Route Mergers (talking About The Recent Roadmap Stream And Matt's Comments About It)

Hi all, as some of you will already know, Matt went into the current issues with route merging on the most recent roadmap stream. He mentioned that getting route mergers to people ('how do we make the client side know that when a player owns two routes they should merge, while keeping the routes playable indepentently for players that don't own both') is a major obstacle, as well as some other technical issues. He mentioned that when developing routes, they kept in mind possible future mergers, however, no work was being done on them currently. You can rewatch the section they talked about in the video below at about 43:52.



What I wonder is how high the demand is, and if community members have any possible suggestions for solutions to the problems Matt refers to (community members have already merged routes themselves, so they are creative and capable enough). A kind of brainstorming session if you will, while also showing that it is usefull for DTG to work on this, as there is demand (would we really mind paying a few bucks, 5 euros or so, for the work they put in? Maybe making the merger come with a loco to justify a higher price could also be a possibility).

Route merging could offer great possibilities in the future. For example, my Köln - Wuppertal suggestion could link RSN, RRO that route and SKA,
and my Riesa - Leipzig suggestion could link Rapid Transit, that suggestion, Riesa - Dresden and my Dresden-Neustadt - Děčín suggestion.

Anyways, please let me know you thoughts below .

 

First problem is that last gen consoles won't be able to run it.
Second, it would take a lot of development time to make the game core capable of linking the routes in the way they explained in the video.
Third, it increases the development time for every new route because you have to test and debug the timetable alone and then with every combination of having this and not having that, etc ...

We are frequently seeing that they can't do much easier things because of budget / development cost. Right now I think this is way out of reach.

PS: Forgot to mention that right now every DLC is its own world. Each has its own copy of all trains, etc ... Many of them are not even built exactly the same way as others. If they wanted to do this, they would need to start by making every piece of stock be compatible with every route that is to be linked.

 

To be honest i iot quite excited when they started to speak about that, and when it didn't seem like something too abstract but something that has been or is somewhere down the development line of TSW.

I think Matt said it, it would be nice to have a merger on the client side, so if you own both routes they will snap or blend into one. With a common timetable for the whole extent of the route. If you don't own both routes ai trains/services would just vacate via a Portal.

I've read some other suggestions with a pop up or the one with the SPAD signal, that kind of uses checkpoints to load you into another route. It's a nice idea but more of a workaround, a bit immersion breaking. in the end one continuous "world" where you add little pieces of the puzzle (routes) is the ultimate experience I believe, where you can drive from Aachen to idk, finnentrop or even further away with no interruptions.

 

That wouldn't be an issue because if you listen to Matt's aspirations, the game will just treat it as one long route, and won't have any effect on memory usage. Matt's said many times there's no technical limitation in the game or the hardware as to why routes in TSW are shorter than TS1 routes, generally - the reason is simply down to development time.

I think if they do do it, I imagine they'll only really want to do it for intercity and long distance routes (eg ECML, WCML or an LGV, or ICE route), not something like Wuppertal - Finnentrop

 

Those issues do indeed play a role, but Matt truly made it sound like it wasn't some inachievable dream. I do worry about increased QA time aswell though.

 

I wouldn't see why not Wuppertal-Finnetrop. It could provide longer freight services, which are also higly requested. Though of course route merging would have the highest effect on long distance fast passenger traffic, where you run out of 80 km of track very quickly.

 

That is the case if the route only increases in map size and not in the number of services / stock moving around. If you join the routes and services, the complexity of the system the dispatcher has to deal with increases significantly.

We can't have all the services in the Bakerloo line right now. It is not because because DTG doesn't want to give it to us, it is because they can't with the tech they have at the moment.

 

Hardware dependancies aside, it is very much achievable if money was no issue, but if money was not an issue I would have my own real life train collection in my backyard.

 

That's not entirely accurate. Each has its own copy of its own "native" rolling stock, both the defaults and any DLC for which it is the "home" route; but layered rolling stock is imported from another route. SKA doesn't have a copy of the 422; it's simply borrowed from RRO, if present.

 

Yes, because those are compatible or were made compatible, but it is not always the case.

 

I wouldn't mind paying again for a merged route with new time table. Isn't a new time table on a existing route what they tried with the "Diesel Legends" pack? I wouldn't mind paying that for a bigger route. True, the older consoles can't run it and I am not sure how many players they have on PC to see if its worth it. But maybe the next gens are better at running the route and once they release the new update, maybe they can look at analytics in a year to see if its viable.

