Hi all, Probably a stupid question, but is there really any difference between the branded and unbranded versions of both these routes apart from the obvious no branding on rollingstock? Seeing as I'm low on disk space, I think it'll be worth me deleting the unbranded versions.
Bossman told me they had made small improvements to the scenery of the later (unbranded) route. Some foliage colours from memory.
Workshop. Plus, if I recall correctly, there are some nontrivial differences in rolling stock, i.e. very different colors. So it's similar to having both Woodhead, PDL, or having more than just one HST. Otherwise DTG could have simply released an alternative version - same as all the American stuff involving BNSF.
Interesting. I don't have the unbranded route installed. I'll check the files against each other. What I do know is the original route has a lot of flickering issues due to missing texture mipmaps.
Not quite as both Woodhead routes are set in different eras The older version was set in 1954 - 1960 after the tunnel opened and when Steam was still in use Woodhead BR Blue is set in the 1970s when steam had finished and everything was BR Blue livery
there is a branding patch for the re release here https://bluewarriorrailwayz.weebly.com/uk-trains.html although not sure if it is possible to use it anymore since the route is now in ap format that are protected
I know it isn't what the OP asked, but NWC did have some more substantial scenery upgrades as far as I'm aware. AP files have been used for years now, and they are not encrypted. I haven't tested the branding patch but you'll probably just have to copy the files into TS and overwrite if needed.
You should not overwrite those files in the *.ap If you do it changes its size and date and Steam would replace it with the default. The way the game work it sees files outside the *.ap file first - which is how repaints work
Pretty sure the Game actually reads outside the ap last as it applies each read as a layer, So AP file first then layer the external files over the top. that way it ensures that the dependencies are loaded correctly
Either way, outside wins. I have applied RouteProperties.xml for Ohio Steel 2 by simply copying it like this - and it works. It should be extremely easy to test, just edit the route name at the top and check in-game. Unless it takes it from elsewhere.
That's why you also back up those sort of changes to another folder (it's not always needed but helps if you want to comeback to them later )
Game reads the outside files over the AP files - so if you change a texture (for example) outside the AP it will use that instead of the actual file in the AP. (I assume it would read the AP file first other wise you wouldn't have any assets loaded, then loads the extras outside, I'm just guessing though here )
Yes - first the contents of the .ap files are loaded. Then, the external files. If they have the same path and filename, they'll replace the .ap's content in memory. That's the basics of modding. So you can easily replace a file without touching the original. If a patch or mod's not good, just delete it and the original contents of the .ap will be used again. Once you start modifiying or unpacking .ap files themselves, you can get into all sorts of troubles. Keeping track of changes becomes impossible, and strange errors can occur much later. That's when you need to validate your files. Don't alter .ap files.
This.. Nothing uhhh... urinates me off more than a readme that says "first thing you must do is unpack the xxxx.ap", NO.. never unpack an .ap! It's unnecessary and can cause no end of problems and makes removing problematic mods a ball ache. Stop being lazy and include the correct file structure for the mod to work alongside the .ap, better still learn how to create an installer to ensure the end user doesn't have to get all technical and potentially put things in the wrong place.
Opening an .ap for extracting files to be modded and placed outside then is ok. I put scenario mods or route mods into their own .ap file, this is not a problem in the Routes folder. In an asset folder it's different though: You may only place a second .ap in there if it does not overlap the original .ap, so no duplicate files. This will crash the cache generation (blueprints.pak), the game will close and your indicator is a zero byte blueprints.pak in that asset folder then.
There are certain things that really do need the AP to be unpacked at least partially for. While many reskins use BAT installers now, there are a huge amount that still manually require GeoPcDx files to be copied into the correct location. It is possible to only unpack that one file in an AP file, but it still needs to be done in some form.
Thank you for being patronising. I was simply saying that it was possible to only unpack the required files rather than the whole thing; it was a general comment rather than a personal response.
As was my reply, funny how you see your comment as such but ignored that mine was too, if you scroll up you'll see that you weren't the only one to comment on partial extraction of what you need (which I thought was obvious ergo the "implied" comment in my last). Being blunt and to the point is not being patronising, that you see it as such is on you, not me.
Interesting. So after I deleted the unbranded Welsh Marches line, I loaded up the branded version and now all my terrain textures have disappeared.
You said "I deleted the unbranded Welsh Marches line" - just deleting the route from content/routes would not do that. If you unticked the route in the Steam Client it might remove common files from both routes. Untick the Branded route in the Steam Client then reacquire it
I have now both installed – my computer managed to free up a hell of a lot of space that I was able to fit both. Going to do an upgrade next year so I can put TSC on a 2 TB drive
