Watching the Roadmap stream. Apparently DTG have time to repaint the 1972 stock and add scenarios, but not fix the timetable up to its true capacity (and as initially promised on launch). 20-30 min gaps between some of those services is not acceptable. I get needing technology improvements, and also not overriding current timetables. But then this gets back into DTGs release strategy with routes, and what is required to run them sufficiently. SDO is another particularly good example, where a 12-coach train can get cut-off on stations on London Commuter.
Chill out. They have said work is going on regarding dynamic platform allocation, which I bet is not an easing thing to do. Of course, I agree that this has been a ridiculously long wait, but it's good to know they are still working on it and havn't given up entirely. And just because they are not finished with that part yet, it doesn't mean they shouldn't do anything else either. I think the anniversary livery for the '72 stock is a nice touch.
I'm getting a bit confused here. You're annoyed DTG don't have the time to fix the Bakerloo timetable but acknowledge the game can't handle it (which is actually why it's not being upgraded, it doesn't seem to have much to do with time right now). Also, what does SDO and the release strategy have to do with it?
I'm beginning to think dovetail must have some magic wand that let's them bypass issues. Or at least that's the impression I'm beginning to get from the forums. The short awnser is, listen carefully to Matt's bit on the BKL Timetable. He acknowledges it is anything but the best option, however, until they can sort the tech out, there are barely any options. It's simply a technical limitation, for now, at least.
There's zero need for dynamic platform allocation, the platforms used for each service are shown in the publicly available working timetables, those which the service mode *should* be a copy of.
Honestly I would say the same in return. I left what I considered constructive criticism, because features that are so integral to a route shouldn't ever be left out in a DLC ever again. (Again ditto with SDO, LIRR Timetable etc). DTGs track record with promising features and actually implementing them... hasn't been the best (cough multiplayer cough)
Because if no-one speaks up, it just grows increasingly unlikely that it will be implemented or corrected in future. (And yes, ofc you can argue, well different team members work on different things, but even then the priority seems to take preference to arbitrary or new DLC) If a DLC takes 1+ year to meet outlined/promised expectations... why should I continue to give DTG my money? It's also disappointing in the context that this expansion is supposed to be a "celebration" of the 1972 50th anniversary, yet I still can't enjoy the route in its full capacity. Because it's frequently becoming a cliche that DTG release something that is not to its full potential, or cut corners. I could debate, that SDO is really integral to the "Train simulation" aspect, as players will consider opening doors on a 12-coach train designed for 8 coaches... buggy. I would also argue that if something is not implemented now, the less likely it will be later. There's enough precedent for that in the Class 66 (GWE), no SDO for 2 consecutive versions of the Class 377, sound updates for DB BR 146 / 185, full timetables for LIRR. Preservation team only goes so far without the core engineers and without breaking an established route. Instead of over-promising features, and items jumping around the roadmap... save the headache and get key features done on launch.
Good point. After all, it's disgusting that when the Orient Express was inaugurated as a so-called "luxury" service in 1883, they didn't even provide such basics as USB charger ports or free wi-fi, not to mention seatback video screens!
I like the expansion pack, was hoping after rivet, that dtg goes in that direction. That bakerloo has technical limitations was known already. Ill get this, since im a huge fan of the london underground. If you dont like the pack dont buy it, share your own liveries made in your own free time. Sounds to me like a complain "dtg has time to create a new amtrak livery for advertise them self". Dont forget not everybody has the time to do own loco paints. Im glad i can get them as payware now.
I mean, that is a whole seperate discussion itself, but paid liveries (coming from flight sim) seem utterly bizarre to me. Having to (maybe based off Arosa line expansion) pay $10 for something that can be done for free is interesting. I did once cook up a can livery for the 1972 stock in substance a while ago. One of the discord community members picked up the remaining work and did an awesome job!
Honestly if you have something serious to say or even opposing feedback, say that instead next time. I appreciate that alot more than... whatever this is. Objectively, this route is still missing a promised feature... and sarcastic statements are only going to air this out more than you'd like it to be. I'm just simply here discussing my frustration, expressing feedback to avoid, and playing alongside moderator rules and decorum.
The point is that to run a full RL Bakerloo timetable requires a generational advance in AI dispatcher programming over what was available when the route was developed. That work has now met three out of four milestones.
Brilliant work really. Lets say im not as talented as you in crating liveries and not have the time to make them. Whats wrong with buying them? This isnt black and white only. Just because people want to pay, doesnt mean they expect dtg to remove the livery designer. This offers something for everybody, no matter the skins in the next pack appeals to everybody. Welcome "MARKET PLACE", FINALLY Even if the pack seems to be small, this gameplay addon is a business decision, and people should think about the bigger picture here. I asume you are not going into an apple store making drama because you prefere samsung.