 

I would buy route extensions it's whether others will follow and development time. Köln - Wuppertal LGV Avignon - Lyon Köln - Frankfurt Am Main SEHS extended to Ashford International HMA extended to either Ulm or Stuttgart these routes I would buy day one if the extensions came. What Matt said was encouraging tbh I think once more routes come the question will become louder. So many possibilities now and then in a year or two will be even more routes. We'll definitely be heading back to Köln I reckon just my thought was my favourite route once TSW2 released.

 

The real risk is running into the dependencies black hole that exists in TS2020 - to run this dlc you need “insert list twice as long as your arm of DLC that will cost £500 in a sale”

ok I exaggerate- but this should be avoided at all costs, it’s bad enough that loco dlc has to have a home route. I wouldn’t want to see any extra dependencies in DLC.

TSW works well in the fact most DLC only needs the base game, and locos have a home route (I’d rather locos be independent but I do get the logic behind that one)

 

I voted for the second option. Although I don’t own ECW yet (hello summer sale) that to me would be a prime candidate for merging into L to B when we get it. With or without Lewes to Wivelsfield. Throw in a 4VEP and I would hand over £15 or thereabouts for it.

 

yeah true that, needing a DLC for a DLC for a DLC for a DLC is a nightmare. but i think if they keep that merging client side, as they said, we can largely come around that issue.

 

I wonder if there could be a temporary solution until connecting routes is implemented. For example, when Brighton to Victoria exists, at Brighton station there could be an objective marker that allows you to transport to East Coast Way at the same time of day/weather conditions etc and visa versa? At least this would prevent us having to go through menus to switch routes. Having said that, I have no idea how easy or difficult this would be to implement.

 

I think routes should be purchaseable and playable independently, with the merger, as mentioned, on the client side of things. Extensions aren't ideal to me, and only make sense in a few cases.

 

If there is a problem of combining customer-based routes, the solution may be to sell parts of the routes and the combined route by different DLS with their own services. For customers who have one of the routes, the combined route is sold at a discounted price. This is how JUST TRAIN routes are sold

 

That seems like a really good idea, it could solve a lot of the problems. This way people that already have both routes can have a merger at a low price, while new players can buy the entire route in one go (albeit with a higher price).

I only wonder if the seperate routes should also remain playable. For example: should RSN and RRO remain playable seperately, because then you have 3 routes in the menu, which might get cluttered, but I think something can be figured out for that. Maybe submenus for each area are possible, like having a 'rhein-ruhr-sieg area' in the main menu, that allows you to select either RSN, RRO, HRR, SKA or a merged route when you click on it. Even without merging that might be a good option, as the menu is getting more and more cluttered with every new route.

 

I really do hope interconnected routes become a thing one day. Eventually getting the whole NEC, WCML, ECML etc as well as just making routes feel more real would be awesome indeed.

 

Well i guess in that stream Matt was talking about me and my merged routes when he was talking about community
RRO and RSN


LIRR and NEC (this one is from TSW 2020):

 

I think that the first step could be just extend a bit a route. An extention will be much easy to develop, just some changes at the current services on timetable and not merge it with new service. For exemple, a first thing could be add some branches and freight yards to koln on SKA. Everyone have SKA (included in TSW2) so the player base that can buy it are much more than LGV for exemple. And i will pay up to 15€ for 20/30km of route.

 

I do hope it happens but I have a feeling it might only become a thing when (looking long into the future here) TSW3 is/maybe/possibly released and the restrictions of the last generation consoles are left behind. Pure speculation on my part, but just the impression I have.

 

Excellent idea because the next Generation consoles can handle this type of Operation due to their processing ability. If they want to test this function use RRO & RSN joined together at Hagen Hbf and Rolling Stock to boot up the other DLC route for you. Example for this is Riesa-Dresden where the IC2 set your on gives out a pop up screen at Riesa do you like to continue the service to Wuppertal yes or no? If Yes is Chosen RRO is booted up for you where the Same IC2 set you're on appears at Hagen Hbf for the trip to Wuppertal. On the other hand if the no option is chosen you are given the choice continue Journey return to free roam and return to main menu.

 

I guess all we can do is create demand and ask about extensions on every platform , stream and communication

 

I have now made a suggestion for merger packs based on this thread in the suggestions forum.

 

Mergers and extensions are two very different things.

 

One thing I would like:

Can someone tell me how this was done and at least where I can download them?

 

I think merged routes will be future of tsw. Single sections for those like how it is now, network sections for those who like long runs.

I guess the key to develop the merge effective doesnt exist now without spending a hell of time to fix layers etc.

