Upcoming Release Master The Electrics!

Poor quality control is going to be the death of TSW, and possibly of DTG. I also was going to buy it today- but, fortunately, I was tardy enough to see the user reviews come in. Sorry, but no cigar. Maybe after they've fixed the most glaring bugs, and on sale.

 

Same here. We are still waiting for london commuter fix since September. Unacceptable

 

Bought it, got excited about the 110 & 463, drove it, found bugs, checked the forum, read a lot more bugs, got it refunded.
Fire the beta testers and QA staff, they are useless anyway. Hire ambitious and enthusiastic players out of the community instead.

 

Quo vadis DTG

 

I'm not sure who the Director(s)/CEO is these days but IMHO the whole project needs intervention from the highest level. It's not like this was a massive undertaking, a short route and one new loco/trainset and they have the nerve to charge £30. If this is the bar for the standard of future releases, they will be lucky to get £15 a route.

As I said there is much to like about TSW, I'm playing an older route at the moment - but they need to get their act together or it will die.

 

Selling product as broken as this one is insulting the customers.

PS Yeah, we know, we can drive, so there is no problem / dont like it dont buy it / I will talk to the team / etc.

 

By far the worst release in over 12 months, right now I think Rivet would have done a better job.

Its hard to describe how gutted I am, I was stoked when this was announced and quite frankly its absymal. Release in time for Christmas and be damned.

Even if 5% of the issues got passed the Q&A and beta testers then serious questions need asking. And as for the heralded auto tester to find and eliminate tiles with poor FPS, its clearly not fit for purpose, either that or DTG just ignored it.

Its buggy, its got poor performance, its rushed and its sloppy. And like breblimator says its an insult to the community.

Its the very last DLC I shall be buying, roll on Sim Rail release next year and we can forget DTG & BRO ever happened.

 

redrev1917 Sorry but youre reaction is a little over done now! Yeah this addon is not good and yes its not ready for release but don't forget there alot off addons with a realy good quality and the most from DTG! It's bad but not so dramatic as youre comment!

 

Any software developer is only as good as their last release. Youre entitled to your opinion, and the first couple of runs I actually thought it was fairly decent but the more I play the worst it gets. Sub 25fps for a sustained period into Bremen when on my rig theres not a single other DLC ever hitting below 30-35FPS a sustained period tells me this is bad, when you consider theyve been telling us about their great shiney new autotester and how it means they can highlight areas of poor performance over night then its either not working or theyve released the route knowing darn well its bad performance.

 

redrev1917 Tipp... Turn down the foliage setting and you see a way more better FPS

 

Show me the trees, because I aint seeing them

 

For me it was the solution! I can only say try it...

Its also the bottleneck in Kassel Würzburg.... The trees are highres and thats for the performance a bottleneck

 

It seems, keeping a route a secret until it gets leaked a week before release. do the preview the thursday before the tuesday release. At this point is to late to make any fixes so you buy the route as is. you then hope for patches to trickle in to fix some issues and then they move on to the next. repeat. Don't get me wrong I want them to succeed. They need a better approach because is not working. Is getting worse

 

DTG: "Forum eo, iterum crucifigi."

 

Ceterum censeo insectas esse delendant.

 

This needs to be done! Or at least have them focus on DLCs and let the community test fixes themselves because your QA is clearly not capable of doing either.

I was lucky enough to be at work, so I was about to buy it today in the evening. Extremely excited about the 110 and KaKo... but hey, 35 euros spared!

Seriously DTG, from the bottom of my heart... WAKE THE HELL UP!!! This is unsustainable. There are a bunch of DLCs in the pipeline, and this way, more and more people will ignore them. You seriously need to rethink the whole process from the ground up. E.g., we have (probably) Acela and (probably) another NEC bit coming (judging from the route/loco codes)... NEC signaling still doesn't work! We can now only wonder what new bugs will come with releases everyone would otherwise be excited about.

 

Aren’t you running that huge list of ini settings you posted in another thread? Maybe take them all off and see if it’s something in their doing it.

 

Already removed them and the mods and this performance is based on virgin settings.

On further investigation I'm leaning towards the possibility that it is the 425 which is causing the performance hit rather than the route it's still. Perhaps it's doing something to simugraph which is causing a CPU bottleneck. Far better performance in the ICE1 and 612 vrs the 425

 

I wonder if that's done with intent. Do the preview stream as late as possible before release so if there are any bugs, issues or anything blatantly missing then DTG can always pull the "That won't be fixed by release, sorry" card.

 

I must be missing some really obvious things then, because I just spent two hours with it, did all the training and a couple of services, and everything seemed ok to me.

