me in that service once the route is loaded.

Because without that I might jump onto the other route only to find that there is no service comming in the next 15 minutes.... So.. I either way there for 15 minutes, or I quit to main menu and select the service...

 

So you hop onto the same place on the other route and then have to wait for a non AI only service to arrive and take over?

 

Well, then I hope you plan to improve on it in future, because as it is, it has limited use for the player, as he wants to chain his train services (which is what a player in a trainsim game wants in the end), then he still has to go through the main menu.

 

I can’t express how excited I am for this one feature alone. The ability to seamlessly load into route from another route feels me with joy, like an 8 year child unwrapping his presents on Christmas morning.
It makes me wonder now if we’ll get fully completed routes like the ECML and the newest member, the WCML.
Mentioning this now for the 200th time lol, e.g. King’s Cross to Peterborough (please make this route DTG) *prays to the DTG elders*. Then seamlessly load up at the same station (Peterborough) and carry on to Doncaster.

I’ve seen some complaints about the Avanti on the new WCML only clocking in at 50 miles, while it’s not ideal for a sprinter train at least the option is there for DTG or a third party to extend the WCML in the future. Even legacy routes such as BML route hopping onto ECW etc. The potential is endless. I can not wait to see how this feature evolves in the future, maybe eventually leading into route merging like in TSC. I won’t run before I can walk though. Thank you for listening DTG <3 Cheers.

 

This was my first thought too, sounds very promising.

 

I think it is a super cool feature. I have a couple questions about it that I will submit if/when there is a Q&A:

1. Will route hopping take into account time and weather? if it is 9:15am and raining at LA Union on Antelope Valley and I "hop" to LA Union on San Bernardino will it still be 9:15 and raining?

2. Will any backwards work take place on the older routes to improve continuity? I.E. Cajon Pass currently has no Metrolink traffic in San Bernardino so it would be a bit odd to get off a Metrolink train from San Bernardino Line and have all the Metrolink traffic disappear when you "hop" to Cajon Pass. Not a deal breaker but it would be a bit immersion breaking.

 

Yes, that’s some really good points I didn’t think of. Until we can fully test it for ourself’s there’s no way of knowing how much fine tuning DTG did on this new feature.
I’m looking forward to the preview streams, hopefully they can shed some light on this.

 

Leaning towards "no" for both simply because that involves programming the two routes to "synch" when they're not made for it. Could be wrong though. To me it's not a helluva lot of difference and not matching the current weather is the price to pay to get this feature, I'll take it.
I could be wrong though. They could have done the extra step to "integrate" the two routes.

I'd guess it's more like "journey mode" where you just go from one "mission" to the next. That would be the easiest to integrate with the least amount of programming. I'm going to make sure this works first before asking for MORE features on something that's not even released yet though =-)

I did notice that there's even multiple "hops" available... for example per the FAQ you can drive from one end of the Antelope map, to the San Bernadino map, to end on the Cajon Pass map. That's a HUGE improvement and should scratch that itch for the "we need longer routes" folks. That run would be a 220 mile run all at once.

Driving the SEHS then all the way down the GWE would be pretty neat too, or London to Eastbourne on the ECW. Connecting the whole route from Leven (Fife) to Glasgow would be pretty amazing too.

 

No problem Chris. A tidy forum makes life easier for everyone.

 

I don't think you are "walking"... I think it just "loads" the new route in and you start as if you had "stopped" at the station.
It's a pretty good compromise for me...provided it is available for non-timetable routes too.
For example say I want to drive the whole Antelope-San Bernadino-Cajon Pass route.
Do I have to stick to JUST what's in the timetable?
What if the train I want isn't in that timetable?
Can I create a scenario using the same 3 maps?
Can I "Free roam" and spawn my own train to drive across the 3 maps?

That's my only concern with it....because San Bernadino is not a freight map. Antelope has just 1 real freight (split into 4 services, but it's still the same one repeatedly in the timetable), and Cajon Pass is ONLY freight.
So... what would you be able to drive between the three different maps in a single go?

Would the Intermodal that starts on Antelope continue on San Bernadino and then end on Cajon Pass?
Even if it is, that's limited to just 2-3 loco types (well one stock, and then two substitutions possible)
If I want to create my own train/consist to drive between the three maps, can I do so?

 

Nice and powerful feature, a aceptable "go around" for the problems occur with route merge.

Still one question:

I arrive at dresden from a ride over tharandt. Then i use the route hopping to the Riesa - Dresden route.

Now i want to take over a expert line 101 service. So How is the feature dealing with the different amount of timetables on other routes?

Is the timetable selectable in the "route hop menu"?

(For obvious reasons i wouldnt be interested that im getting kicked into a reduced timetable or in case of the 101 expertline the "correct" timetable would be necessary.

