Peak Forest Railway: Ambergate – Chinley & Buxton Feedback Thread

Thanks Scorpion 1 for sorting dudders out with my reskins. My Hub name is PinzaDave. There is a scenario for Peak Forest with Green Diesels called "Peak Forest BR Green Days #1 (PFR)" Also look out for BR Blue diesels too. I have to agree with you Scorpion 1 - we really do need a BR Green loco pack - Classes 25, 31 and 45 to start with.

 

By the way - there's a tree in the road just north of Ambergate station!

 

Nice to be able to thank an author for their work. Very much enjoyed your Green scenario and it inspired me to have a go myself.

 

Pleased you liked it Peter, its rare to get feedback. I do wonder how the scenarios play for others, as I can only see it from my point of view. They are not easy to plan, the beginning of a journey is usually quite easy, but I find the ends to be harder to plan. That scenario originally had 2 freights heading south from Gowhole, but for some reason they got stuck at red signals up at Chinley, so I had to abandon them. Of course I didn't know they weren't working until the end of the 30 minute scenario!

 

Thanks mate amazing

 

For me an improvement would be, if scenarios like the 2.5h pickup & drop would be in the timetable.

In the northern transpennine dlc, those special scenarios were part of the timetable too (heavy freight dlc), making it very special near the usual hourly traffic & services.

 

I'm just the opposite, Old Vern, loving "shunting, banking, and light engine moves" plus the category you forgot to mention: loading. To each his or her own, eh?

 

Where's that old thumbs down gizmo when I need it?

 

Yes sometimes I think it is a shame they removed the downvote function. When I see the phrase cash grab I know not to read further, it is up there with fanboy and rip-off!

 

What is the save location for this .pak file, please?

 

It is under steam then trainsimworld3-windows no editor-ts2protoype-content-DLC

 

Thank you theorganist

 

That's a good point. The route for me is highly appealing (in a sale) because it's ultra-local and it would be kind of cool driving thru all those locations that we frequently visit, but I just don't like the steam element of TSW. I personally just think the exclusion of a DMU was a bit of an oversight (moreso when there was actually an opportunity to add them) because for people like myself it does make the route a bit of a no-no purchase...and if your observations are correct there might be far more 'people like myself' than DTG perhaps realised.
Anyhows, it's all a little after the fact now because if they were to redress things there's no way I'm ever going to pay for the route AND a dmu DLC just for the sake of a little nostalgia so it would still be a no-no purchase. For a few miles worth of petrol i can just as easily walk past the disused platform at Millers Dale making cho-choo" noises.

 

Not planning the scope to include dmus, and to a point where they have to go with excuses over and over again, wasnt really a smart move. This because their 95% fire and forget strategy.

True success comes from inspiration, vision and creativity. Dtgs current solution of calling a success reminds me of going with short cuts. (Saving time by doing the minimum)

 

It’ll only get worse. It always does when a big company takes over. Budgets will be cut to as little as they can get away with to maximise shareholder dividends. I know they need to make a profit but when the big boys get involved, corporate greed takes over completely.

 

Depends. Other games published by focus have been pretty good. Plague tale and snowrunner to name a few.

 

Yooo DTG, you dead?

DTG : Yea man

Seriously, where have they all gone?

 

Well we don’t know what Focus’ policy is on direct interaction between the developers and customers via forums and other media is. They might well have told (former) Dovetail to cool it as regards direct 1:1 participation.

As regards Peak Forest, well my money is ready and waiting for a decent diesel pack, particularly if it brings a new loco and/or DMU to the table but I pretty much burned out on the steam side of things, gone back to Run 8 for a few days.

 

You know what, I can happily do without the 1:1 interaction if it means we get polished products that are updated promptly as and when required. If this is the start of things changing then bring it on. The old way of doing things cannot carry on or this game is toast.

 

In addition to Run 8, I’ve also started trying to teach myself the route editor in Diesel Railcar Simulator. It’s not 100% intuitive like Trainz or TSC but unlike TSW at least the developer is giving us the tools to have a go (there’s also a timetable editor) unlike DTG who seem to want to keep everything locked down.

 

Very good point OldVern. I can well imagine someone at Focus (is that what it's called?) reading the frank and free exchanges on this forum and saying "no no no."

 

tl:dr if already mentioned...

When working the 0709 Buxton to Manchester (timetable service in Journey mode), at Chinley the stop marker is beyond the signal which is maintained at danger. Fortunately the trigger area is sufficient to stop short, but this really needs to be amended. Either the stop marker needs to be moved back in front of the signal, or the signal must be clear and yes I know there are reasons within the game why it isn't, but again limitations in the core instead of being fixed are leading to an irregular situation.

