1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Scenario Preferences?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by nextgenlemon, Dec 27, 2018.

  1. nextgenlemon

    nextgenlemon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2016
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    55
    Hello all!
    As pretty much everyone are aware of now, we have seen the scenario editor on the Dovetail livestream a couple of weeks back, and knowing it's coming along well with pretty much no room for conspiracies anymore, I thought it would be a great idea to hear what people like about scenarios or missions for that matter.
    I used to be a vivid scenario creator myself a few years ago, most noticeably on German routes such as Berlin-Leipzig, Koblenz-Trier and Hamburg-Hanover although I created scenarios on some British routes as well. In general my scenarios were well received, and I see no reason why not to start developing scenarios for TSW.

    I haven't seen any thread like this yet, so I am creating this thread to harvest some preferences in scenarios, that I and other scenario creators potentially can use for outlining eventual scenarios for when the editor releases to the public. Please do a favour and post a reply with what you think. So here comes the question: Which type of scenarios do you enjoy/prefer?
    Do you like a relaxing drive with not too many surprises, or do you enjoy a good challenge with a lot of traffic and events?

    I will start it off posting my own preference:
    I enjoy scenarios that are fast paced, and where a lot happens. Events where something is out of the norm. And services with many stops

    Looking forward to hearing what you think!
     
  2. Medellinexpat

    Medellinexpat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2018
    Messages:
    312
    Likes Received:
    465
    Firstly I think it unfortunate that questions about what can, or can’t be done with the editor are now considered ‘conspirarcy theories’. Many if not all of the questions are valid and there’s still some argument that it’s still not entirely clear (or at least fully understood) what can be done and what can and can’t be redistributed.

    Generally I’d expect your responses to be heavily tilted towards ‘a good challenge, with lots of traffic and events’. Sure, there’s nothing wrong in a quiet afternoon’s sightseeing cruise, but I wouldn’t expect it to win a poll.

    There are three things that I think are important when considering TSW scenarios.

    One, in TS1 one of the joys was being able to add a diversity of locos and rolling stock adding the ‘train spotting’ element to a scenario. It’s likely that for some time to come there isn’t going to be the diversity of additional loco and rolling stock (beyond reskins) to support that. Scenarios will have to rely on a much more limited array of both traffic and controlled locos. In other words less eye candy.

    Two, adding lots of traffic or heavily populating scenarios could well be a performance issue. People complain that TSW is a little barren as released by DTG and that’s likely to be at least part driven by performance throughput.You’ll also need to consider that others (your ‘clients’) may have less capable hardware. From that point of view, at least initially, ‘keeping it simple’ until feedback is established might be a good course. Again eye candy is going to take a hit.

    Three, the route lengths of TSW are often considerably shorter than those in TS1. Now, there have been excellent TS1 scenarios on shorter lines but it does limit what you can do, how long scenarios might be time wise and even simple things like a more limited number of places to begin and end a scenario.

    So with a smaller set of locos, some performance limitations and shorter routes beyond the inititial scenarios that are made available keeping interest is probably going to need some thought on those ‘out of the norm’ events and making those as believable as possible. The really successful ones will be those that leap beyond ‘heavy snow’ or ‘stuck on the tracks’.
     
  3. Sintbert

    Sintbert Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    228
    Likes Received:
    195
    For me its simply anything that is not just Start-Green-Green-IntermediateStop-Green-Green-EndStop.

    With jumping out of locos and go to other trains, ride trains as passenger, combine multiple trains, there are a whole lot of new possibilities over what TS had. So i am looking forward for a lot more challenging and varying scenarios than in the old TS.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 3
  4. Juxen

    Juxen Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2017
    Messages:
    112
    Likes Received:
    184
    Personally, I prefer switching assignments. I'm not a fan of the default ones, as they're very hand-holding, and I'm unable to perform time-saving tricks due to the scenario's scripting.