To appreciate the subtleties of authentic timetables you need to have a good knowledge of them to begin with. This suggests you may a very rare breed of rail fan. At least we are assured that work on it is still on going.
Platforms should not change randomly. Every train has asigned platform from which departing and also to which is ariving.
450 services is not a RL timetable though. In real Bakerloo has over 800 services a day. So even with these 'technical advances' required, it still won't be completely realistic. Exactly. Why do they have to be assigned dynamically? Brighton Mainline has 1200 services and all have platforms assigned to them, why can't Bakerloo be the same?
Platforms do change all the time. For example when a train is running late the following train may well be put into a different platform. If the player ran exactly to time, then yes, you can fix the platform. But given this is a game and players quite often run late, I can quite imagine that there needs to be some soft of dynamic allocation. I'm guessing that this would also help as a temporary fix for some of the Red Signal bugs. For example in Hamburg Lübeck where a platform is blocked by an AI Train, if the dispatcher was dynamic, it would pick another free platform and at least let you finish the service. If Matt with his vast knowledge of the game and it's internal workings says that it's needed, sorry, but I'll take his reasons rather than somebody on the internet.
The point would be what if two trains are heading for the same platform from different routes and only at a junction prior to the station is it finally decided which one will arrive first. How will the dynamic dispatcher deal with that. The discussion yesterday seemed to be about the train looking at the next stop and deciding on a platform when leaving the previous one, but it might need to be even more dynamic than that. Also the key test will be how much a very delayed player service breaks the dynamic dispatcher with other services being moved infront of it and trains behind it stacking up.
Rubbish. Trains run out of course, or you might have a failed train in the platform for an extended period. Certainly in the real world things frequently go wrong (I spent nearly 30 years working in various railway Control Offices) and the service has to be adapted accordingly. There are even contingency plans in place to implement which may include running trains fast, turning round short or even cancelling a round trip. Could you imagine the chaos at stations like Birmingham New Street or York if trains could only use the assigned platform?
Can't help but think that if the idea was to add more locos to the routes, it would have been really nice to have either a London Overground Class 710 or 378 (more likely the latter as Electrostars aren't new to TSW) on the above ground section of the Bakerloo line where they share tracks for some more variety of rolling stock and increased service frequency. I'm fairly sure this wasn't practically feasible though given that the extent of the pack appears to be just liveries and some scenario / service improvements rather than building new rolling stock.
Yes the game should be able to asign platforms dynamic. So when there are unnexpected situations. But when everything going as planned every train should stick to assigned platforms. Given that the AI in TSW run trains with great precision i'm assuming that this feature would come into effect when the player train diverts from the planned timetable.
This pack isn't meant as a loco DLC. After all this is a Expansion pack (not a loco pack) IMO the Class 378 and 710 should come with a new route, as on BKL you would only get to use it on half the route. I think the heritage 72 stock livery was a good choice for BKL
Maybe DTG are planning a chaos mode. Usually what happened to me when Late Turn Train Running Controller on Thames Valley…
I’m sure it’s explained somewhere but I don’t understand why this timetable restriction affects the Bakerloo Line (which is after all a single end to end route with just one type of train) but not other routes, even those with branches feeding onto the main line. Just look at the complex timetable on BML for comparison. All I have heard it’s a problem with the dispatcher. So, what makes the dispatcher a problem on this route but not others? I’m not doubting it but would like a clear explanation in plain English as to what the problem is.
Victoria has 9 or 10 (for the BML), so you can easily spread the trains out there. Not so much at Elephant & Castle or Queen's Park where you only have 2 sidings/platforms to play with. I think this is where the issue lies as it means that if a train is late out of E&C, there's a higher chance trains will be stuck in the tunnel waiting for the platform to be freed up, even if the other's empty. I think all it really needs to do is between Lambeth North & E&C (in the case of Bakerloo) constantly look at E&C station, and see if there's any free platforms, and direct you into the empty one if the one in the timetable is in use. Dynamically assigning platforms for every station could get a bit problematic I think. It could also be the dispatcher getting confused having to constantly switch the points at E&C while stopping trains colliding.
As noted previously, Zusi 2 manages to dynamically route trains onto different lines depending on a % chance entered when the timetable is drawn up and how things are running. So it is quite feasible and I'm frankly at a loss why none of the big commercial sims to date have been unable to put this into practice.
