Don't worry that's not forgotten and is being worked on when time allows. As we want to do it properly though it isn't just a simple switch the 86's and 87's onto the WCML diagrams.
Has a week day timetable been considered for Blackpool to match the WCMLos timetable so we can route hop.
Quick question for JT Benedict, any plans on doing anything with the Preston docks branch with the upcoming Preston to Crewe route? or is it not really worth doing as it saw little traffic.
That's great to know. I'm hoping you'll add in a few loco swaps at Preston as well. As short and sweet as they are, I love doing them when I only have a few minutes to play TSW and want a short service. Would give the 86 another route to be used on, even if it's just in Preston area.
Got a lot of amazing moders out there, could the timetable be released, and maybe some of the moders could do the changes if there was interest? probs would have to put up a poll to ask them 1st. Wish i could help as I've got the time just not the knowledge.
Amazing to read so many nice comments here about one of the best routes and loco dlc in the sim. Hats off to just trains for bringing us these amazing pieces of content and cannot wait to see what the next route is looking like. Either way with just trains you can gurantee amazing content and worth every cent. Day one purchases from me as always
That was my thoughts to a tee including the I wish i could help part. I can understand with their commitments to on going projects and sounds like the 86/87 additions is a bit of a spare time project (thats Not a complaint). But it would be nice someone came along and had a ago with JTs support.
Fascinating. That's 3 posts by a JT employee and not one of them even acknowledges the error they have made with the Class 86 pack coaches. Even when we have posted pictures. It's most strange. It doesn't matter what thread you post the question in it gets completely ignored by JT. Every single time
Is it by any chance that damn livery designer bug? Because if it is, it’s probably a DTG problem not just trains Also quite possibly that fixes would happen with the new route with the 86/4 giving them a reason to back update/ fix the/2
TBH It doesn't really matter who it is. JT or DTG? Neither party have ever acknowledged the error even though it means you can't really use the livery in-game as all the coaches are incorrectly named. I'm guessing, but I don't know, that correcting them might bugger up all the formations used in the timetable which possibly explains why everyone shies away from this. However that is just my guess and I could be way off. However that doesn't excuse the fact that no-one has talked about fixing the error in, what?, nearly 6 months? At the end of the day it is a JT product and it doesn't work correctly. On a lighter note here is a Blue liveried 4BEP unit, parked up at Brighton, for those that care (Still needs a bit of work though on the colours but, if you deliberately select the wrong model, you can manually get it into the game).
It’s only really a problem for like the 4 people that use livery designer hence why it’s probably not being worked or prioritised
You know what I mean, more people care for gameplay over a bug that’s on a few over things and doesn’t affect gameplay
We were hoping an update that went out before Christmas regarding some localisation fixes would have resolved it (the issue generally lies within that) but it didn't but we're compiling stuff for a patch to hopefully resolve it
I think there's been a bit of confusion. We're still aiming to have the 86's and 87's appearing within the existing timetable (would likely be a new timetable in game due to the nature of the changes though) but doing a brand new timetable for weekdays would take too much dev time.
Np mate thanks for clearing that up, any chance you can drop off some of these community communication techniques over at DTG LOL
Nice pic, reminds of the old days in MSTS where you'd have to fake up most trains until an official one came along.
You're using "hind sight" glasses, not "rose tinted." When Shap came out, who knew what other routes were even in the works from JT? You can't shop based on things you don't know. People buy based on knowledge they have at the time. I can't imagine anyone was saying "JT might make another route that includes the 86, so I won't buy it" Two considerations 1) You don't get the Mk 2 cars with the new route (that I know of) just the loco, which was a huge selling point for that DLC. 2) If you love the 86 and bought it when it came out, that would be months and months of play time with it you wouldn't have had otherwise. All for $20? Bottom line is that it's not an unreasonable cost and you can't live your life entirely by what MIGHT happen in the future (that you don't even KNOW about at the time) That's silly. You MIGHT be hit by a bus a year from now so why bother going to work?
Try posting on the thread it belongs on maybe? Posting the same thing on every thread on the site just comes across as obsessive.
Also the 86/4 is mostly likely going to be mostly freight with only a few passengers services but the 86/2 and 87 would be required for the rest of passenger services
I understood, 86/87 work on when time permits. In the current TT. For a weekday timetable it was why I asked if it had been considered rather than is there one in the works as I thought time commitments would be an issue. Still if some TT wizz came along and offered to make one with a little assistance, but outside your JTs time and work schedule and offered it as part of an update, well who knows, pipe dream at best at the moment
Agreed, I see the 86/4 doing the same thing for freight as the 86/2 replacing 87s on the non top link services. There were of course 87s working freight turns, but these were outnumbered by 86s and other classes like the 85. On that note, hopefully now we seem to have decent quality recordings of the key sounds from the 85 as seen in a recent freeware pack, JT or another developer can negotiate the use of these sounds to make an 85 at some point. I remember JT mentioning that this was previously the main stumbling block for making an 85.
I'm actually just waiting on the Class 90 to see how that's introduced. It should run on the same WCML as the Class 86/87 right? In a more modernized package?
Do you know what I'd never thought of that Oh rats. Just remembered that JT hadn't replied to the messages I have left there either. Oh well, that must be my fault for being "obsessive". I've just checked 100 different threads and, guess what, I haven't posted on those. So, maybe, you're just wrong.
Thank you very much Benedict. Whilst the fix is well overdue it will be gratefully received by everyone who wants to see a variety of different liveries on your superb coaches. (Including idiots like me who are trying to make mock-ups of SR emus). This will also, hopefully, enable me to add both the buffet cars and the Mk2s to my formation mods thus allowing an even greater number of formations to run in-game.
I can imagine you doing that just to make that sentence. That was enough amusement to make it all worthwhile.
Technically no, as the 90s didn't enter service until just after the route is set and the 90 pack we're getting depicts the class in it's current freight role, but they did indeed eventually share the same duties as the class 87, from late 87/88 right until the end of WCML loco hauled trains in 2005. In fact originally the class 90s were going to be just a heavy update to the class 87 design and designated the class 87/2, until BREL realised it wasn't really that similar to the class 87s anymore.
For Just Trains routes in the 80s, that sounds like the 90 fits in fine swapping in for the 87 then? Or is there something inherently different in the "freight" 90s vs the "passenger" ones?
I believe the 90s working on freight eventually had their ETS equipment disabled/removed and were regeared for a top speed of 75mph.
No I meant that it was either leave those services out altogether and only add them in with the class 86 (which at the time of the release of WCMLOS the 86 wasn't a thing), or have them in from the route's release and just use the class 87 until an at the time theoretical class 86 came along. The class 86 did only replace the 87 on the cross country services but at the time of the route's release there wasn't talk of a class 86 for the route. Shpuld they just have left those services out until if/when the Class 86 came along, or not?
the route already feels relatively quiet as it is, although realistic it is much quieter than any other section of the wcml we’ve got so far. reducing this number of services would not have been a good selling point, especially on the grounds that they were being kept behind a £20 paywall
