West Cornwall Local: Penzance - St. Austell & St Ives - The Definitive Feedback Thread

It’s not as if Ass is even a swear word. After all, DTG feature them on most of their routes.

In any case, it’s not as if you can share your scenarios with others so what right do DTG have to tell me what sort of language I may use in my names?

My Aunt Fanny and Uncle Willy got right upset when they couldn’t use their names.

Edit: I tried to put the diminutive of Richard and the automated forum Gestapo changed it to LOVE! That is totally ridiculous. If that was my name, I would be offended by that (and we all know that in these Politically correct times, offending people is the worst crime there is!)

 

As mentioned, I believe this is done deliberately to mask the lack of scenery behind it. If those trees were to disappear, then all you’d be seeing is plain/very basic terrain as they haven’t modelled the area appropriately. I believe DTG has done this in the past, too.

 

When refunded, the game disappeared from the list.
But that was before.
I, too, still have it in my games, while the refund has been made.
Likewise, that DTG does not put us the unpurchased games in the Mastery.

 

Yeah the editor is so poor and restrictive. I've managed to make a few but it's not easy with the very limited option they give you. You can find my scenarios here:- https://adamajparker.blogspot.com/

 

...Or the Woodhead route with the town of Penistone...!

 

Hi all.
I’ve managed to capture the oddity with the doors not shutting on the 150. Has anyone sussed out how to close them?



TrainSim-Matt I’m not sure if this is useful

 

View attachment 71488 Is this acceptable? Compared to the original.


The scenery is a joke and needs correcting. So please get to work on it, Rivet and correct this so it looks as beautiful as it is meant to be. Beach cafe, Pedn Olva hotel, Harbour wall and lighthouse all missing, together with other significant buildings.

I am really surprised and extremely disappointed that a developer can issue and be satisfied with such an abysmal replication of the real scene at this. It is massively incorrect and an insult to train sim fans and the beautiful seaside resort of St. Ives.

This is one example of the many slip shoddy work of an incorrect nature throughout the route and IMO this route is not ready for release and is a damaging blow to the wonderful catalog of DTG routes.

However, I cannot fault Rivet on their replication of the Stations and Locomotives, they are first class, it’s just a pity that they don’t pay the same attention to detail to their route building.

Sorry, London Midland, I have tried to enlarge photos but cannot find a better way. Any suggestions?

 

nwp1 It would help if you uploaded the pictures in a viewable size for starters.

 

Am I doing something wrong, I've ran a couple of scenarios using the 37. When I uncouple the wagons the brakes on the loco are jammed on and i have to go to notch 10 to get to 15mph.
I have checked both cabs and the loco brakes and air brakes are all off. Also the handbrake is released

 

Jamy I've had this too. Have you tried switching from air to vacuum brakes on the switch on wall behind you?. Sometimes that'll do the job. Similar with the 08 too

 

Do you blame Rivet for this? Or are you going off topic here?. This is a known issue and may be fixed some day.

 

This was very helpful. Thanks. I ran into this issue too but didn't think about checking that switch (In cab 2 I think).

 

I’m not sure why you’re blaming me for going off topic. I was merely replying to a couple of earlier posts.

 

One other slight issue I found going back through my notes, on the Up platform at Truro sign by the footbridge spells Penzance as penzance, looks like someone forgot to press the Shift key when compiling the text for the artwork!

 

A lot of the scenery is frankly a work of the imagination. St Ives is rather like they described it it down a phoneline to the art editor.

I find it very disappointing that neither DTG or Rivet have come back to respond to these criticisms - but I guess they realise this standard of scenery is indefensible

Sadly it's not the first time the game has served up rubbish for branch line termini. Take a look at the area and buildings around Minehead station and then compare it to that of Auran's Trainz from more than a decade ago. In TSW the old station hotel and Victoria hall don't appear in any recognisable form despite being so prominent in the real world station environs.

 

Actually I have been meaning to take a drive on the West Cornwall route which came with TRS2019 to compare. That did come in for some criticism particularly use of modern station assets for a route supposedly set in the steam era. However some latitude can be extended as it was essentially just part of the route bundle that N3V put into the main release, not an expensive separate DLC.

 

On the 37 don't be surprised the brakes don't work properly as the train doesn't even have a brake coach! I could have spotted this error when I was six years old so how DTG/ Rivet can let this slip through beggars belief - especially as the train in NTP is correct. They must have to work hard to get it this wrong.

 

The 10 coach Mark Two rakes with the Class 45 also have no brake vehicle (from my pre refund notes).

 

Not blaming you, but this topic is about the WCL route not about sharing scenarios. So your comment in this regard surprised me and despite all criticism we may have, I see no need to blame Rivet for not implementing sharing scenarios.If you want to discuss this topic, I think it is better to start a new thread or to add your wishes to the suggestions forum. There you can find a long list of wishes regarding the scenario planner.

 

Why would the lack of a brake vehicle affect the braking of the rest of a consist?

 

In theory it wouldn't. However the Guard would be unable to carry out a brake test and operationally it is just wrong. I can live with the fact there are no catering vehicles or sleeping cars but not a brake coach. No excuse really as NTP consists were correct.

