Is creating Sessions a waste of time ?

[backyard]

here is a top priority suggestion...

anything put in the description in regards to sessions, and i think this would help up the ratio

The power of suggestion, also known as advertising, is very important to all content submitted not only to new content, but also to Forum Community posts!
If I don't recognize the subject, I don't read the post!

 

[mononlaf]

To me, a route or track layout without a session(s) is like a picture on the wall. A session is what gives life to any layout. Yes, I can hop into the locomotive engineer's seat and recon a new route or even move some logs, coal, etc. around. But to what purpose?

I don't view TRS as a game. I see it as a railroad simulator. Others have taken care of physical simulation regarding motive power and other rolling stock and the terrain over which it moves. It is in a session that we ordinary users can simulate railroad operations - the movement of people, animals, and materiel from point A to point B according to some kind of timetable and in the presence of other traffic.

I like hands-on train operation - both short and long haul, including consist sorting in the yards. But, like others in this thread, I have a hard time finding sessions, especially for TRS 2006. So, I've been into session development with the objective of providing myself with AI traffic in the presence of which I, as engineer on another locomotive, can then issue myself a set of work orders in the yard or on the road.

But, I also like to act as dispatcher on occasion - controlling all the activities on the route. (I don't want much - I just want it all!)

So far, with experience with only two or three routes, session-building has been quite a task. No sooner do I issue the first set of AI instructions, than I find that there are all kinds of problems, including numerous ones with the layout itself - need trackmarks, triggers, sometimes even revision of the trackage. I wonder if the originator of the route ever ran a multi-train session on it - or checked that the production rate of a coal mine, say, met the useage rate of a generating station - in the context of the logistics of moving the coal over a distance while interacting with other trains.

Bottom line - sessions are important to me as an ordinary user, and I hope that every layout developer will provide at least one comprehensive session for people like me who mainly want to interact with his or her efforts in a railroad operation simulation. And, that this first, comprehensive session be included as a dependency for the route. I think I can take it from there in providing myself with variety in revising the first session for changing my part of the activity - and revising the AI parts as I wish.

Dick

 

[mtldrm38]

I think the route download always will be higher for others to try the route and those that enjoy it more will do the sessions and more experienced users will tend to create theyre own sessions with there custom stock!
So doin sessions are great for explainin the route.....

Dave =)

 

[Stallion]

Stallion, I think there may be more "just drivers" on Trainz than most expect. I find I spend a lot more time now on razorbackrailway.com because of the reasons you covered, and others.

Herb

I think you're right, though I wouldn't quite class myself as a "just driver". I would like to set up my own sessions with traffic and tasks, but until I've gained more familiarity with railway operations and how different services interact with and work around each other, I want to stick to sessions.

I've spent most of my gaming life with flight sims, and although anybody can throw a plane around the sky, you can't get an immersive experience and operate in a realistic environment unless the rest of the world (i.e. traffic) and some guidance/pointers are there to get you started. I don't get a lot of enjoyment out of a simulation without those things. That's what I'm looking for with Trainz, and that's why sessions are pretty crucial for me.

I am to Surveyor what a child is to a Hornby train set I can get things going and play about but there's little realism in what I create.

Mononlaf summed up my general thoughts two posts ago in a much more concise way than I can manage, so no need to say any more.

I think this thread has at least proved that sessions are definitely worthwhile for a lot of community members, and it highlights the need to make sessions more easily identifiable in relation to the route they go with. These two points can only be good news for people like me. (I hope I don't seem selfish!)

 

[FootplatePhil]

I think this thread has at least proved that sessions are definitely worthwhile for a lot of community members, and it highlights the need to make sessions more easily identifiable in relation to the route they go with. These two points can only be good news for people like me. (I hope I don't seem selfish!)

