Standard Route Features - Can We Set A List Up For Dtg

Correct and how about Hump Switching

 

Well, that approach doesn't really obviate the challenge, which is the complexity of the timetable. AI or player-driven, the TT and dispatcher have to get them all routed properly, and it was the inability to make that work with a RL or at least realistic level of services that left LIRR as sparse as it is; it was the complexity of that task on NY-T which meant it was still incomplete when the pre-ordained release deadline hit.

Also, on an A-B route just about all "AI" trains can be driven by the player, either from the timetable screen or by taking it over in free roam. The only ones that aren't are the ones headed off-map through portals.

 

I have my list of what I think is really missing.
I am well aware that all this is just a post that no one needs.

The main and probably the only reason why I stopped playing TSW is the uselessness of night scenarios (morning + evening can be added too). The headlights of the locomotive - they can just be turned off with such success. If they don't make any sense, why add them? they only devour the PC resource. Perhaps in Britain they exist for "beauty", but in Europe and the USA they have a direct purpose. Many locomotives are equipped not only with buffer lights and the main floodlight, but also with additional floodlights. In the game, the headlights will illuminate the path ahead worse than my headlamp. Perhaps the problem is in baking textures?

If the game is about realism, as many write, then it's time to give the train driver more realism. Locomotives do not have aisles between cabs. How is that??? But on the other hand, we have beautifully modeled passenger compartments. I do not think that this will require a lot of resources and will not particularly affect performance. There is no need to make them detailed choen.


Sound. Everything is simple here. There is not enough sound of passage of turnouts(switches)/crossings

Small Wishes:
- Fully working eBULa and analogues;
- Expansion of the list of submersibles on the routes (if they really ply there), otherwise some routes are simply empty;
- High-speed trains would be nice to add the ability to open the nose cone, for couplings and possible scenarios;
- Voice notification of stations in cars and on platforms.


If you don’t have enough hands to complete some tasks and expand content, you may need to involve third-party teams like TrainSim-Germany, Skyhook Games, Rivet Games. I think in almost every country / region there is a team of people ready to help in this regard.

 

Aisles is a nice feature to have, but not a requirement to drive the train. Even if it was modeled, it is still modeling that needs to happen which takes up dev time that could be used in other more important areas and it wouldn't really add anything and still uses up memory cuz it has to load in everything in the engine room. The only reason some corridors are modeled is cuz the signal/safety systems are in there or locomotives like the 182 where you enter through the middle of the corridor.

What do you mean about submersibles?

You can open the nose cone for some high speed trains.

Each of the 3rd parties you mentioned have their own content so they can't really help out with each other's content. Only exception is TSG since he is second party. Rivet helped with some station building in cathcart circle, but that's it. Whenever they create content, they may add something new and dtg learns from them. For example, rivet did announcements in their latest route which dtg will learn how they did it and see if it is possible to be added. Doesn't mean it can be implemented at all or done quickly

 

I didn't mean submarines. This is a typo + translation. I wanted to say that there is very little traffic on the routes. example USA, Germany and Switzerland (I don't want to offend anyone, but for now I only play in these regions). I just wish there were more different trains and locomotives on the route. In real life, on some routes you can see up to 10-15 different locomotives. In the game, routes are often tailored for 1-3 locomotives. In reality, there are more. I want to say that I want to see more DLS with locomotives.

USA: P40D, HHP-8,P40DC/P42DC, ALC-42, SC-44, AEM-7, F40PHM-2, F59PHs.
Germany: DB 215, DR 120, DB Class 120, Siemens Vectron.
Switzerland: Re 4/4 II/Re 4/4 III, Re 6/6 , Re 460, RABDe 500, RABe 514 , RABe 511 , RABe 501.

 

If you haven't known already, german routes layer and sub into each other. The more you have, the more traffic you get. There are also certain german routes that are naturally busy like bremen oldenburg, dresden riesa. Munchen augsburg is another german route that has a lot of layers. Hrr is another one.

For the uk, you have several such as London commuter which gives you around 1200 playable as a base and 4000 total with ai. 1400+ playable if you include all layers. Nothing beats london commuter to this day. Sehs can get busy. Bakerloo

For the US, you have boston sprinter which is very busy at Boston South cuz of all the ai only traffic. Harlem can be busy too at certain times.

