GWE is, I suspect, one of the first routes for which the Preservation Crew upgrade will make it through testing to release. What can we expect? The standard PC upgrade includes Skybox Crossings Road traffic PIS Platform climb-up Livery Designer compatibility I think we can also anticipate two newer but non-problematic 'standard' upgrades: Rush Hour passengers Liveried intermodal containers Anything else? I think a new timetable is right out; while it could be improved, it isn't dire enough to require a rebuild like WSR or RT. While I can fantasize about a Heathrow Express Class 387, it's not going to happen. And, no, they are NOT going to time-machine the line into the present day with OHLE and Class 800s. Maybe, just maybe, they might replace the Class 66 with the new, improved ECW version (however, that would need a working fuel cap fitted!)
I read that they've finally fixed that lighting problem to the east of Reading. Personally, although the PIS is welcome, that issue was the only thing bothering me about GWE.
It would be nice if they fixed the errant TPWS loop at Reading and re-activated the system, instead of the quickie fix which was just to turn the whole system off.
Oh, another nice thing might be to add additional freight wagons, from ECW and TVL (since those 90s wagon types generally have remained in service right to the present).
iirc from streams I think they had to tweak the timetable to make the pis system work and I think Adam is working on making the class 166 pis to work.
I think the sound need work, such as more realistic track noise when going through junction and bridges. Also the horn sound for low and high are too soft and not loud. The Different camera In-cab cycle also needs work as well.
Changing the class 66 with the newest version should happen without questioning in my opinion. Beside that, a working pis on the 166 would make a reasonable preservation feature..
I was under the impression that TPWS isn’t actually simulated in TSW because it doesn’t work well enough and that was the only active grid anywhere in any route and it was a bug because it shouldn’t have been left in there. I’m fairly sure that’s what Matt said in a stream a long while back.
Hopefully we get all above. I would also like to see ATP to the HST and also making the timetable more busy including filling some of the empty/sparse yards, but somehow I doubt it will happen. Also, a lot more paths added in Scenario Editor so we can bring in the Heathrow Express and tube stock with relevant DLC.
I would like to see upgraded sounds fir the Class 166 and HST, busier timetable, playable Greenford services, new skybox
Upgraded sounds for the Class 166? Are you joking? This is one of, if not the best sounding train DTG has made until now.
Apart from PIS (my biggest wish for all the passenger-focused routes), on the timetable it would be nice if more than a single train per day stopped at Hanwell!
Hopefully they'll improve the signalling to give approach control from red/flashing yellows. I've a feeling they won't though because it'll probably interfere with the timetable mode... Not fussed about PIS, but I think I'm in the minority on that one.
I think Adam worked on the 166 over last Xmas no? Not sure what the upgrades were but really looking forward to get my hands on it. I'm eager for all the changes above and RD support is what I'm really looking forward to. A question, when we finally get RD support for the HST and the 166 on the GWE will that mean we get RD support for the 166 on the Brighton Line?
I believe yes. RD support is a function of the loco, not the route; if a loco supports RD then it will do so wherever it might be layered.
For a first route extension, the Greenford branch makes sense. Its short enough but at the same time make it feel more complete.
I don't think a timetable rewrite is going to happen. It is a LOT of work, since it basically has to be built from nought, and only warranted in cases where the old TT was horrible. GWE has enough traffic to make it feel alive.
I'd have to disagree with that. GWE always feels very dead, then again maybe I've just been playing on BML too much lately. What are the differences between the GWE and ECW 66s? I never drive them outside of scenarios so I'm not as familiar with them. The only difference I remember is the ECW one having a longer animation for sitting in the driver's seat, which just kinda irritated me. On the more optimistic (and unrealistic) hopes for the update, I would really appreciate better sounds for the 166. I see 166s relatively often IRL and I'm always struck by how much louder they are than in TSW2. They sound so much more powerful than they do in TSW2. As far as I'm aware there's no AP pack for them though so I seriously doubt DTG would go to the effort of recording sounds themselves. On an even more unrealistic hope (and before anyone replies telling me, I'm very well aware of licensing and that GWR said no), I wish DTG could somehow make the FGW liveries available for console players. The one thing that kills the immersion for me on this route is every HST and 166 wearing GWR green. Very few wore that livery on this route in this period, and I've NEVER been on a 166 with that interior. I'm not even sure if it exists in real life- I've never seen it if it does. Perhaps DTG could negotiate with GWR about the liveries again and make it a mastery award or something. A man can dream. Oh, and ATP for the HST would be great!
