From my understanding, the /6's on this route run between Rochester and Rainham, and between Tonbridge and Paddock Wood. Owning SEHS, you can only really get up to a nice speed after Gillingham - only up to 70mph though - before having to slow down again soon afterwards for Rainham. I'm fairly sure the speed limit between Tonbridge and Paddock Wood is much higher, but would be the only section where you can really get up to speed, which is what the /6's were designed for if I'm not mistaken. My point is, I'm not sure if there is a lot of space to play around with the latter sub-class, as that's the one which interests me most. But like you, I really appreciate and am most welcome to having new sub-classes to drive around in.
4-car 375s do pop up occasionally on this route albeit they're quite rare. It'd definitely be quite a waste for the updated 375, and even the Tonbridge station model to only be used for a 20-odd mile "bus stop" run. No doubt I'll still enjoy it, as I've referred to it as a "third rail niddertalbahn" before, but I'd definitely rather be flying through Orpington or Swanley at 90mph. So I'm hoping this route will be a stepping stone for a bigger route with more variety. If true, then my previous criticisms of there being too much WCML can be thrown out the window!
It's always a matter of "there's too much of this because there's not enough of that"... (of "what I want" !)
It’d be a nice touch if the 375/6 can be subbed in on the main MVL stretch (even if it’s just from the menu for a player train). Whilst it’s considered rare because they’re not the base allocation - they show up more frequently than you’d think with at least one 4 car along there 6 of the past 14 days alone. The units cycle regularly so as to avoid them getting “trapped”. Here’s a rundown since 19 September - including the second instance of a 377 in service along there last weekend. I am moderately surprised we’re not getting the 375/7 too, given that it’s basically a 4 car 375/3 (they were ordered & delivered at the same time).
Hiya, You can't substitute 3 car units for 4 car in TSW. They have to be the same length for subbing to work. There are dedicated services, however, where you can drive the /6s on the MVL. The SEH 465 can be used on MVL vice a 375/6 because they are both 4 car. We've enabled subbing a /6 for a 465 if you decide you want to drive one. They won't appear as AI on the Valley itself, as the time period is incorrect.
Just arrived into this thread. Loving the new features for the 375. The scenery appears to be high quality too. Any idea for a release timeline?
Release timelines never appear due to obvious reasons and impatient users badgering developers all the time for release.
Because the overwhelming majority of traction on MVL is the /3. We added the /6 to give variety and other gameplay options, and to allow people to run the upgraded 375 on AC lines if they so wished. When a 4 car set does wander onto MVL it is almost always a /6, with the rest of the subclasses being much less common.
You know, especially for those who create online mods, you can quite easily make a /7 and I think a /8 using formation designer, once the route comes out, if you combine the carriages between the /3, /6 and /9, though if you wanted the correct seating layouts I'm fairly certain someone would need to create a mod for that
So excited for this route. I was stopped at the Aylesford level crossing this morning on my way to work and couldn’t help thinking I’ll be driving on this line soon
I've used the route often in real life and can reassure people that occasionally 375/6s venture onto the line! I think you'd all have a heart attack, because a 377/1 turned up yesterday on the route... Running in Southern livery with the SE logos slapped on the sides! I find it crazy people are nit picking about the 377/6... As has already been stated when a 4 car unit is allocated to the route it's usually a 377/6. The Devs didn't even have to include that in the route in the first place. It's one of those situations where I want to hit my head against a wall... The vocal minority nit picking stuff that's be studied by the Devs hence the inclusion, which the vast majority of players really do appreciate. I want to encourage sub class varieties being included, not curb them, as I'm sure most of you don't want to either! I think it's fine to discuss "why was XYZ sub class chosen" if there's a genuine curiosity, but beyond that it gets a little bit silly. I've been waiting for varieties of 1st Gen Electrostars to be in the game for a while, so really excited for the 375/6, 375/3, and the 377/3 for ECW. I'm biased, but very tasty rolling stock for me, probably on par with my Southern slammers in terms of being firm favourites of mine.
Now we are talking. What’s funny is when the 101 was released people complaint and said it was broken because they couldn’t drive the train or work out it had gears lol.
A Class 411 CEP EMU is battered old NSE livery would be like railway enthusiasts top shelf Razzle to me... Corrrr. Surely someone will have to create a Mk1 EMU at some point?!
The advantage of a 4 CEP over a CIG or VEP is that the traction motors were in the leading vehicles so no excuse not to have a bit of electro thrash audible in the cab.
