Quick question about the timetable. Particularly, the evening services. Why are there so little? From what I see Services run quite late on both parts of the circle ad at a standard frequency (in real life) However, I was driving a service from Leven to Edinburgh, leaving at about about 1800. I arrived at Kirkcaldy, and our of interest I wanted to see what the next train I'd see was only to see there wasn't another train for 2 hours! (about 20:10) Then I realised the next train to arrive there was the same train I was driving! (As I was driving the Leven livery 158). Is this really as scarce as the real life timetable or just missing vital services. Similarly, Glenrothes services finish at like 1900 which is crazy to me.
Yea that entire timetable feels like its missing a crapp load of jobs. But there is an update for this route next week so hopefully it get bulked out then.
One can only assume a Rivet Dev's trains kept getting cancelled and they assumed that was a real thing
I really hope so. We are getting closer to the update and I can’t help but feel it’s going to be a disappointment… hope I’m wrong.
Wasn't this the timetable they based on a certain day of the week a few years ago that happened to coincide with strike action or something?
Not sure why they did such a sparse timetable, in reality as I’ve mentioned before there is a very frequent service right up until the late evening. Why did DTG accept and sign off on this for publication, surely even their testers and QA must have noted the lack of trains at certain times of the day.
If I remember, I'm sure Skyhook made the 2020 Covid WTT for some odd reason, so whilst it was updated with more stock it actually used a drastically cut service pattern (I stand to be corrected on that one though if I am wrong). Why that was chosen as the updated timetable was a confusing one... However we are only a few days off of a 'update' for FCL from Rivet themselves (and most likely updates to cater for the unreleased Inter7City HST)... Hopefully it might take some of us by surprise if they've spent time on the update.
Don't jinx it! It's been delayed once so hopefully not again! It's a difficult one though, as I am pacing my expectations with the FCL, but curiousity has got the better of me with the amount of work that's needed to 'test it'. I thought it might just be updated sounds for the ScotRail Class 170, but it does sound as if there's a bit more going on. I'm speculating if Tyler may have had anything to do with a more modern timetable...
I agree and I hope you’re right. I’m just being careful with expectations. This is Rivet after all. It would be incredible if they really did put some work into this update though. I hope they have put more work into the scenery and upgraded it some more. And the timetable too like you’ve mentioned which is crucial.
Calling it now, it'll just be station announcements (and just maybe they'll put something about the 170 sounds in the patch notes but the fix'll be absent and then they'll be like "actually it's coming in the next patch")
Sadly fear you might be right. Of course, the 158 timetable is really Skyhooks to fix but again, I wager not much likelihood of that ever happening.
I'll chime in. I'm hoping for the following personally with bated breath as I know how these things go. I know reality bites hard before someone tries to humble the already humbled lol. This would be the gold standard of a 3x delayed update. •TOD4 lighting. Cameron bridge screenshot looked like TOD4. •Rail singing •New flange squeak •Ai horns. •Track shadows redone. •Make ballast grey lol. |Better timetable (I never liked using a 158+170, personally) •Class 170: -Enhanced suspension. -Fixed awful flanger sound effect with open windows (which I assume is caused by two engines being just about in sync) OR added audio from the newer 170s. -Announcements brought to modern standards. •Class 385 - Suspension. - Announcements (which rivet already have the files for) automated, with the option to manually trigger via MMI/TMS. -Brake adjustments (maybe less sensitive in the 0-30% regime). Class 158. -You know what goes here lol. FIX THE ANNOUNCEMENTS - The same suspension that mml received (which I take to be a guarantee) Oh and station announcements too. That's what I'd consider to be a full redo. On train announcements side note: it would be good if the entire announcement folder for the 385 was used to bring announcements to all the Scottish units. It's full of extra announcements about safety and security etc. I like the 385 cos they look like the DMUS we use in Ireland and there's just a railcar vibe to them that I love. They're just let down by the technical aspects. Don't expect much from rivet used to be tune I sang but the ECW remaster showed me they're well capable of greatness. I could hardly fault that job. Anyway that's my two cents for what they're worth.
As far as my expectations? I hope I'm wrong about those. "Changed: -We made the route work in more languages Added station announcements. See you next week!" Lol
The route is already TOD4. I do agree with the rest of the stuff. The route already has onboard announcements but my god they are terrible. That’s one thing I’m really hoping gets a fix with this patch.
