Hi fellow simmers. After buying the APTrackEP, I've removed it from most routes again. It's basically the Konstanz-Villingen tracks that were licensed from vR to AP. They are nice, but I don't think they look good on all routes, especially not british ones. The biggest gripe I have with it is that the trackbed height is not corresponding to all tracks replaced. You get floating AWS ramps and TPWS grids on North London & Goblin for example, and visible artefacts showing that are originally covered by the default trackbed. The adjusted track rumble sounds are a pro of the pack though. What's your thoughts?
I do like them, but because I see them all the time now I'm getting a bit bored seeing the same track again and again. Better than DTG tracks I'd say, but not as good as JTs (Gueterbahnhofs tracks). However, I did really like Keith Ross's tracks in Shap - there were lots of different photorealistic varieties.
Yes, the same brown terrain and trackbed all over the place was a reason I removed them. I'm currently making my own adjustments - keeping most of the default track but using the AP track sounds. (By keeping the Audio folder AP installs into supported Asset folders and editing the original tracks' <BedRumbleSounds> to point to these files.) This way I can make use of the improved sounds but keep the original looks. For example the WCML South looks much better with the original greyish ground textures.
Thanks for that number. But somehow this is the only AP pack that lacks their trademark professionality if you have to adjust the tracks yourself. On the other hand, a lot of flickering is reduced. That pack triggers my OCD On checking the blueprints for WCML-South, you can just keep the AP Audio folder without any further adjustments needed to get the improved sounds, as filenames referenced are the same. I've installed the APTrackEP to an empty folder first to exactly know which files are altered, and have packed all route related folders into a "TrackEP.ap" next to "MainContent.ap" which I can toggle on and off by renaming.
I was never impressed with it's initial release, when suddenly ALL the track in *enhanced* routes became modern, with concrete sleepers. Even the AP fans were critical of it, there was a rather lengthy discussion at UKTS.
I've always really liked the AP track. It's not a perfect fit for the whole of the UK, but looks a lot like the ballast and sleepers used in the area where I currently live. There's a couple of patches on ATS that improve it quite significantly, a wooden sleeper patch and a texture enhancement which adds variety and makes track in different UK regions look more distinctive. Combined, I prefer it to the Güterbahnhof track, which is alright but a little drab and 2-d looking by comparison. Purely a personal preference of course - there's no right answer, especially with something as readily modded as TS.
There's also a texture replacement that make the AP track pack look more real. https://www.google.com/search?q=AP+...CDUxMDVqMGo3qAIAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
I think it's more like 0.07. That's the number I've used on a couple of routes, and what is in the South Lancs BR Blue route manual. Do you make changes to the lineside objects as well? For the South Lancs BR Blue route, they recommend lowing those by 0.03.
Indeed, TS uses metric system so 0.07 equals 7 cm / 2.75 inches which should match the gap. And choose No to raise trackside equipment.
Personally I like AP track EP and has been installed for several years now. The new JT track which comes with MML (later versions) also looks good. The track on Kings Cross - Kings Lynn/Peterborough/Cambridge route also is better - As so that I do not prefer default tracks anymore but maybe that's just me.
While the AP track pack does what it says on the tin, I don't use it anymore. That's mostly because I like taking part in DTG''s screenshot competition, where it's banned, but also because I like the variation in track type across routes. This adds to each route having a sense of place, which to me is important.
Yes, I noticed on WCML North where Keith uses a lot of variation, different sleepers. APTrackEP makes them all look the same. I'm applying it selectively for more modern routes. The Audio changes I apply everywhere if provided. For NLL Goblin, I have raised the tracks and use it there. It adds a lot of lineside structures btw. And for screenshots, all you need to do is temporarily move everything away to only keep the .aps of the route / assets folder of the route you're driving.
Personally I've always liked it. Even if it does make lots of track sections look the same where there may be variation; it is often better than the mostly 2D tracks that have been used in UK and other European routes that doesn't look good at all in my opinion. The only issue is that siding track that often have wooden / old sleepers don't have a proper 3D AP replacement so sometimes they blend badly with the more advanced looking AP track but since they're usually on short sidings it isn't too big of a deal but can be hard if you want good shots at sidings or near them. I ended up going for an upgraded version though with a free Alan Thomson Sim texture pack you can apply to the AP Track Enhancement Pack if you have it which makes it look even better in my opinion. The only issue with that is for some reason it messes up the colour of AP's grey ballast. What I mean by this sometimes there are stretches of track that go from brown to grey ground and AP Track Enhancement would do a smooth gradient like effect to adjust for this going from brown track ballast to grey track ballast and it blended in nicely. But the ATS Texture Pack for some reason makes the grey ballast into a lighter shade of brown which looks very out of place and rather bad on areas with grey ground / ballast...