 

I was more commenting on the assumption made that the 37 brakes are broken because of the lack of brake vehicle, rather than the reality where the mode selector changes as it pleases.

 

Without the brake control gear and without being able to carry out a brake test as a guard you would not be permitted to bring the train into passenger service - in fact I don't think you would be allowed to operate it ECS as it would be classed as unbraked for operational purposes.

My point was if they can't get the basics of train formation correct, it is unlikely braking is accurately modelled. I'm not sure what impact the lack of a brake vehicle would have on braking - I suspect by the 1990s the brake test safety systems wouldn't let you bring such a train into operation at all. You just had to have them - even a two coach train had to have one brake.

 

You don't need a brake vehicle to undertake a brake test, they are required for the handbrake more than anything. Even then though, there's numerous documented occasions of sets without brake vehicles running ECS and in passenger service, it's just not the norm. Also even now 'brake test safety systems' don't really exist on UK loco-hauled stock, merely rules and procedures. After all the guard still has control of the brake at any passcom, so there's no safety concern.

 

Isn't there a brake valve and gauge in the Mk2a that the guard is supposed to check? ( Just going from memory and reading operating instructions from years ago...)

In any case a guard-operated handbrake is still surely essential ( due to the case of runaways, brake failure etc even though air and vacuum brakes are supposed to be fail safe) I am fairly sure this rule goes back to the dawn of the railways.

 

My memory is fuzzy now but I think it was permitted to run ECS with no brake vehicle but not in passenger service. For starters the emergency equipment is kept in the Guard’s compartment, the Guard would not have access to an inward opening door during despatch, or for emergency evacuation purposes. Where is the Guard going to travel when not checking tickets and where would you put heavy luggage, bikes, mail and parcel traffic? No, these passenger consists should all have a brake vehicle, be it a full BG or a passenger brake, BSK, BSO, BCK etc.

 

Yes and from memory I think some of the emergency equipment had to be locked away (detonators) in a special cabinet - impossible in non brake coaches.

A friend who worked as a guard has confirmed they did indeed contain vacuum or air brake gauges and valves - although the handbrake was the main legal reason for the need for a brake vehicle.

Even an ECS would surely require a guard operated handbrake on the main line so I'm not sure how even an ECS could operate without a brake vehicle in normal service. I can't remember seeing one on the main line without a brake vehicle in over 40 years trainwatching - would be genuinely interested to see any photographic evidence to the contrary.

 

Under DOO Non Passenger regulations, in the same way that a freight train these days runs without a Guards van on the rear. However, all that aside DTG have definitely got it wrong in their rush to layer in the diesel haulage and it should really be addressed, along with all the other issues.

 

I know they don't like taking away content, but I think they really need to take away substitution for the 40 and 45, given neither were in mainline service in the 1990s, and the 40 didn't even go that far south anyway.

 

A reasonably recent one, ECS https://flic.kr/p/22WyQRu

 

BR Class 150 potential issue: I found an anomaly of the DRA: switch it on, then shut the doors. The light is still lit, but it's no longer preventing you from applying power. It stops working immediately when you choose to close the doors. Is it like that in real life?

 

Finally got a chance to drive the WCL, from Penzance to Truro and back. There's nothing really wrong with the modeling per se, though the quality is inconsistent. Some buildings look fine, others look rather ordinary.

But what a dull drive it was. Endless line side trees, almost unbroken. I didn't realize Cornwall was so heavily forested. I was expecting the " Cornish Riviera ". Too many seasons watching " Doc Martin ", I guess.. I saw only one AI train, a Class 101 in the entire journey. And I don't remember a single road vehicle, though it was Summer and 9 am or thereabouts.

As for the Class 150/2, it looks well modeled inside and out with some nice detail. I couldn't comment on the engine sound, since I've never seen one in the flesh, as it were. Couldn't hear much track or switch noise, but plenty of squeal pulling into stations.

I'll try some of the other locos and the St. Ives branch line. Haven't seen any beaches or water yet.

Overall so far I'd say it's about the level of SEHS. Without the layers, especially the NTP locos, I might have let this one rest in peace on my hard drive too. I'll probably have an occasional foray with the 101 and one of the big, old diesels from " up north".

 

The area east of Truro is more wooded, but no where near as much as depicted in this route. I used to travel the route regularly - I was last there this summer - and I just didn't recognise many parts of it. As discussed earlier, one issue is the use of generic "cut and paste" trees that repeat - that makes it particularly lifeless.

The lack of any response from Rivet or DTG to this long list of criticisms suggest it has already been abandoned. (But I would love either company to come on here and prove me wrong with details of how they will put all these issues right...)

 

I'm not buying this as it currently stands, but if they add in a trophy set for the PS version and introduce a Valenta HST as an add-on DLC, I'd buy route and train at the same time. Both of those boxes need ticking first, mind.

 

They had better not abandon it. They have a duty to release something that is vaguely acceptable. This is not a finished product and needs addressing immediately. It is disgusting if they do. There are so many errors. Major ones ! Not worried about a fence post being 3 meters out. I’m talking glaring inaccuracies!!!