Some routes are busy at terminus stations.

More loco and route dlcs with new trains would be nice. Just wanted to point out that certain routes already in tsw can get quite busy.

 

Working GSMR, Correct sounds and physics, correct full timetables (no rushed half arsed timetables) a good variety of traffic both playable and AI, more explorable areas, MAKE USER CREATED LIVERIES ACTUALLY SPAWN IN, what’s the point in making liveries if they don’t spawn in!!

 

Should all trains have the outside view next to the driver as the first view you get when you press the arrow key? (Some go to a cab control or a screen first and then you have to roll through the views to get to the outside.)

 

I'd really like to see this put on the list as a standard feature. Here's a list of units after DRA, unless I missed any.

DCZ 612: NOT featured
DCZ 143: featured
DCZ 766.2: featured
DCZ 363: NOT featured
DCZ 185.6: featured
KWG 401: NOT featured
KWG 403: featured
KWG 185: featured
KWG 182 Dispolok: NOT featured
BRO 110: featured
BRO 463.0: featured
BRO 425: NOT featured
BRO 155 Press: featured

Edit: Oh yes, the 101 also received a long list of improvements but this feature sadly wasn't one of them.

 

I think so. My most common views are Interior Forward and Head Out Right. I switch between them a lot during movements. They are likely the most common for most players as they are the most realistic in nature.

 

Or head out left, in British trains

 

Just a morning random thought.......

Trainspotters.


We keep mentioning people and npc out of stations. Why not make railfan dioramas standard on every route. Spawn between certain hours

 

i agree, and on board ticket inspectors and guards for another added sense of realism

 

When is this list going to be implemented, note that West Cornwall steam has been released with no key bind on raildriver.

If this isn't in the list as mandatory then it needs adding pronto imo.

 

LFR doesn't come with the dynamic physical snow build up we saw on the TSW3 releases, which is a shame, and I had expected that to be a standard feature.

 

Trainspotters would be a really great use of the dioramas! I do agree that we should see more of the dioramas in general, but adding in some trainspotters to that mix would be nice.

 

Ah, this became an issue with Niddertalbahn:

• TSW3 rotary motion blur on ALL rolling stock wheels, no exceptions.

 

1. Authentic timetable stopping times for all stations along a route. Not dicatated by the ai which is very unrealistic sometimes without giving the passengers a roller coaster ride... Although I must admit more recent routes have improved things somewhat. I realise this probably takes a lot more work, time and expense which is probably the reason it is done very rarely.

2. Im sure this is strived for already but accurate lineside signage and signalling. For example: On Birmingham Cross City there is a speed reduction sign that is lying down line side that has not been fixed yet. Some routes are very hit and miss when there is warning of a speed reduction. I realise this i more complicated on British routes because there is so much variety in the signalling/signage rules across route as to where speed reductions and signage is etc. But on German routes it should be standardised. Most recently there is a missing speed reduction sign on Linke Rheinstrecke from a 140kph to 110kph. I also appreciate that these sorts of things can only be seen and reported beforehand by the Beta team who are in limited number and can't pick up everything. Perhaps more time is required?

I must point out from a personal point of view I am an advocate of much more expensive and higher quality content. I realise I am proabably in the minority but I come from the flight sim world where some content is very expensive indeed.

Thank you.

 

This is becoming a pattern

 

This is a prime example of where you think a bad thing in tsw past has gone, the games moved on and then it's omitted, forgotten or fallen out of the development window of what should be "standard"

 

Couple new things:
- Ctrl++ / Ctrl+- should work for all units in a train, regardless of length.
- Since the above fails on long trains, all windows on locomotives need to be able to be opened from the outside. This mostly affects the big US freight locos like the ES44, etc
I prefer to operate DPUs manually to simulate it more accurately (and sometimes will run with DPUs in power while head is braking) and I can't do that if I can't get to the controls on the back of the train easily (or at all).

 

As for the freight trains: all us freight locos mechanically should be standardised with es44c4 quality (brakes, dpu) + cab view height adjustment, accelerometer.

 

Something I'd like to add here which is inconsistent across route but I found really good.

Rivet I've noticed on streams have placed on the Glasgow route commands such as "go via junction xxx" . I personally find this is better than "go via" which DTG tend to use at its suggesting to me start slowing down to 40 or 25mph

Can this better level of instruction be more consistent for future routes?