 

Think you've posted in the wrong thread, mate. This one is for Peak Forest, not Midland Maine Line .

 

Mml Mastery works fine for me.

 

OP posted in the wrong thread…. SARCASM MODE ON - If the developers responded in the same tone as some of the poster do..

I can believe the laziness of the poster… they do not even do any QA to make sure they are in the right thread…. Apparently the op could not be bothered to see if the comments made any sense to the topic they were posting.

SARCASM MODE OFF

We can be thankful that the developers and many others do have a modicum of manners and polite discourse…and to the OP apologies for subjecting your feedback to my diatribe but after reading several pages of comments on multiple threads, there is definitely a polite way to provide feedback that is greatly appreciated by myself.

 

I think some posters are deliberately rumbustious as it give their ego's a massage and probably think, mistakenly it is the best way to get a point across, plus it gives them kudos with certain like minded posters. If people at work request things in that way, they get the least priority.

 

Same for me as well.

 

Oh crap.. sorry. I'll delete the post and repost in the right thread. Evidently, I was too lazy and couldn't be bothered to read the thread title before posting. But hey, I'm not charging $40 for the privilege of reading my posts, now am I?

Also, don't get upset at people being negative. It's not healthy and only perpetuates the circle.

 

OMG SOMETHING DOESN'T WORK AS WELL AS IT SHOULD, THE GAME IS BROKEN, BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH!!!

Yeah I get sick of it as well, I've issues with how DTG run things and have learnt that what they say and what they do are two very different things, but the people on the shop floor who make these DLCs from the ground up and work hard to make them for us have my respect, especially those at Skyhook who have worked hard with the improvements. But nope, people just wanna rant and rave as though they themselves have been insulted.

 

Don't worry about it --- I don't mind people being negative and pointing out deficiencies but I do just view some post as someone having a temper tantrum in a public place and pay the post as about as much attention. The feedback posts I put the most faith in and appreciate the most are those that describe the perceived problem or deficiency and either provide ample information to re-create or suggestions on how to correct. So being negative isn't a problem -- how it is presented is what I was commenting on.

best

 

Regarding the Latest updates to Peak Forest..
(No complaints here just some observations and my honest opinion)

Just started playing again after the latest updates to Peak Forest. I understand wanting to lower the volume of the safety valves for what I imagine are accessibility purposes(even though it was quite easy to keep the 4F quiet anyway..) and somewhat disagree with the comment in the related stream about them being deafening. Is it wrong to have loud locomotives? Perhaps it’s an idea for a locomotive and/or safety valve audio slider in the settings?

Thanks for reading
I’m curious to see what others have to say..

Edit: I’ve also noticed the possibly exhaust audio is also quieter which in my opinion is a little unfortunate as I’m sure some of us did like thrashing up banks with goods or on banking duties…

 

I can actually enjoy the 4F now. Don’t know about your audio settings but the safety valve on the 4F was extremely loud. Now, it’s in-line with the 8F and Jubilee.

Really? They sound the same to me. Maybe I’m misremembering.

How, if I may ask? I don’t seem to find any way to actually drain boiler pressure in a meaningful way.

 

It might also just be me but I recall the exhaust being louder at low speeds with the regulator opened up fully and the reverser wound back to 50,40 or lower.(But again it could just be me haha)

As I remember the safety valve would partially lift and then were somewhat loud when fully lifted. To keep it partial or to stop them lifting, if banking or moving I’d close the dampers and fire hole door fully to prevent or reduce the likeliness of blowing off.

 

Your suggestion is great. In terms of things being loud, In real life, it can eventually cause hearing damage or exacerbate certain conditions like tinnitus. An example is the buzzing noise inside the 185 which I read from other forum members that it worsens their tinnitus. The safeties are extremely loud in real life and you would definitely go deaf in a short while, but that shouldn't mean we should have to suffer the consequences by playing tsw. Also, telling people to not play steam or certain dlcs for having loud/annoying sounds doesn't help either.

 

IRL, safety valves are indeed extremely loud. They're releasing huge amounts of energy from the boiler, after all.

But also IRL, the locomotive has a competent Fireman on board, one of whose jobs is to avoid wasting coal and water to no good effect. That means they won't have the safety valves lifting constantly. Even when the train stops for a while, there are various things they can do to keep the boiler pressure under control; closing the dampers and firebox door, minimising use of the blower, using steam to top up the boiler with water - for which they'll prepare by letting the water run a little low while running and anticipating a stop.

Until TSW also has such a Fireman in the cab, it makes sense to reduce the noise factor from the unrealistically constant safety valve action. I'm not even sure the safety valves in TSW actually reduce the pressure, rather than just signalling that it has reached an artificial limit; I'd expect to see them cycling on and off in that case.