Even bakerloo has 3 timetables, so they have to be selectable)

 

During the route hopping announcement, they show a clip of the player at San Bernardino being given multiple timetables to choose from on the San Bernardino line, so yeah, the feature addresses the existence of multiple timetables

 

Think this is going to be a useful feature. Same caveat though, if I finish up a run on Glossop then “jump” to Manchester Victoria plus time warp for a train to Leeds will the save game fall down if I have to save and reload on the second run, when I can’t see the objective data which we know is currently a flaw. Features like this and network style routes are great, but the systems that make it practical need to be running smoothly.

 

I wonder if Route Hopping will form the basis of new route selection?

ie Are we now likely to see Doncaster - Leeds/York or New Street - Crewe or Piccadilly to Crewe etc ?
Shorter route 'extensions' must now seem quite attractive to DTG.
Personally I've no real objection to this other than it may limit forays in to new geographical areas.

 

The thing is, nothing runs directly on all three routes.

Antelope Valley is Metrolink owned with Union Pacific Freight

San Bernardino Line is Metronlink for the full length, with local UP and BNSF traffic in various areas

Cajon Pass is mainly BNSF

There is no real train that runs across all 3 routes in a direct path, so it's really just a player swapping trains to different routes that are "technically" connected to each other

 

Well something must connect because they're listed as able to be "route hopped" in the FAQ.
Even if it's a bit of 'creative interpretation of reality."

I'm not sure the Antelope freight is "real" (feels like they added it on later as a layer) so they'd probably just extend that. through all 3 maps as a proof of concept. Although, I could see them adding a Metrolink layer that doesn't exist too for the passenger folks.

There ARE passenger routes from AMTRAK down Cajon Pass in real life but they wouldn't be run by Metrolink....

 

This is what I thought it was going to be. So you can´t take Bakerloo Line train at Harrow & Wealdstone, drive it to Queens Park on the WCML and then switch whilst sitting in cab and carry on to Elephant & Castle.
Same goes for Frankfurt Fulda and Würzburg - Kassel. Can´t take a ICE service from Frankfurt to Hamburg and carry on from Fulda to Kassel by switching in the Cab at Fulda. I guess timetables would need to be the same on both routes for this to become feasible.

 

If you are just standing around like in Free Roam between timetable runs... how is "route hopping" different from just loading the new route into Free Roam? What added advantage does "route hopping" give we didn't already have?

Is it just a "route planner" so you know what timetables are "roughly" at the same time?
What if it's a through service in real life where you don't get off the train? Are you still spawning on the platform anyway and have to get back into the train like "going to take a bathroom break?"

I was really hoping you'd spawn in a train matching the one you were in on the previous route and just start from the station...not wait around for 15 minutes on the platform.

 

Yes ECML with TSW4 was very uninspiring re. it's lack of terminus and length. If the free upgrade had been available back then I would have honestly passed on it and waited for a big sale. I urge DTG to revisit this route and add a paid dlc that extends it to London, if necessary by using this new feature. Then we will have the perfect run for when a 91 is finally added, plus another line for 700 traffic. In actual fact this would make a great core route for TSW6 if they cannot do it before.

 

I've noticed a couple missing possible hops in the FAQ, namely Aschaffenburg Hochschule and Sued. Both routes there have both of those stations too.
P.S. is it just forgetfulness that Dresden is only listed in one direction?

 

For me a perfect example for route hoping would be Boston Providence and the upcoming Worcester line where the timetables match up with each other. iirc, there are many services that arrive to Boston that AI takes over and continues onward on a different line. With route hopping, I would want to be able to spawn on Worcester DLC and basically see the same trains on the same platforms where I left them on the Boston DLC. If the timetables won't match up, then there's no point in route hopping.

 

One of the IRL freight DTG based their layer one

The Southwest Chief does run on Cajon, but it takes a different route to Los Angeles.

 

It doesn't run on CJP in game though.

 

Maybe I replied on a different thread to this, but there is Union Pacific freight on Antelope in real life, not BNSF (which is in game from Cajon Pass layer) and there is no "native" timetable for freight....JUST if you have the CJP layer for the ES44.

 

I just realized you will be able to go all the way across Scotland with the three Scottish maps in TSW.
Interesting.

 

You did.

 

Was it only me that shouted to the screen during the roadmap "No Matt, Route hopping should also mean extended routes!"?

 

Speaking of the route hopping does this mean Worcester Boston South route hop with the northern segment of NEC Trenton to Boston route being PVD-BOS?