    For instance, if I have to switch out 20 cars from one track to four in a yard, I'd prefer to yank the whole thing out, then toss cars into each individual track according to destination. With some of the default scenarios, you have to go into a siding, grab the first three or so cars, then switch those, then go back in to grab more. This adds considerable time, and in the real world, you spend a huge effort coupling, uncoupling, tying air hoses, and adding hand brakes. I'd prefer a scenario setup that basically is "Take these 20, shuffle them into these tracks. We don't care how you do it."
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 5
  5. Sintbert

    Sintbert Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    228
    Likes Received:
    195
    That may be possible in a player only scenario.
    But for a servicemode i see no solution as every task has to be designed in a way that the AI can do it. And that is the reason they are as handholding as they are, its required for the AI.
     
  6. theorganist

    theorganist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2018
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    518
    Not everyone wants long scenario's and a short route can have as much infrastructure as a long route. There are plenty of yards and stations on all the routes so far so plenty of opportunities for shunting etc. I quite like scenarios where you are riding the yellows and have a tight schedule.

    To be fair to the OP there were lots of people on different forums saying "there will not be an editor", many of whom haven't spoke about it since it was announced and some of it streamed, apart from some complaints that is has slipped past Christmas. Matt has now streamed the scenario editor and it is certainly capable of a lot more than TS so I don't see an issue there. There was some mention of using steam workshop IIRC so I would imagine that is where you can distribute scenarios. When I create scenarios I create them for me, I upload some to UKTS on occasions (haven't for some while) but if others cannot run them then I am afraid that is a pity but I like to use as much of my DLC as possible and create scenario's realistic to the timetable for that period.

    Personally I am hoping that we can create our own service modes as that part seems slightly ambiguous at the moment as it was stated on a Twitch stream that they were having some issues and it might not be possible in the first release of the editor, service mode was referred to in the recent Twitch stream, I would dearly like to create one for the WSR as the current service mode isn't very interesting in my opinion.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 1
  7. nextgenlemon

    nextgenlemon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2016
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    55
    Just to clean up my comment about the "conspiracy theories". This was mainly aimed at comments regarding whether the editor was actually going to happen, rather than fair questions about it's capabilities, which I did also have myself. I was referring to those, believing and stating Dovetail were faking the whole editor thing.

    But I am glad to see your comments so far, it doesn't surprise me that most prefer eventful scenarios and I will definitely keep that in mind.
     
  8. LastTrainToClarksville

    LastTrainToClarksville Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2017
    Messages:
    745
    Likes Received:
    527
    Pardon me, but I did not see any mention of AI in Sinbert's post. so I'm puzzled as to why you brought it up.
     
  9. LastTrainToClarksville

    LastTrainToClarksville Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2017
    Messages:
    745
    Likes Received:
    527
    Thanks for asking, Sinbert. I'm another aficionado of switching scenarios, especially those that require numerous maneuvers and are difficult to complete -- yes, exactly like those I have created for TS.
     
  10. LastTrainToClarksville

    LastTrainToClarksville Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2017
    Messages:
    745
    Likes Received:
    527
    The OP presumes that a scenario will exist, so why have you and others felt the need to belabor once again pessimistic predictions?
     
    • Downvote Downvote x 1
  11. Nick_Brad

    Nick_Brad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2018
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    38
    I enjoy scenarios that do not require 100s of pounds worth of dlc to run.......whilst I don't mind some additions (and I do currently own all of the TSW dlc apart from the class 33 as it doesn't offer me enough at it's current pricing and route usage) one of my problems with many of the TS1 scenarios was that they required me to go and buy lots of additional rolling stock, just for one 45 minute run....if I then tried to grab an additional scenario for the same route, bang, another set of dlc required.
    I think it's important to ask when creating these scenarios, (if you're going to share them,) is does that extra wagon need to be included, or could you substitute it for another that's included in a package you are already using?
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 3
  12. theorganist

    theorganist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2018
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    518
    I wasn't being pessimistic, quite the opposite in-fact I am very excited about the new editor!
     