 

Rivet is know for releasing abandonware for TSW2. Don't expect any fixes at all.

 

"abandonware" That's a very good way of putting it. The more or less captures my whole view on TSW2. There's way too much of it.

 

Why don't they take out the 40 and 45 and put in the 31 and 33? The 31 was fairly regular in this area and even the 33 appeared on railtours. The choices of rolling stock for this route show complete ignorance of recent railway history and operations. Even if this was a rushed job, the bizarre choices of rolling stock and the lack of brake coaches on passenger trains are just inexplicable errors.

How did DTG see this and think it was acceptable for release just two weeks after rejecting it? One wonders if there was a massive row with Rivet and Rivet threatened action of some sort. That's pure speculation, but why else would such a poor and inaccurate product get released?

 

Sorry, I get what you're saying but this is annoying me:

"Abandonware is a product, typically software, ignored by its owner and manufacturer, AND FOR WHICH NO OFFICIAL SUPPORT IS AVAILABLE."

None of Rivet's releases are abandonware*, as DTG still offer support for these products. Granted it's not waving a magic wand to make all the issues go away in 2 seconds (which it seems some people want), but these products are still supported.
It is true however that Rivet ignore their previous releases which is why they acknowledged the Arosa issues in one of the WCL previews. Dovetail also still provide updates on all its TSW2 products.

*You could argue the TSW2020 version of the BR204 is, but it's still officially supported in TSW2.

 

The existence of the Preservation Crew is living proof that DTG do care about legacy products. My concern is the speed at which DLC switches from being actively worked on, to becoming something left for Adam’s team to (eventually) fix. There’s a little too much « fire and forget » although they do seem to be taking more care with the Rush Hour routes. Still, there are ongoing issues with routes like Boston whose ACS system needs a ton more work (and you can’t even acknowledge the ACS alerter with the Q or controller B button). That one is gathering dust but the other two get used very regularly.

The work on the Immersion v2 seems to have just died a death, still no bell mapping for US routes, and the UI is still wrong (controller mappings screen).

 

I think the point about Rivet releasing abandonware was meant as satire... but in fairness Rivet have said on streams not to expect substantial changes and this route desperately needs substantial changes... and don't get me on Arosa which months later is also awaiting major work which will never happen.

 

Yeah, I agree with this. As much as I don't want to sit here arguing for less content having Peaks and Whistlers passing by RR liveried 150s a step too far for immersion considering they were dead by this point. If 31s were in the area in the period I hope to see those added in place of them.

I can accept having the wrong Mk2s considering these are just layers and the proper coaches are not in the game. Perhaps if the correct coaches are eventually added to the game then these can be swapped out for a more authentic experience.

Plus of course, if BGs are required then I hope this is rectified sooner rather than later.

In all, the layers have made this route much more interesting than it originally was (and I was already quite interested), having more places to drive some of my favourite trains in the game is always a bonus to me, but there are definitely some tweaks needed to get the most out of these layers over time.

If I had to guess, I'd suspect that DTG wanted to minimise the number of DLCs needed to get all the layers, which makes sense but, I personally would prefer to see layers be built as authentically as possible instead of being as content efficient as possible.

 

From memory there were still some very occasional Mk2a coaches on loco hauled DMU substitutions on Plymouth Penzance stopping trains until around 1993, but in this route those coaches are on class 1 express passenger duties hauled by 37, 40s, and 45s - that's just fantasy.

A 47 on Mk2fs and Mk2es would be plausible, although even then you can't really say it's a realistic timetable as by this time most services were in the hands of HSTs.

 

Anyone at rivet games “Did we make arosa? That’s not ours to fix surely”

 

It gets worse. If you come into Penzance slightly late with a loco hauled train, the Jocko (shunting engine) is already at the end of the platform you need to access trying to release your train that isn't there. It then stays in the platform meaning you are trapped at a red light forever.

This software is completely broken and should be withdrawn from sale if DTG give a hoot about their reputation and future sales.

 

Surely if the timetable and order of movements is scripted, there should be a checksum that the 09 doesn't move until after your train has arrived in the platform... Or maybe it just isn't that sophisticated.

 

Thats a side effect of the 24h service mode. Ntp has 1 layer too where you need to shunt the parcel train with a cl08, or drive the parcel train with a cl47.

So i was late and the cl08 was already there.

Would be nice if there is a "waiting" point for those services depending on another. So the 08 service starts on schedule, but if the main service is late, the time gets postponed on the 08 too on a red signal for example.

 

150 seems easy to drive, 37 seems hard (at least harder than the Tees Valley one)

 

A lot of the above mentioned problems regarding lights are because you stopped too late.
Ignore stopping distance markers and stop where your end of train is - not loco, rear loco, etc.
EDIT: I've had 1 broken door incident, and still managed to continue the scenario/timetable.

Anyway, I'm enjoying this route and it was a bonus to be at 10% discount on release, so folk should remember that too.

 

Cameron's Gaming
Ok, but Rivet's support exists only with words. Arosa is still unplayable almost a year after release. Is such a thing possible with a product for which support is available?