Genuine question. Was this a big request from the community? Because it just seems that you are adding another variable into the mix in a game which has already spiralled slightly out of control. And that does not seem like a great idea to me. Others may disagree entirely of course!!
I agree. Also they are implemented poorly. Just like Dynamic Weather, which means “all possible weather phenomena in one run.” I would rather have them spend time making crossings where the cars don’t plow through, highways that don’t have cars dropping three-abreast from the sky, etc, etc. But “we fixed broken things” doesn’t bring in new customers like “WOW! NEW FEATURES!”
Yeah, dynamic weather... Just once, please can I have a nice summer's day without the inevitable downpour half way through. Or a nice run on a crisp, cold, sunny December day that doesn't finish in three feet of snow!!
Personally I thought it would look more like getting Expert Locos and having to manage them from fuelling, cold starting and occasional faults or issues. A little more immersive that what we have currently!
Really starting to think that was a ton bs and the fact they didn’t show the others doesn’t full me with hope
I think the concept of introducing some variability was a good one. The fact that, if you drive the same Timetable mode run twice, everything will be exactly the same both times, was a problem. Real life isn’t like that, and why would you want to have precisely the same experience multiple times over? I think the introduction of signal checks and TSRs is good. It needs some tweaking, but that’s only to be expected, and there’s the basis for a really good addition to the game there. It’s also realistic - signal checks and TSRs are part of the day to day reality of train driving. Train faults are a bit different. In reality they occur very infrequently, and in a simulator they’re difficult to reproduce realistically. They’ve been set up to occur far more frequently than in reality, presumably because if they were set to occur at a realistic frequency people would declare that they ‘never’ happen after a couple of runs with no faults experienced. But at the current frequency they’re just annoying and unrealistic. Like most people, I suspect, I keep them switched off, and will do until there’s an option to have them occur at a remotely realistic frequency (i.e. extremely infrequently).
Because of the player survey, but then wasn't it limited in options? Kinda a stretch to say "you all wanted this" when really it should be "you wanted this more then the other options"... Shame train faults just became a game fault...
I think more erratic movement of other trains would be more realistic, demanding driving input due to possible yellow and red lights. Probably give the dispather a brainstorm though.
who would have thought that purposefully adding train problems to an already problematic game would result in x2 problems?
I remember saying this prior to TSW6s release... "In theory it sounds like a good idea, but if the implementation of it is like dynamic weather then I'd probably avoid it" I wasn't wrong. I turn off the random faults anyway, as they aren't really that random (not just because of the frequency), but because it will be one of 3 things. It's not complex enough for me to want to engage with it. I'm hoping in time DTG do rework it a little bit, because it is a good idea if it is done right and if it had more complexity. I'd like for it to work like JTs MK3/Mk2 coach sets, where there's only very small and rare chance that you get a matching rake of coaches. Similarly, I'd like for the odds of faults to be rare, and for the faults to be more complex then just turning a button on and off. That way it would throw a spanner in the works and make you have to use your brain to resolve faults/issues.
its a no from me..there are enough real faults in the game without any artificially generated ones. lol Also the temporary speed restrictions look rediculous because there are no track side workers or building supplies anywhere near them
This feature belongs to expert dlcs, where it can implemented specific for a loco type and in a very high variety and making use of the troubleshooting over the systems. For example the 101 expert or the upcoming 145. But even there as a player im fine with max. 1 fault every second service. Not sure what inspired Dtg to go with faults as a general feature. My guess it will go down the sink as fast as it appeared. The simplified faults are a joke and maybe fun 1-2 times. Also it doesnt have anything todo with troubleshooting. I wrote in a other thread time would have better be spent on polishing the signal delay / diversion feature. Dtg is currently ruining the entire franchais with their halfhearted yearly releases.
I so wish they'd chosen 'live weather' over dynamic weather, you pick a date and the sim pulls historical weather data for the relevant location. If you pick they day you're on then it can pull the weather as it is.
I have random faults enabled on the expert DB BR101, becasue when it happens, it is something rare, and it breaks the monotony of the usual service runs. I have DTGs random faults disabled, because it is an annoyance, as it happens way too much often.... If your engine is soo bad that it stalls every 5 minues, then possibly the unit shouldn't be in service... Also them being a pop-up and not a in-cab indication is such an immersion breaker... What boggles my mind is... it's so obvious, that even minimal amount of real playtesting would pick it up.. So how late in development the feature was actually enabled, causing engine stalling every 5 minutes something that actually got released? How many iterations internally of the feature there was? And the thing is, I don't expect it to change, in any meaningful way. It will be put on the pile of features that DTG implemented, but never improved up, so it they are borderline not usefull... like quickplay, like dynamic weather...