  13. LastTrainToClarksville

    LastTrainToClarksville Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2017
    Messages:
    745
    Likes Received:
    527
    The same problem often crops up in TS Workshop scenarios. I agree that it is thoroughly obnoxious. Yes, it would be possible to edit such scenarios to remove DLC I do not own, but that would take up a great deal of time and ruin the enjoyment. Thus, I just boycott them. I have protested to their authors a few times, inevitably receiving a response that amounts to, "I bought all of this stuff and I'm determined to use it whether you own it or not -- so there!"
     
    • Downvote Downvote x 1
  14. londonmidland

    londonmidland Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2017
    Messages:
    367
    Likes Received:
    874
    But then there’s the argument of the scenario not being realistic if you only use the default/a limited amount of stock. You need to get the balance right in order for the scenario to both be enjoyable but not require a silly amount of DLC’s.
     
  15. cActUsjUiCe

    cActUsjUiCe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2017
    Messages:
    229
    Likes Received:
    562
    First, I prefer realistic and authentic scenarios. Since service mode allows us to operate without many obstacles, the scenarios should be challenging. Otherwise, scenarios are just service mode with a short story behind it.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 2
  16. Nick_Brad

    Nick_Brad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2018
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    38
    Yes, reaching a balance is important....I can understand one or 2 or even 3 additional pieces of rolling stock may be needed for a given scenario....but people don't always make clear the dependencies needed, or worse, I've seen some that require multiple additional routes which could be seen as trying to force users to buy certain items......if Dovetail, for all it's faults, tried telling us we can play this great new free scenario, but we have to buy x,y,z content first, then there would be an uproar.

    I for one will strive to keep content to a bare minimum when using anything I create, but I do not expect others to follow my decision....in the end, we are all individuals who are free to do things as we want, however, we also have to be open to criticism, (not hate/trolling,) if we expect others to use our creations.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 1
  17. theorganist

    theorganist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2018
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    518
    Re scenario creations I hope I didn't sound obnoxious. I was merely trying to say that I make scenario's for my own pleasure using the DLC I own, if I deem them good enough and they work effectively (which half the time doesn't happen) I sometimes upload them to UKTS but some of them do require quite a lot of DLC. I have created a couple for the Riviera in the 50's route which used very little as I deliberately created them for the purpose of uploading them to UKTS. I am not sure people should be criticised for creating scenario's of their choosing though as they have took the time to create them in them in their free time.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 1
  18. theorganist

    theorganist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2018
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    518
    Why would someone as an individual with no involvement in the payware side of the simulator be trying to force people to purchase additional routes? If I have specified a route is required to run a scenario it is merely because I have used suitable stock from that route.
     
  19. Juxen

    Juxen Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2017
    Messages:
    112
    Likes Received:
    184
    Personally, I'd love to have something like what Run8 does, which is that they have a default boxcar texture with trucks and couplers that replaces rolling stock you don't have. It performs exactly like the car it replaces (length, weight, brake performance, etc.) is identical, but you can easily get by without those assets.
     
  20. Nick_Brad

    Nick_Brad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2018
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    38
    I don't see any issue with creating scenarios for your own pleasure, if you've purchased a lot of dlc then it stands to reason that you'd want to make the maximum use of them. I don't know about your uploads personally, but I know a number of others on UKTS relied on the user downloading the scenario first and then checking the readme to see what other assets you need to actually use it. This was one of the reasons I moved away from the site as I couldn't use any downloads and on the route creation forums I'd drool over content, only to find out I needed loads of other routes if I want to play the completed route, (if it ever was finished).
     
  21. Nick_Brad

    Nick_Brad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2018
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    38
    That sounds a great thing, it's a shame that TS1 doesn't have that option....as for how TSW will work, we can only speculate at this point.
     
  22. theorganist

    theorganist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2018
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    518
    That's fair enough, I tend to list any scenario requirements on the information page so people could make a decision before. I agree that some routes you wouldn't know you were missing assets until you had downloaded the route and read the read-me file. I like the way the workshop works but it is obviously a bit more restrictive.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 1
  23. hightower

    hightower Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2018
    Messages:
    369
    Likes Received:
    675
    Realism for me. Prototypical AI (as far as is possible for now), real schedules / routes / weather etc.