How about fixing the High Beams on all trains because when you use them in Evening run conditions you still won't see much in the Dark. Therefore this must use DB BR612 type high beams to fix the evening high beam issue.
The Class 166 acceleration being made more realistic would be a good place to start, with a realistic timetable to go with it.
The Greenford branch itself is never happening. As for the services, you can go as far as Southall, so whats the problem?
A while back I made this thread: https://forums.dovetailgames.com/th...ress-preservation-crew-update-wishlist.43459/ Basically to summarise; .Additional time to set up train .Better timetable .Livery designer support .Improved scenario planner .Have it so that you can close the doors on 166 and still have the countdown time tick down so you can close the doors ahead of time .Maybe FGW branding
it's a day late and a dollar short for me, whatever they do. I've completed all the timetable and scenarios. Waiting years for an update is simply unacceptable
All of those are desirable; some are do-able. I don't know if longer setup times are possible without making a new timetable- and they aren't going to make a new timetable. Scenario Planner 2.0 is way beyond the PC's remit. And FGW branding is out because First Group refused to license it.
My experience from the real GWE comes many from the late 70's to noughhties but this route was really busy at all times it seemed. That is why Reading station keeps getting rebuilt (for Matt) and others like Didcot. It would be great to have the route busier but it might have to be in a different era cause of the Licences?
As it currently stands, the GWE upgrade features consist of an updated skybox, improved track rendering, platform climb up, platform departure boards, class 166 destination boards, rush hour passengers, RailDriver support, branded shipping containers, and static wagons in Timetable Mode (additionally utilising the JNA from East Coastway). Details on fixes will be confirmed in the patch notes at the time of release. Animated road traffic is already present in the route and there are no level crossings on the line that needed upgrading. Scenario Planner was already expanded in an early 2021 update.
Whats going on with preserved livery function? GWE probably has some of the most anticipated stock for livery function, yet not on the cards.
Anyone else think the Class 166 acceleration and braking in TSW seems off? To me it seems way too powerful?
I thought Adam and his team were addressing the 166 with these issues last December but what he said above it was just the destination boards which is a shame. But do agree with you although I have never been on a 166 I take my opinion from those that have and driven it in real life.
I’ve only been on a 165 once, but what I can say is the brakes aren’t as powerful, nor is the acceleration up to 35mph.
The issue youve got is, as soon as they change the physics of train then the whole timetable needs to be redone as the timings will be unachievable and even worst could potentially break the dispatcher. Lets be honest the TSW dispatcher struggles anyway, if it was a donkey you'd take it out back and put it out of its misery
ISTR we had someone on the boards a while back who stated they were a real 166 driver and that the physics were off, i.e. Ferrari acceleration and too quick to stop. Sadly the fact it will break the timetable and upset achievements is an excuse that cannot be trotted out forever, if the developers cannot get things right in the first instance. IMHO it's a bit of a cop out. As a player and customer, I would rather start over with the timetable, scenarios, Journey etc in trains that get it right, than drive something which is barely a semblance of the real thing.
The question is, do you bite the bullet and fix the 166 physics, which would consequently require you to fix the timetable and its timings too, or do you just leave it, so it'll continue to be wrong physics indefinitely? I'd hope to see them fix it at some point. Especially if we have a route which will utilise the 166 again at some point in the future.
Not a new thing for DTG, though. Remember years ago when I bought the Class 70 add on for TS, running light engine, as soon as you throttled back the loco stopped like it was running through treacle, not rolling with the inertia you would expect from a 120 tonne machine. Reported to support and the answer which came back was essentially tough with, yes, if we change the physics all the scenarios would have to be rejigged.
Actually i like it a lot to get empty unused stock on the tracks and also the JNA. The brand new JNA made by Marcroft in stoke (Year 2000).
AFAIK, Adam's Preserved Crew doesn't have a simugraph boffin, so re-doing train physics is outside their portfolio. Come to think of it, have DTG ever revised a loco's physical model?
londonmidland Sorry for going off-topic here but I just want to add that the brake on the LIRR Train is also a problem instead of powerful it's the opposite. Anyhow back to the topic.