German versions Bahnstrecke Werdau Chemnitz Dresden with Dresden to Riesa and RRO RSN. Future ones would be Zwolle Groningen with Bremen Oldenburg with the bridge section being the 129km Oldenburg Groningen. Route hopping for that is Oldenburg Hbf and Groningen.​

 

As has been mentioned before, unless the work was previously done in an original release of a route to allow for the possibility of an extension, then the routes would essentially need to be rebuilt from ground up, before then also working on the extended section. The original SEHS ram between St Pancras and Faversham, and that had to be rebuilt again before they could add the Ashford and Dartford extensions in SEHS2.

Given the time this must take, I can’t really see DTG justifying committing spending so much time essentially rebuilding an existing route when they could be working on brand new content.

It’s a shame - I really would like to see DTG expand current routes rather than splitting them into multiple separate routes - For example if we got another WCML in the future north from MKC to Birmingham or further, but I honestly can’t see it happening unless there is a very special reason to warrant it

 

I thought Matt's reply on this was very measured in the stream.

Its obviously something they would like to do, but the way the routes are built (everything from scenery to timetables) is not standardised. I hadn't even considered the complexities of timetables previously.

What I think many would like some view on, is that there is a plan to avoid future technical debt, and where there are route crossovers, considerations are made around timetables, scenery etc that would facilitate an evolution towards route merging in the future without a complete re-write.

For example, where a route gets too complex to extend in a conventional manner (WCML?) I'd propose it could be split up into logical packaged 'products' and released separately. If provisions are made to harmonise the sceneries and timetables, i can't see any showstopping technical reason why a player controller service couldn't be migrated from one route to another in an acceptable manner.

Why should they do it?
Well, forgetting the obvious enthusiasm community wide for this - On the business side it really does make a lot of sense:
1. Shorter development cycles with more regular route updates and more transparency for the community with regards to direction of travel (see what I did there?)
2. Less risky big route projects - WCML must have taken a LOT of investment. Ironically, the sections north of Milton Keynes would be a lot easier to develop, but would have less demand (see criticism of ECML) without the route to London. Developing even a short addition to WCML including in-train Route Hopping would generate significant interest and revenue, from a relatively cheap endeavour. They have done the hard work already!
3. Less reliance on Rolling Stock for perceived value - Intrinsic value becomes the growing route, rather than relying on new trains. This again would simplify the development process and probably open up more avenues with third parties to add niche extensions.

How should they do it:
1. Identify a candidate route for a proof of concept (community led?).
2. Agree route extension direction - This should deliberately be a extension in the region of 15-20 mins driving time, which doesn't offer any new significant services or rolling stock, but may extend some by a few stations for example. The purpose here is to prove that a short development cycle using route hopping to piggy back on another route can be profitable and well received, even if its to nowhere special.
3. Develop the route using the existing scenery for any duplicated locations.
4. Develop the timetable leveraging the existing route timetable as a baseline. Include margin of approx 5% for delays with route hopping unable if delayed more than that.
5. Develop the route hopping functionality so that player trains (only) that transverse both routes have the option to switch from one route to the other in-cab. This isn't difficult - its a a read and lift of the train config and a load of the new route with that same config, just like is done in a scenario.
5. Market the route as it is, a POC to test feedback
6. If successful, extend the second route further in small chunks conventionally (no route hopping) until it also reaches a point of maximum complexity. Start process again....

Do it quickly. Fail or Win fast - It could revolutionise the sim.

 

I just don't understand how people come to the conclusion that these two are in any way related...
Route hopping is basically just loading a different map and spawning you at a predefined point. It is just a ui shortcut for stuff you are already able to do. It is also easy to backport to existing routes, because you most likely just need to add the teleport markers and link them together.

It solves none of the issues that are present when you want to merge routes - conflicting scenery, different point of origin (so your object coordinates don't match), merged timetables, original timetables made with portals where now track is... etc.

 

I don’t think that’s necessarily true. So long as there is an uncooked master version, which there must be for fixing and patching, I don’t see any reason why that can’t be added to. Yes you might have to play around with signalling links etc and the timetable probably redone from scratch, but I do believe this mythos of, “once released, it’s set in stone” amounts to a bit of misdirection.

 

My only “nit pick” to speak regarding the route hopping feature is that because of different layers and different timetables, and in some cases even probably completely different periods of basis is that the timetables won’t sync and match up, but I do completely understand why this isn’t a thing.

From what I’ve seen and heard about the route hopping feature, I think I certainly will have fun with it. I mentioned on a previous thread that I’m really looking forward to driving down Cajon Pass, jumping across to LA then heading up the Antelope Valley - without having to quit out into the main menu and manually select and reload the timings and weather etc. This would also be great fun with the number of London connected routes too

 

As I understand it is a route switcher. You arrive at a station where multiple routes have a starting point and you pick another route (DLC) than the one you are driving on. If that route would have an end station with also other routes connected to it you would be hopping between multiple routes. There is still much potential left in route hopping is my take on it