    I’d suggested this to DTG in the survey, but I really like the idea of a ‘live the life’ mode. I guess it could actually work with scenario packs - where you drive real driver rosters throughout a day/week/whatever. That would give lots of potential for variety, and really immerse you in the simulator.
     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2018
    • Upvote Upvote x 2
  24. LeadCatcher

    LeadCatcher Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2016
    Messages:
    370
    Likes Received:
    644
    I personally like scenarios that involve a bit of complexity such as switching to make up a local freight then servicing some track side industries. Or, like some scenarios with the South London DLC for Train Sim 2019, áreas with complex interconnections, taking some “backroads” if you will to get around obstacles like track maintenance. I also do not mind a variety of different DLC being included since that adds to the immersion and realism.
     
  25. Juxen

    Juxen Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2017
    Messages:
    112
    Likes Received:
    184
    I'm really eager to get my hands on the editor, so I can make a small shortline that I used to work at. There were 5 industries on about 5 miles of track. 3 industries were simple pick up/drop off 1-2 cars daily. One industry required inbounds to be put into a storage area, then spot 5 cars (random, depended on the day. Had to find them in the storage cuts), and then pull the outbounds. The last one was an ethanol plant, which would usually just require empties in and loads out, but occasionally we'd get 110-car corn trains to unload. Due to legal nuances with a railroad that provided us the cars, they could only deliver a 110-car train in 22-car chunks.

    Some nights (4 PM start time, weekdays) would be only about 2 hours of work, but could get to 8 hours easily if there was an issue. Other days would be a full 12-hour shift, as unloading a corn train required waiting 3-4 minutes per car at the dumping point.

    Basically, my point is, extremely diverse scenarios can be created for even extremely small routes.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 3
  26. LastTrainToClarksville

    LastTrainToClarksville Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2017
    Messages:
    745
    Likes Received:
    527
    I truly do not understand your post: would you please elaborate? \
     
    • Downvote Downvote x 1
  27. Juxen

    Juxen Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2017
    Messages:
    112
    Likes Received:
    184
    I believe what he meant is that the AI in TSW (and most AI in general) requires very precise instructions to get a specific outcome. If I want cars 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 rearranged to 2 - 3 - 1 - 4 on the same track, there's fifty ways of doing the job. Some are faster, some are slower. And the AI is required to have little waypoints (go here, uncouple here) dictating every move. So does the human, for that matter, but they could be more of hidden rules or something.

    Because every service is operated by AI when you don't choose to do that assignment, the AI has to have specific instructions to perform the task. "Pull up, grab 1 - 2 - 3, uncouple 4. Pull 1 past the clearance point, cut off 2 - 3. Move 1 up past the switch. Throw switch, move car to other track. Go back, couple 2 - 3, create 2 - 3 - 1, push back onto 4."

    The problem for a player in TSW is that, from the scenario editor stream, there is no "Take these, make this, we don't care how you do it" rule.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 1
  28. SamYeager270

    SamYeager270 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    419
    Likes Received:
    353
    Having a defined way in which to accomplish tasks also allows TSW to detect when you have accomplished that task/objective so that it knows the player can then be given the next task. Although it can be frustrating we just have to accept that the software isn't currently clever enough to cope with multiple ways of accomplishing the overall objective and has to have things broken down into discrete tasks. Equally this method of discrete tasks is probably quite helpful for less experienced players.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 1
  29. Cael

    Cael Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2018
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    121
    The scenario that I've enjoyed the most in a simulator was a night shift in the old MSTS. The scenario ítself was a bit over 12 hours long, started with some diesel engine switching, then in moved onto freight duty, express train rescue, heavy freight with some shunting.
    This is actually what I imagined the Service mode would be. And I guess with the editor this could be done in TSW if you broke the scenario into parts or used a service mode timetable (and had a network map rather than a route from A to B for some variety).

    Other than that, I prefer scenarios with something more than just a drive from A to B. Getting the train from a depot, some engineering works on the route, faulty train, rerouting, etc.
     