Im sure if dtg gets the tools done to merge routes and create layers in an effective way, this could be a next level experience.

 

Correct and if you own Rapid Transit RRO RSN using the DB BR182 OBB 1116/1016 on a Wuppertal Steinbeck to Finnentrop Run you're going to be hearing Chris Lohner PZB LZB Sifa voice prompts for the whole 1hr 30 to 2hr trip

 

What about, merge the 2 or more routes then sell it as a new DLC and make it so that if you own the appropriate routes you get it at a reduced or no cost???

 

That’s an interesting concept. Certainly gets around the timetable issues mentioned so far. Could also be a way to do longer term justice to some of those big hitters like ecml/wcml.

 

It's not bad idea if the discount system works properly for those that own the route. I think there should be a 40-45% discount for owning one route (out of two), as some additional money has to be made to cover the costs of merging the routes and creating a new timetable.

Perhaps DTG could also add an additional loco to the merged route, and then charge a bit more, if that helps covering the costs and makes players feel like they're getting more bang for their buck.

 

I think BML and ECW present a perfect opportunity for a route merger. There is a short section between the two routes that is currently not modeled. What could be done is to copy both BML and ECW together into a new DLC (so both are part of one new DLC as suggested before), and add the missing section between both (so that we can get the Victoria - Eastbourne services). That way, there is further justification to pay a bit even if you own both routes already, as the timetables need to be adjusted but you also get the new piece of track. And then people who own BML and/or ECW get the new DLC for a reduced price.
Of course it is not up to us to decide on prices, but I could imagine the DLC to cost something like 45 to 50€ (you basically get a package of two routes for a reduced price), and you get a 20€ discount for each route of the pack you already own, i.e. the merger would cost someone who already has the routes something like 5 to 10€ which would be a good price I would say and should give DTG enough budget to make it a reality

 

Hmm.... I'm not sure. Sure, longer routes would be nice, but nothing stops me from loading up one partial route, and then starting a drive on the other partial route with the same train. It's a loading screen extra.

If a route merger comes for free, sure, there's pretty much no reason not to use it, and it may perhaps be an extra reason to buy a certain DLC to complete the route (even when it's just another modern German electric route...). But if you want me to pay for a route merger, which contains no new tracks... I don't know... not sure the merge itself would be enough content. At least it'd need to come with a merged timetable. I guess you might end up with a DLC similar to Diesel Legends, of which its main content is the new timetable.

I'm not a fan of combining merger DLC with a new loco. That'd basically mean you'd need at least 2 routes to be able to use a certain loco, while I'd prefer loco DLCs not being dependant on any route DLC at all.

 

This is an important consideration and applies to a lot of the bundle suggestions I've seen recently. Not everybody owns all the routes and uptake of loco DLC is already smaller than route DLC. If the loco was part of a deal which required you to have two or more specific routes in your collection, you'd be shutting out or turning off even more potential buyers.

What if I have both of the routes, but only really play and enjoy one of them, and I want to use the loco, but don't want the merge?

 

I think the way they need to consider is modular. I come back to Lego, I think the future builds should be made so if longer end to end routes are planned you can buy them bit by bit as they are released or as a bundle once a whole route is complete.

Regarding the locos I think this comes down to planning. I think here the loco dlcs perhaps need to be standalone with a capacity to be used on any or whole section of route

 

I think Train Simulator does it pretty well. You can buy any loco and use it on any route in the Quick Drive mode (closest thing we have to TSW Timetable mode) or user created scenarios. You only need a specific route to play the scenarios (which is quite logical).

I believe I've also seen a few route mergers available on the workshop. I can't find them, but I remember Rivet themselves uploading a merger of two of their route DLCs. That means for anyone who owned both routes, you'd be getting the merger for free.

And then there's the thing with route extensions, but not sold as extension. Like DTG first making and selling Bristol - Cardiff for Train Simulator, and not long after creating the extended Bristol - Swansea route, selling it again, not requiring the earlier Bristol - Cardiff.

Not saying what Train Simulator does is ideal, but it's better than what TSW currently does. (Which is no route mergers/extensions, and loco DLC can't be used at all without a specific route).

 

You can get two methods of BML ECW merger one is at Wivelsfield 2nd at Brighton. Wivelsfield is the more realistic option you can split the inbound Service to Eastbourne and Brighton from London Victoria. Return to London Victoria from Eastbourne and Brighton Station is combine the ECW Class 377 Eastbourne with BML Class 377 Brighton service for London Victoria at Wivelsfield.

 

This would require new track being built in the game.