Definitely, this is very true. I'm also pacing myself and managing expectations so I'm not disappointed. I think what started my curiosity and some speculation off was the delay to the update itself and the 'testing' which made me think theirs a very slight possibility of something going a bit more substantial going on. However, as has been rightly pointed out in this thread it could just be some basics are added such as announcements, sounds for the 170, and rail singing, and suspension for the 385 (by the way all of which would be most welcome). Although, I think Rivet must know by now that both routes require more than a light touch up to bring them upto a good standard. And being the devil's advocate and seeing it from an opposite perspective, Rivet have now been officially confirmed as developing DTGs in house routes, so there is every possibility they have been to busy doing this work to revisit such routes as FCL & E2G. Hopefully we may find out tomorrow afternoon or Wednesday the extent of any updates... Certainly one that's ignited my interest and one to keep an eye out for!
Would gently disagree. The Class 185 quite possibly the worst UK train in TSW. Obviously DTG and Rivet can’t be blamed for the tiny cab window, but the audio comes across like a mix of Brigadoon on bagpipes and 1950’s UFO fed into Simugraph and hoped for the best.
Be interesting if the inter7city is announced alongside the route update… it’s been silent revealed for a while now. The 385, I’ve long given up on… it’s been thrown away and shame cos the model is nice, but absolutely godawful sound mixing means I just avoid it (the updated Skyhook E2G timetable with additional timetables traction options really brought the route back to relevance) I’ve always liked Fife Circle… anything they can do to improve the timetable density would be great, plus any of the new QOL features warmly received.
I literallt Can't use the 385. The sounds are disgusting, that paired with the peephole of a window (which would be tolerable with good sounds) forces me to use the 380 on E2G. True Shame really.
The Scotrail HST announcement would be a good time for the very near July Roadmap. . Guess we will find out shortly. Otherwise it’s very likely a TSW7 DLC.
I'm beginning to wonder if the reason we haven't seen the I7C HST is because Skyhook (I'm of the belief it's by them) are actually working on buffing out their Fife timetable. It was highly criticised after all. Plus I can only assume that the HST would also come with a timetable of its own, (likely a copy of the buffed 158 one) it'd be useless otherwise if someone didn't also own the 158. (Skyhook already have two identical Shap TTs for the Cargo Line add ons, themselves being a copy of the default one) This is of course assuming it is by Skyhook and not a Rivet thing but that wouldn't make much sense imo as to why Skyhook new about it months ago before anyone else, especially as I seem to remember Adam saying they didn't use the Voyager in the timetable because they didn't know about it
It’s a very good point. I still also wonder if there’s a possible Dundee Extension being developed that might go along with the HST as it’s been pointed out previously that having it only going to Markinch is a short run for the HST. It would work perfectly on the Edinburgh to Glasgow route however. God this is never ending with this Inter7city HST. Please just announce it this week in the roadmap xD.
Has the Inter7City ever been properly acknowledged by DTG? I'm starting to think it's been binned as it was leaked at the same time as the 171 and the 171 came out a while ago now Have a similar feeling for that GWR 387 that was mentioned in a stream (in february?) but never properly added to a roadmap
Yes, it was officially confirmed in December by Candace after someone found it in the Steam files if I remember correctly. As was already mentioned above, an extension Dundee or Perth would be a natural order of things for a Inter7City to operate on... However, whether that happens or not is anyones guess. But to manage expectations I'd probably say it'll be a no for now.
There was the Northern 158 too, I think all of these have just been shifted to TSW7’s release roster now though (well at least the 387 & 158, I agree the I7C has been known for far too long to still be in the running for a release).
Wasn't it said that the Northern 158 wasn't for MAC? Which is the currently only known/available route I would make sense for, so I assume it hasn't properly been shown of as it has to be for an unannounced route. GWR 387 I genuinely have no idea what's up with that
I wonder if they are trying to sort out the ongoing save game issues with the GWE remastered timetable before pushing the 387? Or, wild card here, maybe the TSW7 core route *is* an extended and more modern version of GWE to Oxford, Swindon or Newbury and the 387 has become part of that.
The Northern 158 has been acknowledged by someone in Skyhook, however they have ruled out it layering on MAC.