  30. LeadCatcher

    LeadCatcher Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2016
    Messages:
    370
    Likes Received:
    644
    I do hope that TSW will have the “Marshall” instruction for the player. when you set up a marshall command, the player just has to assemble a consist in a location with the cars in any order. This gives the player the freedom to use any method to accomplish the task with out having to have their hands held all the way through.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 1
  31. Sintbert

    Sintbert Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2016
    Messages:
    228
    Likes Received:
    195
    I was talking about switching in a yard.
    As of now we have a very good version in NEC-NY where you have to take apart a train and sort it in multiple trains. That is scripted in a way that you have to do it exactly in the order it says you to do it. There is no freedom to take a few cars more at once and put them in to the tracks, then take the next bunch.
    There is a reason this is done that way. That reason is the AI requires such exact scripting to be able to complete that service itself. And in Service mode this is a strict requirement since every train you don't drive, is driven by the AI. This includes every shunting and yard move.
    A completely other thing is a scenario. There is your service that will never be driven by AI and for that reason can be much more open in how it is scripted. There such a yard move can be completed by a instruction that only requires you to put the cars in the track, the order or the way to that result can be on the players discretion. You only have to meet the final requirement for the scenario to continue.
    I hope that makes it a bit clearer for you.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 4
  32. Gascan

    Gascan Active Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2018
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    228
    The scenario I'd like to build with some scripting provided I can get my head around how to call up different bits of data is to have a randomized consist with a determined weight, and though the consist is already assembled the player needs to determine what combination of power (a variety of which would be assembled around the turntable or somewhere that putting them together would be a minimal effort) will be necessary to move the consist as quickly as possible but using the least amount of fuel.

    The idea is to put just the right amount of power and weight into getting the train through the route as efficiently as possible. Configuring the power properly, considering drawbar limits and distributed power setups... Throttle management...

    The challenge with actually doing it would be:

    a) Having a script that could randomly generate the consist from a relevant bank of stock "owned" by the user. I imagine this should be relatively easy... and would involve reaching into a rolling stock / inventor file location that may need to be modified by the end user. Stock could be loaded or unloaded... and the overall consist would be a combination of both.
    b) Establishing the overall weight of the consist using information I'm assuming can be called in game? Length could also play a part but I think weight is generally the defining factor since there is a hard limit on how much can be on each axle / wheel. The more weight, the longer the train anyway...
    c) Determining the amount of fuel used per locomotive from the time the consist is hooked up with the desired power to the time it arrives at its destination. I did notice that the "max" amount of fuel per hour (I think) used... and I think there was a min and I'm assuming that the program is working through fuel consumption in the background and that it's specific to HP and throttle settings etc. A script would simply run a check on the fuel quantity at the beginning and at the end
    d) My ultimate would be to take the fuel used and apply that into a formula that spat out how much fuel was burned per ton of cargo per hour with the overall objective being to be as efficient as possible.

    The whole thing is wildly dependent on how versatile the editor is going to be as well as whether or not I'll be able to work the scripting necessary to call the information I need.

    None of what I want to do may actually even be feasible but I fantasize about this kind of objective.
     
  33. Nick_Brad

    Nick_Brad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2018
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    38
    That does sound ambitious Gascan and could be a fun challenge to run, but the average user, myself included, are probably not going to know the running characteristics of each loco in game or how to operate them in the most fuel efficient manner. Most of us are still at a level of "lets get the train from A to B, on time, without giving everyone whiplash or breaking speed limits".
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 2
  34. Gascan

    Gascan Active Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2018
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    228
    This is true... with that said let me share one of the most intriguing articles I've ever read on the subject. It was this article that introduced me to the finer points of rail freight operations and inspired me to work towards capturing them in TSW.

    I was ALWAYS a fan... loved watching trains since I was a kid- this information simply opened my eyes to exactly how amazing what I was looking at was in so many different ways.

    I should mention the article was based on NA freight operations... though I'm certain the principles apply to any operation. It isn't what I'd call light reading and I've read it a dozen times and still pick out things I missed or didn't get my head around.

    HERE

    You need to scroll down a little to find the article but it stands out.

