Why Can’t Routes Be Longer?

Yeah I understand that the short modern routes sell better than longer period routes.

I just don't get dtg's attitude towards the loyal customers that have supported dtg from the beginning. It kinda sounded like Matt was saying the new customer base is happy with these short bus routes so the rest of us that want something different can basically go and f ourselves.

I have actually reinstalled TSC fresh over the last few days and purchased any enhancements I don't already own and invested in a decent 4k display to get the best out of it. Enjoyed a nice run from London Vic to Ramsgate last night. Might attempt a run from London to Liverpool tonight.

 

While a break in a longer journey isn't ideal, I guess it's a way to provide effectively longer routes - using route hopping. If for example memory constraints meant extending PBO -> DON to KGX or to LDS & YRK etc. was not viable in one route, I guess a separate route you could route hop to and from (same era etc.) could work as an alternative

 

Personally I will not complain if it's done that way with a split route. It actually has an advantage to me, the route will not become to long. So even with not that much time to play, you can drive a part of the route and the next time the other part.

 

There's something to this. In some instances it doesn't make sense (long haul freight or an express) but for passenger routes as long as it's a stop at a station, it's often a stop you're going to make anyway so you're not "interrupting" a run by route hopping. I don't know on this route or on what runs it'd be proper for a stop to be made at Milton-Keynes, but where it's proper then there is no real interruption of service. Instead of sitting watching the clock for a minute or two before departing, you just take that minute or two to load the next route.

 

Is there a way to make a route then sort of future proof it for a extension in the future?

 

One thing though, this would probably need two timetables to make it viable, at least in my eyes:

1) One so you can continue a service you were already driving.
2) The other so it can be standalone, if desired or if someone doesn't have the Part 1.

For the first option, it'd also need to be set up so that the station (or wherever you finished on Part 1 of the route) and the train are exactly the same way as when you finished Part 1, as well as all AI trains being the same (a bit tricky when it comes to substitutions).

I wonder if that'd be possible at all? I mean, theoretically, maybe. But would it be practical?

 

Bottom line - if you are looking for DTG supported long distance route then best to use what is available through 3rd party product on TSC.

 

Yes that’s what I meant. Since extensions on existing dlc are out of the question this would be good way to complete full lines in the game. There’s plenty of people who would love to continue their journey from MK or Doncaster, as long as it’s still using the same rolling stock, set in the same era than it would work.
I don’t really use the route hopping feature at all, but having popular train lines like the ECML or WCML split into multiple parts, the feature would be play a big part in loading into the next part of the route. The train you were driving in the previous part of the route would need to be already set up and ready to go though, instead of spawning on foot like what happens when you use the route hopping feature currently.
Route hopping V2.0 incoming that’s one technical challenge to improve the use of route hopping.

 

At least San Bernadino and MBTA Commuter pretty much run the complete line for their designated routes, so they don't end in weird places...

 

Hi Matt! You have got my attention my even mentioning a New Street Extension or add on for the WCML. That would be stunning. I honestly would support that. Would love that really would. I mean one whole thing be amazing but to be able to have an option saying if I want to continue the service then it just loads the portion to new street that would be amazing. Only thing that could be annoying is Maybe when there is a service that skips Milton Keynes Central and is maybe Non stop to Coventry but no big deal really.
Whether there is a way where you past Milton Keynes at 125 then it loads into the MK to New Street route with the same speed and 390 Unit.
But I would 1000000% Welcome a Route to New Street. It be great for all stoppers like Some of the Edinburgh Stoppers that stop at all stations Watford,MK,Rugby,Coventry etc.
If you were to do such a stunning route would you consider the Northampton Loop as well? At least you don't need to model New Street as well and you got some track layed out towards International.

 

But I 100% welcome things like that.

 

I grew up with dispatching simulators, and the first ones I got were coming on 1,44 MB floppy disks. While still having everything TSW needs for the background simulation of trains. Full day timetables, different physics simulation for various train types, simulation of randomised closures and corresponding alteration of train spawn, ad-hoc generated freight trains above what was scheduled to run. Complicated multipart stations with shunting movements and active marshalling hump yards, or route dispatching signal boxes controlling 150 km of track.

Maybe you should think about how they managed that thirty years ago running from a floppy, and why TSW now requires gigabytes of ram to process the exact same amount of information.

 

Partly because of how they built the game over the years, in addition to how the Unreal Engine has been updated and maintained. They either need a new engine (give it a few years) or they need to keep optimizing their code. They've already released two patches that were meant to address memory issues, who is to say they can't release more fixes?

 

I’m not particularly a fan of this idea.

Having to get out the train, walk over to a big glowing marker to change “route” and then go through a loading screen breaks the flow. If the timetables don’t match up exactly between the routes, you’re not going be driving the same train either.