Wow, updates for E2G and FCL look pretty impressive VERY surprised the the 385 seems to have had a comprehensive pass… hoping the sound mix optimisation has done the trick and we no longer have the torturous ambient noise and thump from the sound loop restarting… not expecting miracles, but hopeful! great to see more service and stock opportunities loaded in definitely taking both for a spin once the update has landed
Update for both Edinburgh routes sounds good. Interesting they added more lighting to Edinburgh Airport. Interestingly the patch notes says they added illumination to the airport for the Edinburgh Glasgow express route. You can’t even see the airport on that route at all. So it sounds like they’ve added it in which is cool. I also really like the sound of the new services for both routes. Hopefully it now feels more alive. Hopefully the sounds are much better too now. I just hope tommorow doesn’t come and everyone is disappointed because it’s still terrible… I’ll be so gutted if it doesn’t feel like a decent improvement on both routes…..
Only disappointment on the new Fife timetable is the 158 being left out and the reason, but it has been added to the new E2G timetable ... but will certainly be diving into both routes after the patch is out.
Yes definitely. Sadly, even though i do like the scotrail 158, I probably won't touch the sprinter timetable, especially on Fife with the 7 PM curfew almost.
It is “weird” that the 158 isn’t in.. especially with the Leven livery etc…given additional stock and layers it doesn’t sound optimisation related? So just a strange choice… would wholly appreciate the 158 being blended back in please
Im on it now it just doesnt seem right without the 158 on the new timetable its the main train for the route i hope its added back in its odd to leave it out
Hi Everyone, Regarding the conversation about timetables for Fife Circle, I thought I would share some interesting insights when comparing the Default to the Sprinter version. Default timetable: 825 total services over the course of the day, including 86 AI Edinburgh trams. Of the remaining 739 services 276 should be playable (but the menu only shows 268?). A ratio of 2.6 AI trains to every 1 playable. 10 DLCs are required to get the full experience, with 6 (7) types of traction to choose from. (The Class 40 doesn't appear for me?) Loading more DLCs results in a higher probability of encountering the blurry texture issue. The Voyager is available with 7 services, but the HST services are not. The 170 is assigned to all applicable services across the route. Sprinter timetable: 859 total services over the course of the day, including 160 AI Edinburgh trams. Of the remaining 699 services 243 should be playable (but the menu only shows 219?). A ratio of 2.9 AI services to every 1 playable. 7 DLCs are required to get the full experience with 7 types of traction to choose from. The HST is available with 29 services, but the Voyager services are not. The Voyager was not available when the timetable was developed. The 158 and 170 share applicable services across the route. This is not intended as a 'mine is better than yours' contest, I'm presenting these details to show that both timetables appear to bring their own merits to the table. There is a lot of gameplay to enjoy on the Fife Circle route, but I recognise the sentiment that neither timetable appears to 'hit the spot' for players and that's interesting to try and understand why.
Thank you for the raw data for comparison it is much appreciated. Could I ask, (as I want to be corrected if I'm wrong), but I seem to remember it being mentioned somewhere that the Sprinter timetable was the COVID timetable and I'd like to know if this is true or if this rumour could be out to bed, and if so is it a current (or past) 1:1 timetable? Also would Skyhook revisit their own FCL timetable and implement new stock where it is applicable?
Hiya, No, the Sprinter timetable is not based on anything COVID related, that was speculation. We ran into great difficulty implementing the non-repetitive style of diagrams operated by ScotRail across the Fife Circle area and this was the reason behind the significant delay in providing the Fife Sprinter timetable for the ScotRail 158 pack. We decided to release what we could successfully get working rather than delay still further. I wonder if the fact we use two different types of traction to undertake these diagrams compared to Rivet only using one that meant we hit issues and they did not. A lot of our difficulties centred around the inability to put multiple trains into the same platforms at Edinburgh as per the prototype, due to the setup of Edinburgh station in the TSW version not allowing this. A restriction that appears not to have impacted Rivet in the same way. Given the difficulties encountered, I would say Skyhook is reluctant to touch it again. That is not to close the door though.
Thank you for your considerate and articulate reply. I'll bare that in mind and remember not to repeat this speculation myself in future. Your explanation does explain a lot and gives us players a in depth insight into the issues/reasoning. One would hope given Rivets improvements recently with quality that they'll revisit FCL and fix some of these issues that were a contribution to the Sprinter timetable not being able to fully implemented in the way it had been originally desired. Much appreciated, and thank you again!