    Again- not for everyone but it's some of these theories that I'd like to build into the "efficiency" scenario.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2018
    • Upvote Upvote x 1
  35. 37114

    37114 Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2017
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    151
    If the scenario author has purchased that additional stock why should they not use them? It's a lot of work to create a realistic scenario on a busy line and often a lot of varied stock.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 1
  36. Rudolf

    Rudolf Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2016
    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    210
    For the benefit of the empty wallet of the player. If you create scenarios just for yourself, do as you like. I like to publish them because creating a scenario is a lot of work and I want as many people as possible to be able to play my creation. Therefore I try to restrict the number of DLC you actually need. For each item, I think if it would add anything to the gameplay.

    You can calculate, if each DLC is owned by say 25% of the players, then if you use two DLC
    0.25+0.25=0.0625= 6.25% of all players can play the scenario.

    If you need four DLC, this reduces to 0,01%. O be honest, this may be true now for TSW, but soon this 25% may drop till 5% for some less popular DLC, which has the effect that it is not worth the effort to publish it, even better, don't publish, because you will clutter the workshop with tons of unplayable garbage.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 1
  37. Medellinexpat

    Medellinexpat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2018
    Messages:
    312
    Likes Received:
    465
    Rudolf while I get your point the math doesn’t work like that. Let’s take a scenario that someone has built for say East Coast US freight. Let’s also say there are several pieces of US freight DLC. As people tend to buy DLC in specific categories there is a stronger likelihood that if the own one piece of East Coast US they will own a second and maybe many or all pieces of that type of DLC. Owning that second or third piece of DLC isn’t totally independent of owning the first piece. That’s why Workshop items for TS1 generally work.

    With the current level of DLC available for TSW, and likely to be available in the immediate future, the issue I think is more finding enough contextually correct items to make a scenario interesting rather than limiting the number of people who can play it because of not owning one or more DLC.

    The amount of contextually correct DLC is also going to be limited because of short 40 mile routes set in a specific time period. Now we all probably cheat a little when building scenarios over what is contextually correct but from what’s currently available as TSW DLC you’ve got a limited hand to play with that’s going to look realistic.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 1
  38. 37114

    37114 Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2017
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    151
    I publish mine and they get a lot of plays and ratings but first and foremost I write them for my benefit. If other people have the stock then great, they can play it too. If not then they can't. I'm really not bothered.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 4
  39. Ken

    Ken New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2018
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    8
    Thank you LeadCatcher, that was the instruction that first came to mind while I was reading this post. Wasn't used a lot, but made it fun figuring out how you were going to assemble the consists at the designated location.
     
  40. Nick_Brad

    Nick_Brad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2018
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    38

    I think you're absolutely right with how things currently are with TSW, the limited amount of DLC means that the chances of players not having all of the required dlc for any given realistic scenario is low, however over the coming years, the available content will greatly expand once the editor is here, (if Train Sim is any indicator,) and the likelihood of people owning all of the required content will be much less. I have varied interests and so I tend to jump from British and American routes, but I have yet to find a usable scenario on the workshop for the dlc I own, they probably exist, but as Rudolph mentioned, the workshop is so cluttered and frankly, I lost interest in clicking through them, then clicking back when they required additional purchases...rinse and repeat for hours.......
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 1
  41. LimitedEdiition

    LimitedEdiition Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2017
    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    184
    Some additional work is required if you don't want to purchase additional DLC. With TS1, it was RWTools which was widely used, with TSW, looks like the editor is intuitive enough to use for swapping consists. It is a hassle, but I suppose it's the price to pay when you don't wish to create your own scenarios or have no interest in it. I suppose what you are looking for is a better way to search for scenarios based on your own parameters. I hope that is addressed when the Steam workshop for TSW is open for business.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 1
  42. theorganist

    theorganist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2018
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    518
    You used to be able to filter routes from scenario's on steam workshop for TS1 but they stopped that some time ago. It is a pain searching for routes, why they removed the ability to filter I will never understand?
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 2
  43. Rudolf