 

If you filter out all the fuss about small things, there is not so much left which you could encounter. As it has been with every single release to now in this forum.

 

In my limited experience beta testing (years ago on another rail sim product), testers usually report a ton of stuff. How it is acted upon is really where it matters. QA is another kettle of fish, but judging from the scenario crashes they were obviously not fully tested on a good variety of hardware.

 

If you have a heavy freight train, the loco will only add a tiny fraction to the overall braking performance of the train. It’s the cars which have a much bigger defining effect. I was under the impression the trains handled comparable, even when driving it with different locos.

Also, with the coal Waggons (I believe from RSN?) coming from a previous TSW era, I am not sure what they are really set to (G/P) and how realistic this is over all. The other day I chose one of those services with 20 fully loaded cars and it stated my train would weigh above 4000tonnes. That is hardly possible, hence I am questioning the whole old cargo stuff…

I have not yet driven the BRO trains. Probably not happening till next week, either. But I am looking forward to it

 

I mean train brake 1 BAR reduction
Loco + wagons
Sorry for simplification

 

I think in order to test plausibility of the brakes, you should make an emergency stop from roughly 140kph, measure the distance and calculate the deceleration. If the deceleration in much bigger then 1,4m/s^2, it probably is a bit too strong.

I would be careful with the comparison at 1bar HL reduction. Different types (and eras) of trains would certainly brake quite different. The trains on BRO are quite short, so you will not be able to compare it with longer trains, certainly not with a cargo train.

 

Yes, I know. That was just an analogy for people to try to imagine what I mean by speculating brakes work too powerfully.
I've gotten used to it and it doesn't bother me anymore. I'm more curious if that's how it's supposed to be BR o7

 

I have tamed the brakes here (again, in a dev version that got submitted to be able to release). The brakes were too strong. But even now, they are strong. There is nearly no weight to brake, and the Bnr have 160Brh in R. At a full service that is a good amount oif brake force for the light weight.

 

Isn’t the brh even higher? Out of memory: weight loco 84t, waggon 36t. Braked weight loco 160t (R+E), 63t waggon. Doing the maths gets me to roughly 180t brh for a consist with 4 waggons?!

 

Hopefully this can be rolled out.

Out of interest and if you can say, how does this compare with a similar consist in Zusi 3 which is basically being regarded as the bible for German locomotive and rolling stock physics.

 

The gamepass discount is in effect now.

 

Patch notes- seems pretty substantial and covers most of the bugs i've seen reported.

https://forums.dovetailgames.com/threads/patch-notes-bremen-improvements-and-ui-fixes.62325/

With it being so quick, it makes me wonder if the wrong release candidate was accidentally uploaded yesterday.

In any case, looking forward to driving this route- already bought it but haven't gotten a chance to play yet.

 

From my point of view, I like the route but im wishing that some of these bugs are perfected asap. Im also desperately needing the add on manager!!

 

this route has the potential to become one of the better German route, but some little things quickly ruin the many good things. For example, I play exclusively without the hud and if even the new vehicles don't display the LZB in the driver's cab. Such little things ensure that I no longer see the need to spend money on TSW

 

I wouldn't call a major safety system being non-functional in the cab a little thing for software claiming to be a simulator (since I recall Matt not understanding why some people question TSW being a simulator). To be fair, I usually defend TSW as a simulator, but not being able to play it for six months and therefore focussing more on software like Zusi makes me understand the doubts a lot more.

 

okay sorry then I must have overlooked it in today's patch notes

 

I wouldn't call it a small problem either, but I assume that the majority of people drive with huds (No offense) and therefore many see it as a rather minor point. When driving without a hud, enough things are missing anyway (Ebula, inconsistently placed stop signs (Ne 5),sign of when the doors can be closed again, etc)

 

The only LZB-related things in the patch notes, however, are related to the Br 155 - LZB working in the rear cab and "B" on the HUD, nothing about the display in the cab or other vehicles.

 

Same and how I got the route was a British Ace code for the Xbox Series X version of the game around 5-7am EST which translates to 10-12pm BST and 9-11 pm AEDT. Since British Ace streamed Bremen Oldenburg on his channel. Oddly the Bremen 425 does display long distance destinations and HRR destinations

 

breblimator As far as I know the Falns 183 (coal wagons) have not been touched for BRO since they are a layer rather than included rolling stock. They brake quite a bit harder than what their braked weight imply so I would say that they have unrealistically strong brakes. The PRESS BR155 was worked on quite a bit for BRO but I was not involved in this process and I haven't tested it so I can't say whether the brakes are too strong (or too weak) etc.
Correction: I haven't tested the brake performance to compare vs real world data.