Random faults should have a user settable mean time between failures, maybe 1 - 100 hrs. That's still far more frequent than real life, but any longer and there's no point game play wise having them. I'd also like to see something more challenging, such as losing 30% of your power, a new rattle appearing, and exhaust getting thicker, with no possibility of repair in the trip, so you have to nurse your train along, or quit the trip.
It was a good idea but poorly implemented. In fact you are more likely to encounter an infrastructure fault out travelling (or a delay due to trespass or perhaps animals on the line) than your train breaking down. Also as noted previously, some faults such as an engine shut down, can’t just be fixed by restarting it. You need to address the cause which could be low coolant, low oil which would need to be topped up first. Plus if there’s a leak, that requires depot attention and you would not restart an engine plastered in oil or fuel. I do wonder despite the survey this all came out of a low hanging fruit lucky dip. Can’t honestly believe more people wanted train faults over more save slots or better graphics options.
We know that three weeks before release, already during the preview streams, the feature was still not in any presentable state, so that gives you an idea. You can also see that zero research went into the feature, as most are either completely unrealistic (manual handbrake turning the control wheel 30 times by itself to accidentally apply mid run), or absolutely mishandled (pantograph drops are not fixed by just slapping it up again and continuing, you shut down the line for multiple hours and investigate the cause).
The Expert 101 did train faults right, where a fault may end the journey or you will be restricted (MSS 34Q11 and 34Q12 will restrict you by 10km/h of the line speed for example), and I feel it's a feature that should only be tied with the Expert locomotives. Of course, I understand DTG probably wanted to cash in on random events, however it should've been more thought out - there should be on screen warnings and not pop up messages, and they should have proper random intervals, to name a few.
They had to do something to justify a new version of the game. Train announcements are not new, because already done by Rivet Games on a few routes.
We already had random faults. Aws alarm randomly not sounding as well as dsd. Wipers randomly not working, horn randomly not working, tpws randomly stopping the train. Oh and random red signals, although they never clear. I've even had a couple of trains stall on me long before this feature.
Random faults and events were a good idea on paper, but I’m not entirely satisfied with how they’ve been implemented. Every patch also seems to drastically effect the odds of them occurring… For example, yesterday’s patch has made the 150 engine stalls occur more often now as when one engine goes, a second one follows it about three to five minutes after as if they’re on a timer. I’ve said this before but they should be a rare occurrence, not something that happens every single service. Majority of services should be fault-free unless the frequency is set to High. I think they should be set to these odds: Set to Low: 1% chance of fault/event Set to Normal: 5% chance of fault/event Set to High: 25% chance of fault/event I also don’t any think future content should have faults included until they iron it out the system in place on the main TSW6 routes. It’ll just mean more things to go wrong.
I think they're fine tbh. They don't seem to happen nearly as often as at launch. Hopefully they'll keep tweaking the implementation though.
Not all speed restrictions are due to someone working on the line. There's a variety of reasons a TSR may be implemented.
Unfortunately, they still occur every other run when set to "off", so this even impacts those of us who didn't want them..
Indeed. I think people tend to think of them as being like speed restrictions on a motorway, which are often there to protect workers. That’s not what TSRs on a railway are for. On a modern railway particularly, it is rare to see someone working within a TSR. Work is carried out largely during line blockages (mostly overnight, sometimes over weekends). When you drive through most TSRs, there’s no visible indication of what the TSR is there for. You can often have a guess, but it rarely looks like a work site.
The train faults system is very basic. Id like to see it expanded upon though as it's a nice idea and does add an element of randomness to those A-B green light runs.
Even if i have disabled them, one door of 150 or Voyager stay open when closing passenger doors and need to use external camera to find and close the fault door
Its like others have mentioned, the feature is a last minute "screw up" from DTG and ruins the gameplay in the current state. When disabled it still happens. They should erase this fail from the code once for good.
I knew from the beginning this would be a feature I wouldn’t use, along with dynamic weather and conductor mode. I think the announcements and passenger ambience are decent though, could still do with some work, but overall add a lot of immersion to the game.