 

Those little touches can be really nice. Naming the juctions makes remembering them and associated speed limites easier, and thus route learning easier.

 

Features that are inconsistent at the moment that should be standard (in my eyes) include:

• TSW3 Snow Buildup
• Wet Platforms
• PIS as appropriate to location and era
• TOD4 Lighting
• TOC Maps and Adverts (e.g. WMR Billboards on BCC) - License permitting
• Accurate signage (not using default fonts on speed limit signs on UK routes, for example - and also, the generic font now appearing on station signage)
• Dioramas, such as Boston's - they add that little bit of life to the route.
• Rush Hour Passengers (quite consistent now)
• Prototypical timetables (alright, throw in a couple of "fun services", why not)
• New Motion Blur on all trains.

For UK Routes in particular:

• As mentioned, appropriate trackside signage.
• Fences along the length of the route
• Continue to have accurate and appropriately varied OHLE (as seen on SEHS and BCC)

 

accurate OHLE is a very big thing for me, and this put me off edb-glasgow where the OHLE was extremely inaccurate around edinburgh, same thing with GWE

 

Its definetly time for an overall quality standard through ALL dlcs. Geting tired of nice features acting as demo versions and were fire and forget style in the next release.
Wet platforms and 3d snow build up really shouldnt be a topic.
But Dtg really shot the bird with trenton becoming the 24h timetable to a fire and forget demo feature.

This route deserved every page of the entire 30 pages (•)hitstorm + steam rating. You know dtg, just because there is a solid community which is backing the franchaise even with all down sides and bugs, it doesnt mean your customers are stupid.

 

Okay, here's one another thread reminded me of, that has been implemented before in other routes but would be a nice standard thing to put into all of them where possible.

Cane Creek has that scenario that's just a freeroam mode for the route, driving a pair of locos where you please. Useful for collecting stuff on the route, or just for fun and setting up screenshots.

Pretty sure for any route with manual switching this wouldn't be too unreasonable of an ask, to be a basic inclusion. no?

 

Some ideas I have for what I see personally as standard features.

some have been missing at launch and still missing to this day for some routes, others tragically worked at launch and now no longer. And others are always met.

- Authentic Timetables and complete
- Ai on board PIS set correct aswell (keeping it similar to how other routes work maintains consistency) and headlights and taillights also
- Working and era appropriate platform PIS
- Layers whether Ai or Player for any available stock, ideal to update route / leave spaces to implement future locos
- referring to matts earlier question on busy or appropriate, my answer is definitely appropriate, ideally I prefer when DTG release busier routes but understand reality an like a change with more quieter routes.
- Station designs accurate to reality
- Scenery engaging and typically up to date with other routes authenticity or greater
- collectibles
- Achievements/trophies
- ideally for longer routes where we don’t get all 500 miles etc, I think we should be aiming for 40-45+ sections or longer
- 5 Scenarios or more
- Livery designer availability
- Scenario planner availability
- Light baking so all tunnels are dark or lit where appropriate
- distant scenery similar to how SF Skyline is done on Peninsula corridor if asset placement isn’t ideal
- preferably/appropriately at least 2 locos per route, one or maybe both could be changed (livery/interior) rather than new class’s and in my opinion acceptable as 2 new.
- latest iteration of night lighting for sky/general area and scenery building assets
- appropriate safety systems
- correct cantenary

 

Yes I miss the freeroam scenarios we had in TSC. They were easy to set up yourself too. There are several routes, or parts of routes where you could freeroam to your hearts content.

 

The only route where I really miss trainspotters is West Somerset. Shouldn't there be trainspotters at pretty much every railroad crossing on a heritage railway?

 

One thing that I am missing after KWG, which I believe has not been mentioned so far, is the reflective signs.

Especially with routes that come with older trains (ie BRO or LFR), where headlights are not even worth mentioning them proper lights, it would help a great deal to navigate through the nights. Yes, there are those of us who drive without HUD on and the reflective signs have been a great addition to the features list.

Also, it gives an additional element of depth to the night landscape.

I really hope that this will be brought back and becomes a standard feature going forward.

 

What routes currently have reflective rights, just out of curiosity. I know Dresden - Riesa also has them, and I seem to recall Dresden - Chemnitz getting them.
Any others?