 

What would be their best option to do ECW BML merge? Will that be a Switch at Brighton on both ECW & BML or a connecting booth for BML ECW. Germany it's RRO RSN via the Hagen Gbf junction.

 

If dtg does the work, best would be connecting at brighton and finish the tracks going from lewes to the junction south of wivelsfield.

A benefit beside the network would be to make the eastcoastway freight runs much longer.

For a modder brighton probably is the best solution.

 

I like the idea of merging routes but wouldn't want to pay extra.

 

I do not have the technical knowledge or skills to present a 100% efficient solution. However for example Leipzig nach Riesa, Add Services that lead into the Leipzig Hbf once arriving and ending the service there below the continue journey prompt and above the continue on foot prompt (Depending on if you own the strecke between Leipzig und Riesa) there will be another prompt that could say maybe Transfer or Continue another service, alternatively aswell In Leipzig Hbf (Tief) walking up the stairs of the station would give the player a prompt asking if they'd like to continue and will take the player up to Leipzig Hbf. If the prompt is triggered and the player owns the connecting strecke it will load you to a different map instead of it all being one large map. If the player does not own the DLC the prompt will simply not appear or inform the player that they need to purchase the content beforehand in order to proceed. However if we say riesa nach Leipzig it will be somewhat the same deal within the service end screen without having to add an extra station or extension. And of course what would be cool just like with the Rapid Transit DLC add a Loco DLC and what would be more fitting than the Siemens Vectron, personally I would love route connection as it'd be more immersive than just getting on a train heading outside the route bounds and then pretending I took a train to another route, I would definitely spend any amounts of money on it plus the vectron DLC. I hope my very broken and tired 2 AM suggestion was not too much of a bother.
Ps : please fix hamburg nach lübeck afternoon services there is a train stuck at the hamburg Hbf and it won't move no matter what I do.

 

I guess they are technically not ready for merging because of the services, which create a giant amount of work to get it done. The route wouldnt be the problem.

I like tsw2 and i dont regret making the jump from ts20xx 9months ago.

Everything got improved basicly, except the thing with longer routes.
Maybe the "average player" doesnt spent more than 1.5 hour in a sim, but im sure if the devs could find a way to connect them in a efficient way, things would change.

Best example is the great western main line, with its nice hst. Got even shorter than in ts....no words for that.

I wouldnt mind spawning points on routes which are connected. My loading time is around 5 - 10 seconds, so yes.

Dtg needs a system to implement all the services without having a bunch of work when a route releases which connects. Example the brighton services from london commuter, which are not in east coast way yet. They will probably appear after a ton of work with the preservation update. Same with the loco versions. 2 different cl66, cl47 sounds instead of the one updated.

I recommend a core update to dtgs development strategy, else with more and more dlcs this might end in a rabbit hole.

 

Excellent point there and for this to work they should experiment with RRO RSN at Hagen Hbf. followed by East Coast way and Brighton main line at Brighton and Wivelsfield stations

 

It all depends how it's implemented. I'd love longer routes but that requires a lot of resources from a gameplay perspective. I played a lot of TS merged routes and one of the primary problems is the AI trains, too much can clog any PC (console too), that's when you start having huge FPS drops and crashes (out of memory errors in TS). The game has to be done for "standard" PC builds, not everybody has a NASA PC in their home. I think the routes are OK in terms of size.
We already have some issues handling the amount of traffic in London Victoria, and Hamburg should have even more (if they update the traffic).

 

If service mode is what's causing trouble than why not just not do one for it right now? You could do the actual route merger, and just have it be exclusive to scenario planner, or maybe even make a few new scenarios to take advantage of the merger. It wouldn't be ideal, but I'm sure most people would be happy to have that over no merger at all.

 

It would be much less of a problem had the existing timetables been based on the RL ones, rather than fictional, since in that case everything ought to fit together.

_______________________________________

Actually there is an argument to be made for using RRO and RSN as the platform for the first merger experiment, even though, as has often been pointed out, there are no RL passenger services between Wuppertal and Finnentrop. This actually is an advantage, because for a first effort, they don't have to worry about timetabling through services; they can concentrate just on the mechanics of platform usage at Hagen. Then, on top of that, some through freight services could be added (which would bypass the Hbf platforms anyway)

 

Good point but in real life some of the Freight trains end up going to Rangierbahnhof Hagen Vorhalle where they are going to be reassembled the 1/2 going to Netherlands via Bochum Gbf HRR and Oberhausen Hbf. 2nd half is to Finnentrop Siegen.