Lamplight The brakes on the BR110 / n-wagen do seem a bit strong, at least if you are to go by the BrH.

Since the patch notes are in I can divulge some stuff I did on the BR425.
1. Added Mg-brakes (technically the numbering of the BRO 425 are those without Mg-brakes but since the printing on the sides, the visual model and the cab indications imply Mg-brakes I felt it was more realistic to include them).
2. Manual sanding has a (noticeable) effect on adhesion during slipping. In emergency the train automatically applies sanding if the wheels are sliding.
3. Significant rework of the traction/electric braking control based on a lot of data and videos from a real world BR425 driver (I will update this comment with due credit if he allows me to). The control is quite "laggy" which I hope is noticeable (but not too annoying)
4. Simulated poor adhesion and wheelslip protection. The old version didn't really slip ever.
5. Tuned friction brakes based on braked weight and driver input. The brakes are significantly "worse" than they were before.
6. Implemented load proportional braking for the electric brake and blended braking simulation. The train will try to achieve 0.9 m/s^2 at "full service" at all speeds and weights.
7. Not sure if this is included but hopefully the parking brake will cause realistic traction lock.
8. If you go into emergency the electric brakes are cut. If you then move the PBC out of the emergency (SB) position, the train will only use friction brakes until the PBC is moved to the "0" position.

Points (1) & (2) should be quite helpful if you find yourself sliding while braking and you don't think you will be able to stop in time.
Also worth noting: due to (6) you might need to go into SB ("emergency") if you pass a Vr0 or pre-signal for a red signal and haven't started braking yet, especially so if the adhesion is poor.

 

Keep in mind that when you start using <R> braked weights (R with "Schnellbremsbeschleuniger" aka brake pipe accelerator) and "R+E", i.e. braked weights with E-brake involved, you start to deviate from reality quite a bit lol. <R> (the higher number, I think in TSW both are "diamonds" which afaik is incorrect and it should be <R>, R, P, G etc) or also called R_SB basically has a "fake" 7% added due to much quicker drop in brake pipe pressure during emergency since each wagons KE-valve vents that wagons brake pipe, if a significant pressure drop vs time is sensed. This won't affect the actual brake force nor the stopping distance in service braking. Also R+E is usually much more conservative than reality. Then you have stuff like R+E 160 which again is not very accurate (it just gives a minimum).

EDIT: The stuff I wrote about only one of the R-numbers having brackets (diamond) might be a Swedish peculiarity that I misapplied to German rolling stock so take that with a grain of salt. Either way, the higher of the numbers is with SB included.
EDIT2: So I just looked at some German wagons and they definitely have two <R>, so what I wrote above about only one of them being <R> is not correct for German rolling stock. However, try dividing the higher number by the lower and you should see that it is 7% higher (otherwise I'm pretty sure there was an error).



When I want to calculate or estimate brake forces I try to isolate as much as possible additional braking systems like Mg-brakes, Wb-brakes, E-brakes and so on. Some older rolling stock suffered from the above mentioned inaccuracies because R+Wb/Mg stopping distances were used to tune the friction brakes, even though at that time TSW didn't have Mg or Wb brakes supported. What you end up is humongously overpowered friction brakes.

"Besserwisser" point: BrH is a unitless number, not a "weight"

 

If you're going to bother putting world time codes in your posts (which are almost completely irrelevant in this case) at least get them right. BST isn't in effect at the moment (as the UK is in winter, so they're on GMT which is +0 UTC), and AEDT is +11 UTC so 9PM here is 10AM in London, not 10PM (also, with your logic of using time codes related to in-game routes, why are you bothering mentioning Australia?)

 

I just tested the HRR BR425 vs the BRO BR425 and I'm getting the exact same performance. Something would have to be really bloated and bad in the Simugraph blueprint for Simugraph to start causing CPU bottlenecks. I have never experienced this myself. You mention a CPU bottleneck, are you basing this on seeing higher CPU usage in the 425?

 

I'm putting this down to a bad install as deleting the file and readding fixed the issue

 

So the dials on 425/155 still don't show LZB at all?

 

Ah confirmed around the living room. Maybe worth a punt if it's not a silly price.

 

Loc weight 86
Coach weight 39


Brake weight

loco brake weight R117t R+E151t
Coach brake weight R63t
Coach cab car brake weight R56t

Train Formation (4caoch+1loc)

total train weight 242t

total brake weight R 362 brh=149%

total brake weight white R+E brake 396 brh=163%