    Rudolf Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2016
    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    210
    I think my math is OK (I am well educated in math :love::cool:), but of course you need to make estimates for the percentages yourself and make the calculation with these figures, which I do if I want to publish a scenario. It still is clear, that adding more DLC to a scenario does not help to make it popular.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 1
    • Downvote Downvote x 1
  44. 37114

    37114 Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2017
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    151
    Very true but I don't see publishing scenarios as popularity contest. I takes too much time to make scenarios as it is so I'm going to use the stock I've purchased. Seems pointless me buying it otherwise!
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 2
  45. Medellinexpat

    Medellinexpat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2018
    Messages:
    312
    Likes Received:
    465
    Rudolf your math skills may be OK but your logic is completely wrong and it’s nothing to do with the percentage chosen either. Owning one DLC and the likelihood of owning a second DLC aren’t independent events. If I collect TS1 UK locos and own a Class 47 it’s more likely that I’ll own more UK locos. I’ve probably got just about all available UK locos which by your math would be an extremely unlikely occurrence (25%*25%*25%...) and yet I’d suggest there are quite a few others in exactly the same situation. Now if you built a scenario (and an unlikely one) that had locos from the UK, Germany, the US and China then your math is more likely (but still not totally correct).

    As 37114 says people don’t as a first objective look to make popular scenarios what they look to do is make them immersive. Added stock helps.
     
  46. Nick_Brad

    Nick_Brad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2018
    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    38
    I seem to have unintentionally derailed this thread by stating that I'd like scenarios that don't require many paid dlcs in order to use. I think some valid points have been made on both sides of the arguement over whether or not scenarios should have lots of dlc in them, however I think it's plain to see that a consensus on this matter will never be reached by all parties.

    To be clear on my own personal stance, I do not have ANY issue with people choosing to use any amount of dlc they like in scenarios they take the time to create and share, these things take a long time and as a result, I think I only ever made a handful of simple ones for personal use on TS1. The OP asked however, what kind of scenario would I enjoy/prefer. I stand by my original answer that I'd like to see some scenarios which do not require lots of dlc to use them. I freely support others who would like different things and if somebody wants an unlikely scenario that uses something from every single dlc regardless of the country of origin, more power to them.
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 1
  47. Rudolf

    Rudolf Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2016
    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    210
    What you say does not contradict math. You haver a different way of thinking, which is quite common. The hard thing of statistics is that it does not apply to the perspective of an individual. If you are so lucky to own all UK DLC, of course you can play all workshop content. If 10% of the users of this forum is in the same lucky position, this holds for them as well. But, over all players, the statistics still hold. It may be perfect if your target audience is the small group of players that own all or most of the British content. This does not make my math invalid which holds for all TS players. You should keep in mind that your player base is much smaller than the player base I used for this hypothetical calculation. You are completely free to do as you wish, but for the casual player it is annoying to have to view a lot of workshop content to find most of it unplayable. You also may be lucky to have a clear wish to focus on a small niche market. (Please forgive my teasing the British here, I do not intend to do harm), but I like to play with routes all over the world and I am not very rich. So from my perspective my math holds perfectly well.

    It's OK to disagree on this issue. Math is almost as awesome as driving a train and you see how much there is to discuss and disagree on a fairly simple calculation.
     
  48. theorganist

    theorganist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2018
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    518
    That sums up what I was trying to say. Sure I want people to download them and "play" them but even a fairly simple scenario on a small route can take an afternoon, longer ones can take a couple of afternoons particularly with all the testing (and crashes pre 64 bit TS). I must be honest with TSW I may not make many at all, service mode interests me more.
     
  49. mrchuck

    mrchuck Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2018
    Messages:
    236
    Likes Received:
    97
    How a scenario on taking the lirr from ronkonkoma into Pennsylvania Station on New Year’s Eve to watch the ball drop or going to watch the New York rangers play the New Jersey devils at the world’s most famous Aerna Madison square garden.
     
  50. 37114

    37114 Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2017
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    151
    I'm pretty excited about the prospects of it too. Imagine being able to recreate full 24 hour timetables for busy routes. People keep saying they want free roam. Well this is it on steroids!
     
    • Upvote Upvote x 2

Share This Page