I am very glad I asked the question, and I am now pursuaded that inclusion of sessions is worthwhile (and while sometimes a pain, they are also fun to set up). However, the responses to this thread have highlighted to me that the nub of the problem is 'inclusion'. Stallion, I will be adopting your suggestion of including at least a core of sessions (a base session, and a demo session) in the routes dependencies KUID list before any future uploads, so they all come down from DLS as a bundle. And for sessions not thus 'included' with the route I will in future try and name them so that the link is more obvious when searching. Finally, I will explain how these might be found in the info html.

Thanks for all the great responses.

Phil

 

[leeferr]

I'd like to agree with what Phil said. I knew sessions were important to me, but I didn't realize how valuable they were to others. I had just assumed that trainzers would create their own sessions with an uploaded route. Well, we all know what assuming gets us. I will endeavor to follow Phil's footsteps in the future and try to include at least one session with any new route uploads.

 

[Swordfish]

And the base-session I would call: "aaaNameOfTheMap".
Then the base-session is always the first session in surveyor/driver and in CMP you see that this is the base-session for a certain map.

Regards

Swordfish

 

[Stallion]

Stallion, I will be adopting your suggestion of including at least a core of sessions (a base session, and a demo session) in the routes dependencies KUID list before any future uploads, so they all come down from DLS as a bundle. And for sessions not thus 'included' with the route I will in future try and name them so that the link is more obvious when searching. Finally, I will explain how these might be found in the info html.

Thanks for all the great responses.

Phil

You're very welcome - I'm glad I took the time to contribute a couple of posts to the community! I'd just like to thank all those who go the extra mile in making a session or two to go with a new route.

The above ideas sound fantastic. At the very least, a list of sessions in the documentation/readme for a route would be a huge help, since I usually read all of the information that route builders provide. The only limitation is that sessions can be made after a route is uploaded, in which case the only way to link them with the route is by name I suppose.


One question: What is the general view of uploading sessions for routes that aren't of your own creation? If/when I create any good sessions of my own one day, is it normal to upload them freely or should one ask permission of the route's author first? (If the author doesn't already mention the issue in the readme file).

 

[rockster]

One question: What is the general view of uploading sessions for routes that aren't of your own creation? If/when I create any good sessions of my own one day, is it normal to upload them freely or should one ask permission of the route's author first? (If the author doesn't already mention the issue in the readme file).

theres no need to ask permission as long as the map hasnt changed which isnt very often as usually extra trackmarks and triggers may be needed as the route creator would have designed as they would work it, ive never been able to run a session without altering in someway.

if you do need to change trackmarks and triggers you would need to import a TSO file, the only way i know of doing this in TRS2006 is to use SCS2006, this has a TSO importer built in, would be good if a scripter could create a rule for the simple purpose of importing a TSO file to a layout

cheers

Gav

 

[leeferr]

I don't see a problem with uploading sessions that you've created for a route. That's why I upload a route, so that members can enjoy and make their own sessions. If they create a good session, I hope that they do upload it so that I can enjoy it.
As Gav said, if the route changes, you may need the permission of the original creator. This usually shouldn't be a problem.

 

[FootplatePhil]

I have no problem with someone creating a session based on my route and uploading it. I would welcome it.

However, I would have a problem with someone uploading a modified version of my route (even if is just to add trackmarks). For one, I need to retain control of the map to simplify the release of future improved and extended versions.

Phil

Edit: I would consider adding trackmarks, if requested. Trouble is, you might have to wait a while for upload of the next version before you could use them.

 

[atsfrr3000]

The route I'm working on right now is a long, scenic kind of route, but will have at least 5-6 towns/cities on it and numerous industries. there will be plenty of industrial spurs, sidetracks, and stuff that you really want the end user to see. In addition, with all of those industries, the route will require several AI trains to keep everything fully satisfied.

Thus the need for sessions. With all of the various spurs, nooks, and crannies, there is no way anyone would know where everything is without a demo session that covers the length of the mainline. And sessions are really the ONLY way to provide enough trains to keep things like this running; believe me, there will be no way one person can keep everything handled on my layout!