I’m not into the idea of route hopping replacing what would more benefit a route more as an extension.

Route hopping makes more sense in the context of swapping lines that are actually different routes. Like how JT did it with Preston on Blackpool & Shap.

For a route like WCML South, the line to New Street should be a paid extension for the existing route with a new piece of stock to sweeten the deal, such as the Evero.

I don’t expect the whole WCML in one route, but I do think each route should be between two major stations. A follow-up route could then be New Street - Crewe, for example.

While on the topic of hopping, an option to turn off the glowing marker like the tutorial/scenario markers would be nice I never use it and the markers stick out like a sore thumb at stations.

As for ECML, I don’t think that needs an extension… It needs a new route set in the better era of BR Blue with the Deltics front and centre

 

If TSW were to do any of this then it most certainly will take years. Meanwhile all of this is available in TSC. I suspect ATS is also close at completing the full WCML with the ECML already available and full BR Blue era long routes also available 3rd party. If your itch is longer routes you should give TSC a try. If you prefer the Unreal Engine with timetabled shorter routes then stick with TSW. Both are options (unless you are constrained by only having a console).

 

1. We only sell Salt N Vinegar Crisps "all our customers love our crisps"
2. We are making all our crisp bags small "all our customers love our crisps"
3. We could make big bags, but our customers love our small bags
4. We released a WCMLs flavour crisp, the community fed back the bag was too small, see POINT 2
5. Alot of feedback we get says bigger bags are enjoyed, but we sell lots of small bags so why change?

 

I’m allergic to crisps/chips!

 

Okay.... unrelated to the post but sure.
Most routes in TSW are good about end points honestly.
Doesn't change that they're short US routes.

 

I wish you could Matt.

 

They set off my IBS!

 

I love crisps, especially if they are baked bean flavour, oooooh that's some good shi.........

 

Just quoting myself from another thread that's basically the same. I'd like to also clarify something. When I say "extend" I mean a new route containing a previous route's content and more. I understand that it is not possible to just open up an existing package and add a load more too it.

 

Sorry if someone asked this but when you complete a run to MK, and your given your graph for completing, could you not then just add an option to continue journey rather than route hopping. Would this not give it time to load everything to carry on.

 

IN THEORY it could be possible to synchronise up services between routes, but both timetables would need to be highly pre-planned, with the routes essentially developed in tandem or back to back for it to be possible to auto-load a particular one. It'd make developing a timetable that properly works for each individual route harder, would limit possible layers for both routes as you would need to avoid clashes, and might reduce the realism on other services local to each route - and you'd lose stuff like the weather conditions from the end of your first part when loading the other one. It would be a lot of sacrifices to make it feasible, for something that's still not seamless.

 

Very good explanation that is.
DTG Matt Would there be away that could prevent these type of things from happening or not?

 

Thanks for your explanation, I wasn't quite sure how much was going on in the background

 

Next you’ll be telling me you have a nut allergy…

 

I’m seeing a correlation between timetables and length of route - hmm
1) I like timetables best - Get TSW
2) I want longer routes - Get TSC

 

For me instead of two major stations it'd make sense to say two logical end points

 

In this case it's "one guy from Idaho said the bags were to small, but he said it A LOT OF TIMES so it must be true."

 

If so he shouldn't spend too much time on the forum.
Lots of nuts here.

 

Graphics for starters.
I do remember games on floppy disks.
Is this what you're talking about?
"Trains" (1983 railroad simulation)


Oh yeah... totally the same thing as TSW.
Those authentic sounds and physics animations!

 

so there no us routes in the works for tsw... that understandable.

 

Not that this is the thread for it, but they did 3 US routes in about a year span, so you'll prolly see 1 for TSW 6 release by next month and then another couple after that in the fall/winter.

 

No. And graphics is absolutely irrelevant, because we are talking about background simulation outside of rendered view distance, which still takes gigabytes of RAM in TSW.

 

Man it’s going to be hard to support/ buy routes for this game if they keep going for the electric bus stop short routes instead of longer routes where you can actually do more than 40 mph before the next station.

Honestly I never understood why people enjoy these one handle EMUs which require no skill and have no challenge, to add what’s fun about stopping every 2 minutes?

also Matt you said that the game listens to everybody/ majority so the game basically killed off steam content just because it required a small bit extra effort, steam was in quite high demand until the game made false promises about fixing the current steam content!.

if you look at suggestions and pc editor you would see how much we want steam or at least older content but it seems like this game just likes sucking up to the boring people.

like would it kill this game to actually add first gen DMUs, older br trains and steam trains again, like a tank engine could really go far for the two steam routes and could sell quite a bit if done well.

(rant over, this is 100% poorly written but that’s what happens when you get a few weeks without good sleep, I’m just so frustrated with this game’s persistence for these short and Electric bus stop routes!)