 

Maybe i bring this up too much already but, from now on, on every new US/North American freight route, if the team still couldn't bring the real life DPU simulation/operation into the TSW, at least make the banking comm capabilities up to the CJP ES54C4 standard. That's all i want to say.v

 

Apart from Kassel Würzburg I am not aware of any. It was introduced with DRA with its special emphasis on night lighting. Unfortunately, I have the feeling it is not highly requested by the community. I don’t see many complaints about its absence on newer routes…

 

Dresden night lighting is one of those amazing new shouted about features potentially dropping off the radar.
That’s one of my big bug bears, great new features are released and then disappear

 

It's good to have this, but I think one of the issues is, how to get them implemented all? I heard Matt talk about this and thinking QA would do a check, but that is very late in the process.As far as I know, dtg is already using Jira for bug tracking, though it is not intended for that purpose. Jira essentially is a work planning tool. For any development, you can make separate tasks for each feature. Then you can prioritize the features and make an estimation of the amount of work involved in any of the features. If you do it in a clever way, this goes very fast and the dev teams can do this. Then they start working, creating each feature one by one so you get a lot of focus. Once it is finished and TESTED, it can be marked as done/completed. This feels very rewarding, as everybody can actually see the product grow and Matt does not need to ask about progress, he can just see it, as the everybody can. QA can now do their checks, so the length of the development cycle will be much shorter.
This approach makes sure you get the most important features done first and maybe you need to drop some less important features, but that is normal practice.
It's great way of working and I have planned very complex projects (1 year of work with 50 people participating, dev team 10 persons) with this approach.

 

Another one-and-done feature: the BR 612's very good headlights.

 

One I didn't think we'd need to add, but we are where we are.

All 3rd parties use the same tech for each coupler type so we don't get the issue where the SHG Class 158 can't be coupled to a Rivet Class 150im game despite the real life prototypes having compatible (I was going to say identical, but meh this is the world wide web, and I'll only get corrected ) coupling systems.

Dont know which dev went down the wrong hole with the design, but can we make sure it doesn't happen again please?

 

I very much agree with this suggestion (I think it should be a standard feature: if a switch is on/off or two-state then it should be a button, not a lever).

In the upcoming Midland Main Line patch the Class 158 will have this setup. From memory I changed the Vigilance isolation switch, the DRA button and the guard panel local door switch to a button setup. Skyhook also fixed some other switches in the same way (I think the Traction Isolation switch was changed to a button). The guard panel key has been left as a lever because it really is more of a lever IRL, with a big range of movement.

 

I'm not 100% sure if the Class 158 uses the correct coupler setup, but it does use prototypical jumper cable setup (UK E021).

From a quick look in the editor the Class 150 seems to have the correct coupler setup but the jumper cable setup is very much not correct/prototypical.

Bottomline: Even if the two DMUs had the correct/compatible coupler setup they would not run realistically together since the jumper cables aren't compatible. So even if they were coupled together successfully you'd only be able to brake the "local" consist from your cab and you'd only be able to gain traction on the local consist. You would probably not even be able to depart since the emergency brakes would stay on as brake continuity wasn't established.

 

I've seen it mentioned that the SHG 158 is much lower than the Drivet 150/2 so even if they did have the correct jumpers, the couplers don't line up!

 

Stop markers: this should become part of the Bible for all future routes:

• Stop markers on freight services may not be placed closer than 50 yards/meters from the signal, ever.
• Stop markers on passenger services may not be placed closer than 50 yards/meters, unless the stop is tied to a RL platform halt board for that length train.
• The "On or over" type of stop marker is hereby deprecated and may not be used. All stop markers must be of the "within X yards/meters" variety.

 

There are no cables or hoses between the units when coupled. It is all done through the coupling head.
There is a small circular seal above the coupler itself which transfers the air and there is an electrical plug under the coupler that transfers electrical commands to the engines, doors, pa etc.

150’s and 158’s can and are coupled regularly in real life so it should be made to work in-game. The whole sprinter family including pacers can be coupled.

 

I am aware of how the BSI coupler works. What I explained is how it is handled in the game engine. I absolutely agree that both trains should be made compatible in the game, but that is imho on Rivet since the 150 uses a generic/non-prototypical jumper cable setup.