My system is simple:

• Make the route. Add lots of triggers, trackmarks, and the like to make it as session-friendly as humanly possible.
• Test the route. Make a "test session" in which there are multiple AI trains running around, as well as a human player trying to dodge in between them to get where he needs to go.
• Modify the route so that, if set up correctly, the AI can navigate the route without too many issues.
• Create a "session base" with all of the industry inputs/outputs adjusted to realistic levels. The session base should be used as a foundation for all sessions on the map.
• Make 5-6 sessions for the map with different types of activites. Make sure they all run flawlessly as long as the player does as he's told. Be sure to include a demo session outlining the railroad's operations and layout.
• Make sure the railroad name (or an abbreviation for it) is in the sessions' names for easy searching and filtering in CMP.
• Add the sessions to the route's KUID table, essentially bundling them with the route.
• Resolve to add the same route name or abbreviation to all future sessions for easy searching. Be sure to mention this in the route description, and remind users to check often for new sessions.
• Upload the route and accept your accolades and praise.

So, say for instance I'm making a fictional route called the Midland Western Railroad. I would make 5-6 sessions including a session base and a demo session, and put the abbreviation "MWRR" in their titles. I would add their KUIDs to the route's KUID table and release the route. I would mention in the route info that all future sessions will have "MWRR" in the title and to check back often for new sessions. With that done, I continue to release new sessions, adding "MWRR" to the session title.

Seems sensible enough to me

-Chris (tm)

 

[leeferr]

Chris
I agree with you except for one point. I've found it nearly impossible to make a session run flawlessly. It's not me that's misbehaving in the session, it's the AI. I can run the same session over and over, but the AI's always seem to want to act up. I've been able to get sessions to run flawlessly most of the time, but there's always those times when Murphy wants to show up. In fact, we need an AI named Murphy

 

[FootplatePhil]

Chris
I agree with you except for one point. I've found it nearly impossible to make a session run flawlessly. It's not me that's misbehaving in the session, it's the AI. I can run the same session over and over, but the AI's always seem to want to act up. I've been able to get sessions to run flawlessly most of the time, but there's always those times when Murphy wants to show up. In fact, we need an AI named Murphy

Yes, thats my experience as well. It was the main reason behind my questioning whether it was worth uploading sessions. My demo (test) session runs for several hours with many trains. Trying to 'debug' it is a pain - a problem with the AI towards the end of a session takes a minute to try and fix, and then more hours to test (and this is often repeated several times to ge it right). Usually the problem is not with the route, but with the illogical choices of the AI drivers, which you then must compensate for. I know you can theoretically speed things up for testing, but this seems of dubious value given that one of the things that screws up the AI is the slightly different timings you can get on each run of a session.

Anyway, look for a new version of my route and sessions in a week or so - with modifications as I described earlier.

Phil

 

[john259]

For anyone who likes scripted activities, the Razorback Railway has created quite a number now which run as scenarios in TRS2004 and as driver sessions made to behave almost as if they were scenarios in TRS2006. I hope nobody minds me posting this here.

John

 

[Stallion]

I actually signed up and downloaded a few last night, John. I liked the 3 sessions included with TRS2006 for RBR, and after another member mentioned their frequent visits to the site to satisfy their need for activities, I headed there myself

However, I would have a problem with someone uploading a modified version of my route (even if is just to add trackmarks). For one, I need to retain control of the map to simplify the release of future improved and extended versions.

Thanks for all the replies on the session uploads. I see the issue with modified versions of the routes, and it makes sense. It's a small shame that extra trackmarks can't be saved within the session. When I first got Trainz I modified Rosworth Vale as the AI wouldn't run on the correct lines; all of the direction markers were backwards (since fixed in RV SP2 with lots of extra trackmarks). That showed as another route in Driver which frustrated me a little as it was untidy. I can see the chaos it would cause on the DLS as any route might appear a dozen times to go with different sessions.

