Why Are Multiple Identical Locomotives Listed When Picking Route>timetable>train

I guess these are layers, my question is how I am supposed to know the differences between the three identical Class 158 icons to pick from (this is a tame example compared to some).

 

That's DTGs fault, as it treats each loco from different routes as a different loco, even if it's the same, its stems from how they package routes vs stock, instead of using say a global pool for routes and another for stock.

 

No reason. DTG just can’t be arsed to fix it.

 

That's not it as shown in the screenshots - the three 158s are all the MML version

 

Yes but it's also showing the same version that layers onto other routes as well even tho there the same version, how this hasn't caused a massive collapse is beyond me, read up on how DTG have implemented asset loading, it will make you go HUH!! LOL

 

It drives me insane at times! I don’t know anything about game development but surely it makes more sense to add every loco to the core game and then when you purchase an add on the loco essentially becomes unlocked for use? Seems wild to me that add ons draw from other add ons instead of just being centralised.

 

So is there any difference between the different choices? Sometimes they do have different labels to an extent (whether source map or type of material on freight lines). If they are all equivalent can't they please just be consolidated into one button?

 

I know a bit about software development and games in particular, but I am not clear what if any differences there are between the multiple choices, so it'd be hard to guess why it is like this.

 

It can be as simple as x loco has engine sound 1 at 20 in route a, all the game sees is what is called then goes to the appropriate route and gets its, and some routes tweak other things to fit there requirements, the class 66 is the worst example of all this, this is what i have come to the conclusion based on reading about DTG and there use of UE4 and UE4 in general, from what i understand how UE4 is generally used is to create a global pool that the engine can call on, how DTG have done it is like every route/add on is its own pool, so it just depends on what dev pulls what asset to use.

 

This is such as frustrating bug. For the GWR HST, there are eight different variants for some reason. I could understand splitting the 2+8 formation from the 2+7, but are the rest necessary?


I'm having the same problem with the timetables too. I have two 2016 timetables and two 2017 timetables, with all the services duplicated.

 

The game takes up enough storage space without having to install a whole bunch of trains I'm never even going to use

 

Well, the locos could be in separate data files from the maps and managed by a different system (I'm not sure they aren't already). Each truly unique one can have its own UUID and unique name that would not be duplicated in any list. Different DLC could then be allowed to draw on the common trains.

I guess the key part here being downloading only trains and cars used by the individual's DLC library. This may get into limitations in the steam and console package managers.

The devs aren't idiots so I doubt there is an easy solution. Now would I agree with all the design choices made along the way through the years, probably not, but I have never worked on a project this size other than as a tester. As a solo dev, planning smaller projects is just way easier.

 

But it isn't the same version.. there are usually differences within the same class. If anything, the newer versions has more features, which can now be used on older routes.

 

Yes the newer version usually do have more features, the problems lies within the engine itself, the best way to use the engine is say you have a 30 mile route that has 10 class 66, the optimal way for the engine is to spawn 1 unit then clone said unit to the other 9, DTG don't do that every unit of the same class is its own uniquely spawned asset, that makes more work for the engine, then u add in the fact that each dev tweaks said class for there route, be it sounds, physics tweaks and even different versions of the same livery, so you see how it all snowballs fast, now the engine is juggling multiple assets instead of basically 1 that gets cloned.

 

In TSW5 there would only be one version of each loco represented per each DLC installed. So, if you had for instance the Dosto from DRA and also RSN, both would show and you could choose which one you wanted to drive. If you had six Dosto DLCs, then you would see six selections that you could choose from, and so on.

This was broken from day one in TSW6. As the OP has noted, now you can see multiple "versions" of the exact same loco in your selection screen. So, to use our earlier example, you might see four sperate Dostos just from DRA, and then also the ones from your other routes as well. This can make the loco selection screen get ridiculously long for popularly used units such as the Dosto and also ones that have a lot of liveries like the Class 47/4. To make it worse, even though some of these may look exactly the same, they sometimes offer less timetable services than would be proper. There is always at least one unit that offers all appropriate services though.

Will it get fixed? DTG does not typically fix UI issues in between game versions. None of the UI bugs and mistakes from TSW5 got fixed until TSW6 came out. So, even if they intend to fix this I would not expect it before TSW7. In the meantime it is certainly annoying.

 

This is a VAST improvement to what it was like a few weeks ago, not sure if it's because I did a full reinstall yesterday or Wednesday's patches. There was over 30 HI BLU at one point.

 

Didn't think of it until this post, but now I wonder if this is a side effect of changes made due to the end of backwards compatibility in TSW6.

 

and it uses up loads of hard drive space for nothing.... I really hope they will tacle this problem in the future!

 

I think you might really be onto something here. Checking just now on Preston-Crewe I realized the 20, 47/3 and 86/4 don't have this problem, and neither does the 08, which doesn't have choices for the BPO or Shap 08 available. So all these "extras" could be the game trying to represent old versions that no longer exist, in some sense. That's very interesting, and if this is part of the cause you would think DTG could fix it eventually.

 

Not getting access to a DLC on older versions of the game, is just a storefront thing. So if you buy a DLC for TSW6, you only get a license for the TSW6 version and not for all previous versions. It's not like there is something changed in the game itself.

There is not such a thing like "older versions that doesn't exist", TSW6 has access to all DLC made available for the game.

 

Also pretty sure it affects the Voyager.

 

It was done for the storefronts, that's true. But if previous versions of the game had backwards compatibility and TSW6 doesn't, then something had to have been changed, yes? Unless I'm misunderstanding what you're saying.

And even without direct changes, there can be domino effects caused by related changes, and/or legacy code interfering with the new functioning. Unexpected logic bombs are just part of software development.

 

I think each formation has its own item? So e.g. with the 395 you'll get one for a single unit and one for a double even though it doesn't differentiate them on the screen. This is then multiplied when you get the train from different addons.

 

If you buy SKA for TSW5 for example, you just get extra licenses so you can use the DLC in TSW2 up to TSW6. Since TSW6 you get 1 license, just for TSW6. That's not a change in the game itself, but a change in the storefront. Every version of the game stands on it's own, that's why they have to release all DLC again when a new game comes out and you have to download and install all DLC again.

 

Also true, but it's been two days now, and I've lost my trail of logic. I will just hope that when the bug is fixed, they offer the details of what happened and I am redeemed somehow.