Nothing new in that, nor is it something that's unique to AP track; we've had the ability to "blend in" differing track ballast textures for years.
I am aware; I’m saying that the Texture Pack from Alan Thomson Sim messes it up with the wrong colouring.
So, a payware product that requires a freeware product to work better, but then doesn't work properly? You're going to have to sell it better to me than that.
It works just fine without a freeware product, it’s not like you “require it to work better” at all. I just like the look of the ATS Texture Pack version more you can apply to it; with the downside that the track doesn’t blend well in grey ballast areas which I find are few and far in between anyway so it’s nothing more than a minor issue really. Not every product will ever be 100% perfect plus the freeware pack is free anyway for a reason, it would be a larger issue if it was paid. If the ATS Texture Pack for it never existed I would still be satisfied with the base AP Tracks since I still think they look great. DLC like these AP packs are purely subjective. Some people don’t like the AP Track, some people do, some people agree with the price and some people don’t which is fine! It really just depends on what you like for the game; I’m a graphics & screenshotting nut so I personally like these sort of DLC and wanted to share my thoughts is all.
I have had the AP Track Pack since year dot, so never really notice whether the track pack made much of a significant difference. I assumed (wrongly) that the AP Track Pack was just there working on the routes it is meant for. So have just spent a few minutes trying to see the difference on the Leeds Huddersfield line at Marsden (towards Manc). Below are my screenshots of with and without the AP Pack. Initially, deleting the AP TP folder out of the assets folder in RailWorks made no difference. I then reinstalled and went into scenerio editor in the QD scenerio in TSC, where I was amazed to find out it was NOT ticked as active. So looks like to get this pack to work (and any other AP enhancement I assume) you have to switch it on in every single scenerio, as it does not automatcially apply to the route. (which for me is not very clear in the instructions!)
That’s very strange, it doesn’t do that for me! It’s automatically applied to every route that AP has applied it to that I currently own and I don’t have to do anything like this.
APTrackEP installs the replacement bins into each supported Assets folder. Additionally, modified Loft, Terrain and Scenery tiles are installed per route in the Routes folders. Removing the AP\TrackEP folder will leave you with a broken route, as the changed assets and tiles are referencing this folder. Leave the TrackEP folder in place. If you want to remove the Track EP for a route, delete its files from the Assets/Routes pair of the route. (not possible if you have unpacked .ap's as files will then be overwritten and lost.) For example WCML South, AP installs: Assets\DTG\WCML-South\Audio, Environment and RailNetwork folders Content\Routes\00000087-0000-0000-0000-000000002020\Networks, Scenery and Terrain folders. It is very helpful to install the TrackEP to an EMPTY folder additionally, to see exactly which files are belonging to it. That means you must be aware that if you delete the "RailNetwork" folder from a route's assets, you must not touch the containing "Signals" folder which would remove the SignalEP. Use SteamDB.info to know which Asset folders belong to which route GUID. (Or check RouteProperties.xml) Then you can apply it selectively to the routes of your choice, and easily remove it, as I did. However, if you are unfamiliar with the TS file structure, the only way to remove it is a Steam file verification. Though, writing a .bat file which can toggle the TrackEP by renaming its files per DLC shouldn't be that hard.
I haven't got involved in this discussion because altering how track looks isn't a priority for me to spend money on. But I have been reading the discussion as things go along. Spikee1975 above mentions one option of writing a batch file to deal with modifications like this, so that the original files can be easily restored. I use a piece of software called "JSGME" - I forget what it stands for in full but the last three letters stand for Generic Mod Enabler. With this you can house as many mods as you like (In any game), and even mods of mods, - it will make sure you install and remove them in order so that everything always works correctly. I use it for every add-on that modifies default files, but it could be even used for every add-on installed. I highly recommend use of this small gadget to anybody to save writing individual batch files. A search engine will easily find it but as always chose your download site carefully so as to not get given more than you asked for, so to speak. Best regards, John
70045 Does that work with DLC that come with an installer like AP's? I know of that JSGME - it's been around for ages - but never used it (I actually like to have full manual control, but that surely isn't everyone's thing.)
I install to a temporary file, and copy them across. I used to like full manual control but in old age I make too many mistakes and also have to write down every change I make. John
How does it work handling the .bat's or .geoPcDx's though? As I'm sure you're aware at least 80% of all mods whether AP or just a simple reskin require a .bat file to run at the very least and many require GeoMod if the existing geo's need editing too.
Edit: Oh hang on, think I understand it now, is it making a copy of pre-altered files and also cataloguing any new files added and restores the original and removes the ones from that desired time/date stamp? So post installation files being swapped out/removed basically? If so, that's quite neat.
Why not just manually copy the folders/ before applying the mod?....save them in a folder called "Default what ever it is" outside of the game.