Regarding the save issue, am I right in thinking that sessions made using regular triggers to display HTML pages will work if you save halfway through? A lot of the recent sessions I've downloaded don't seem to use this method, so it may explain why they don't work if I save and continue later. I see that the trigger-method is quite inflexible, especially with regard to control of AI trains.

The reason I ask is that I thought it might be worth an author stating if his sessions can be saved halfway through?

Unfortunately, it didn't work in your Weddin sessions; approached and stopped at the stated trackmark after reloading, and ... nothing happened. The result of those sequential checks and commands in the sessions rules list being reset, I imagine. Will replay it in full later though.

 

[john259]

It's a small shame that extra trackmarks can't be saved within the session.

The Razorback activities do that somehow, both for TRS2004 scenarios and TRS2006 driver sessions. Individual activities can have trackmarks, triggers, speedboards and other trackside objects additional to those in the layout. Don't ask me how it's done though!

John

 

[nwhitney]

By using a .tso file which is akin to adding a layer to the drawing. You can create them in VistaMare's TrainzMap.
Norm

 

[FootplatePhil]

:
:
The reason I ask is that I thought it might be worth an author stating if his sessions can be saved halfway through?

Unfortunately, it didn't work in your Weddin sessions; approached and stopped at the stated trackmark after reloading, and ... nothing happened. The result of those sequential checks and commands in the sessions rules list being reset, I imagine. Will replay it in full later though.

Yes, unfortunately Trainz seems to lose track of my sessions if you save half way through. I have not tried experimenting to see what Trainz can remember, and what it forgets through a save. This is partly because I was not aware that any session of any complexity could be saved and restarted half way through. But since you seem to be saying that some sessions can be interupted if set up in certain ways (Philskene made as similiar comment), when I get a a chance I will investigate further (busy grappling with re-signalling at the moment - seems I can either have protypical looking signals, or signals that work with AI, but not both. We'll see !).

Phil

 

[mononlaf]

I agree with Leeferr regarding the AI problems with developing flawless sessions.

But there is another issue just as important or more so -- that's the inflexibility of the set of driver instructions or workorders that you devise for a session.

Currently I'm working with providing a continuous supply of coal to the Cooper Power generating station in the Tidelands (combined north and south version) route that came with TRS 2006. Because of limited coal storage at Cooper Power, this means two coal trains, one inbound full, one outbound empty as nearly as possible at all times. (You also need diesel and crude oil trains but that's beside the point I'm trying to make.)

AI issue - the AI drivers get confused when backing -- more so than when moving forward. So, I put in a wye at Cooper Power and use the drive-around loop at Thurstan to assure that the engines are always headed forward and at the heads of their trains. (The Thurstan loop takes too much time, so I'm also trying a round table that I've put in.)

The inflexibility issue - using the wye at Cooper means that the engine has to couple to what was the rear of the train when it was inbound. The next time that train comes back to Cooper, it has to do the same thing. But, the car at the end of the train the second time in is not the same car as on the first time in. So, the user has to intervene sometime between those two runs to change the coupling command. Guess you could make a set of commands of double length to cover both situations, but that is something I'd like to avoid.

There are other problems -- sometimes you want to do something at the beginning or ending that won't be done again in a session - like bringing an engine in from the engine house, making up a consist, and then going on with repetative activity like commodity hauling. But then you can't use the Repeat capability because you can't specify where to begin the repeat. In such a case, the user has to start things off, then take some time to enter a string of commands from a point where you want to repeat. If you are trying to run several trains, some AI, some not, this is a type of session that it will be pretty hard to make run flawlessly.

Triggers are great - but there should be a type of trigger that begins its monitoring at a given time and that can be tested for being tripped after that time. ---- Hmmmm - is there one of these at the DLS?

Dick