 

I fully support most of the above!

Of course there are bus service routes and then there are bus service routes! The MBTA Worcester route is a bit “bussy” but at least you’re getting to thrash a big diesel loco between the frequent stops and the route itself is superbly done.

However I left Mildmay and the new Manchester route on the shelf because I’ve got more than enough of that already in TSW.

Thinking specifically of the UK, DTG seem to focus either on main lines (WCML, ECML) or the short bus stop routes. They seriously need to start looking into more secondary main lines, the likes of Norwich or Cambridge to Birmingham (well part of it), the North and West from Newport up towards Shrewsbury. Mid or Central Wales lines, Newcastle to Carlisle - just a few that come to mind. There are ways to increase the lower traffic levels some of these routes have and not being able to cram 1000 services into an unworkable timetable should not be an obstacle to offering more diverse type of route.

 

After Matt’s explanation and understanding the financial direction of the parent company it is apparent that TSW will not see any (a) long routes (b) pedigree Steam locos (c) heavy US rolling stock/freight routes any time soon. He also intimated that TSC will still be supported however mainly through the endeavors of 3rd party. No point bemoaning here about the length of route as it will not have any impact in the near term. 3 or 4 years down the road may be a different story.
Grab your cheap TSC platform whilst the sales are still on for those who desire any of the above 3 mentioned play styles. I expect to see ATS, RSSLO and AP still provide product and integration on TSC during this twilight phase. HIS may also knock out some US stuff.
Respectfully

 

Well It looks like the end of the road for me concerning tsw. It seems the company has gone from a team with a passion for trains to a team with a passion for revenue. Apart from Matt who seems to have his hands tied.
If the free upgrade is still a thing this year I'll probably continue to support third parties but not if they are gonna be stuck behind a yearly paywall.

 

I normally classify it as any route that has two stations less than a mile apart but others may differ, basically you can’t get up to a good speed before having to stop again which can get quite boring or annoying

 

Not saying every route needs to be 200 miles long or bust. But at least on routes like the WCML, ECML or NEC ; we should be at least be able to have the leniency to have longer runs, maybe in the 70-120 mile section just to enhance out the gameplay, as routes like those 100 miles can get covered in 1h 30 max 2h depending on stopping pattern. Like AFAIK the longest Euston to Birmingham runs are 2h12 and the shortest 1h25

 

I don't understand what's fun about not stopping regularly? There's no steering the train or anything, so all that you actually do in a train simulator is accelerate and brake... and unless you have to stop the train every once in a while, you don't really have to do much of that either. So I don't get what you actually do when playing a "non bus stop" route...

...at least if we're going by a definition of "bus stop route" that includes Boston - Worcester, which has a whole bunch of services that are non-stop from Framingham to Boston, some that have just two or three stops between Worcester and Boston, and a great variety in service patterns generally. If that still qualifies as a bus stop route, then pretty much all that doesn't is KWG, ECML, and WCML Shap, all of which are extremely dull in my opinion (well, at least WCML has an interesting loco, but still) because most of the time, you just don't actually need to do anything!

 

While I would prefer a seamless experience this would be better than not having another section of the route. It would be good if there was an option when the service performance screen closes and you get the options to return to menu etc if the hopping feature was here and it could load in the same service (if possible) on the next section. I would just be happy to see more of a mainline route fleshed out in the game as it sounds like merging is not going to be possible with current TSW.

 

It was slightly tongue in cheek… I have since discovered there are a variety of different stopping patterns on the route, which is good, though the overall end to end journey times are fairly similar.

 

Short, frequent stopping routes with a train that's as easy to drive as a bus.

I don't mind commuter runs. If I drive from Dover to Victoria on TSC I'm more likely to drive a stopper, although with a lengthy route there's still the chance to get up to speed on the route.
But with a short 20 mile route on tsw that's impossible.

Also I can drive trains like the 411 which are a bit more challenging than the one handle emus that are too predictable. I.e 0.6 miles from the station, apply brake step one and pull up to the stop market every single time.

 

Definition of bus route probably varies on your perspective but basically any line where the train is running only a short distance between stops, with little or no chance to reach or cruise at line or train maximum speed. Generally applied to shorter routes like Glossop or Goblin but BCC and to some extent Vorarlberg fall in the bus stop category too. Particularly where there is little or no variation in service pattern.

 

Yes I hate that example people use too. A train is a train regardless of the short stop frequency it represents.
It must be an inside joke for train enthusiasts as trying to find an example of “what a bus stop train route is” on google search provides me with no information what’s so ever.

As you said Matt, buses have long distance stops as well as shorter stop patterns, so using that logic should all routes be considered bus stop routes now

 

I think it's a pejorative term from people who may prefer longer, faster drives.