 

Agreed, I think the mechanics regarding safety valves do need some more work. As for your comment regarding safety valves in TSW I agree for the 8F and jubilee it seems as such however with the 4F the safety valves do the job In lowering pressure.

I think at the end of the day, it’s all down to how people play the game and wether or not overall knowledge of steam locomotives is incorporated or not as some always want a constant good head of steam just for driving around and others take a more in depth approach and go as far as closing both ejectors before coupling/uncoupling to fitted stock…

 

The one thing with the safety valve is I don't get the dtg position of "It takes skill to stop it going off" which was said on a stream or something very similar which with current firing mechanics is a little questionable?

At least the volume lowering helps a lot and makes the locos much more driveable. I still think fireman limit should be set a tiny bit below the safety.

 

I think their definition of “skill” in this instance is keeping an eye on the pressure and operating the dampers, fire hole doors accordingly to the behaviour of the locomotive. For example you might want the dampers open 75% and the fireman shovelling coal while powering up banks but once approaching the top you’d want to close the dampers to use up a more steam to lower the pressure. But yes I agree, the mechanics do need work and hopefully the appropriate time to perfect the firing mechanics is being taken.

 

The problem is, if you switch off "F" to stop manual firing, at some vague random point - but far quicker than the fire would burn through IRL coasting or in light steam - you get game overed because the sim determined all the coal is gone! Add to which there is no visual indication on the HUD as to fire mass or temperature. As I said, crass nonsense as there is no way a one tonne lump of incandescent white hot coal would go out in less than 10 minutes. Even old domestic fires (and yes I'm old enough to remember those) could take longer to die out if no fresh coal was put on. There was a reason why they were usually left overnight to die down and cool so the cold ashes could be swept out in the morning.

 

Why is that a thing?

 

I’m not sure about other countries but on what I assume some of not all UK heritage railways (or what I’ve been taught) you’re taught in order to make coupling and uncoupling safe, a locomotive must destroy any vacuum in the system before attaching or detaching vacuum pipes. I believe the same applies to steam heating also.

 

I would expect and hope that, when manual firing is properly implemented with worthwhile boiler physics to go with it, the auto-fireman will be subject to the same physics. That will immediately go a long way towards eliminating the annoyance factor of safety valves blowing off.

I think it would also make sense for steam locos to start services (and most scenarios) with the boiler pressure a little below maximum, and the water level and fire mass somewhere in the middle of the typical range, rather than having them all maxed out as RailWorks did. The auto-fireman should also tend to maintain a moderate fire mass and/or firing rate, rather than piling on as much as the grate will stand. This will tend to match typical performance rather better, and players will have the option of firing manually to get better performance as a reward for exercising more effort and skill.

 

Destroying the vacuum would typically be done by opening the brake valve. I'm not sure why it would also be necessary to isolate the associated ejectors.

The information plate in the cab states clearly that at least the small ejector must be open practically all the time, presumably to maintain the chamber-side vacuum of the relay valve controlling the steam brake. On the other hand, with the brake valve fully open, the steam brake would be held on by the position of the lever, so closing the ejectors is at least harmless in this specific circumstance.

 

This is probably the case.I forgot to mention that I’ve only done uncoupling during top and tail operations where before uncoupling the steam locomotive you isolate it from the brake system while the diesel on the other end has control over the train braking. At this point in time I’m only a cleaner so this is my general understanding of things.

 

So the hoses don't use anglebadwords?

If the hoses don't have cutoffs, then naturally you don't want active vacuum (or steam) in them; I suppose that you might want to close both ejectors, even with the brakes fully applied, because otherwise there will still be a suction in the hose from the ejector pump.

 

""only" a cleaner ". It is a noble and essential job, Sir !

 

Depending on the locomotive some hoses have isolation valves and are usually loosely sealed by rubber flaps however with all the health and safety in this day and age, destroying the vacuum is an added layer of protection.

 

Aye, that is it! However due to some personal views on operations I’ve taken a step back from most yard duties to pursue the role of station master!

 

Vacuum hoses don't have stop valves. You just put the end of the hose on its keep, and that seals the end of it (well enough for Government work, anyway).

It does make some sense to do top-and-tail operations differently. If the brake pipe is under control of the loco at the opposite end, then the brake valve at this end will be kept closed. You don't want the vacuum to be rapidly created the moment you put the hose on its keep, releasing the brakes on the loco just detached. Presumably this relies on the chamber-side vacuum remaining mostly intact without maintenance during the operation.

However, I would still consider it reasonable practice to just open the brake valve (rather than closing the ejectors) before detaching the loco. This would positively, rather than passively, ensure that the brakes stay applied.

 

Never mind, I was thinking about steam heat haha!