Large Route: TRS06 or TS09?

[Rougespear7mm]

Hello all, I'm looking for people's opinions on this matter as I'm not familar enough to make an informed one.

I'm planning to construct a large route (which will remain un-named at this time, lol) which will end up being about 120 miles long when completed through "Rockies type" mountainous terrain. This will be a class one railroad based strongly on it's prototype in the early 1980's with operations seeing up to 10 trains on the line at once over the subdivision. I own copies of TS2009 and TRS2006. So far I've been using TS09 and it's been giving me no troubles so far, even through constructing a small, highly detailed switching route. I find that I get better framerates on average using TS09, and it has texture compression, it has the better 5m grid, and will make use of my second cpu core. Obviously this route will be enjoyed by myself, but I would like very much to share it with others once completed... probably a good year plus down the road

Which version should I construct the route in? I want to support TS2009 very much but everybody says TR2006 is much more stable and more users are 'currently' using TRS06! In the future, users should be mirgrating to TS09 though... Given the mountainous scenery, should I use TS09 to get better overall framerates? Please let me know your thoughts!

Thanks so much! Brent

 

[ct_krogen]

erll why not make it in tro06 then import it to 09, it's going to be a while before i buy 09 I need a faster cpu. my cpu is only a 1.83 ghz

 

[cascaderailroad]

That a good idea, then 06 and 09 users will be able to enjoy it.

My 06 Horseshoe Curve route is @ 567mb, 10,000 baseboards (to be cut down in size a bit).

 

[paulhobbs]

I want to support TS2009 very much but everybody says TR2006 is much more stable and more users are 'currently' using TRS06!

I wouldn't believe what everybody says, most of what is said is based on rumours and half-truths.

Paul

 

[leader2302]

If you want the widest distribution of your route, make it in TRS04.

There are many more users of TRS04 than any other version of Trainz.

 

[Transportfan]

My 06 Horseshoe Curve route is @ 567mb, 10,000 baseboards (to be cut down in size a bit).

WOW! That would'nt be on the DLS, but is it available elsewhere?

 

[Skrogsgorks]

My 06 Horseshoe Curve route is @ 567mb, 10,000 baseboards (to be cut down in size a bit).

I would like to offer a bit of advice. Before you start your project, take a moment to scan the DLS for Routes, specifically their file sizes. Personally I have not seen any that reach even close to that size.

Now, if you are building just for yourself to play with, then go go gadget. If you want to share your work with others, then please pare, snip and tuck so that some of the slower computers trainzers own will be able to enjoy it.

 

[Dermmy]

I would like to offer a bit of advice. Before you start your project, take a moment to scan the DLS for Routes, specifically their file sizes. Personally I have not seen any that reach even close to that size.

Now, if you are building just for yourself to play with, then go go gadget. If you want to share your work with others, then please pare, snip and tuck so that some of the slower computers trainzers own will be able to enjoy it.

Sorry, but nonsense!

The DLS has a default max cdp size of 20MB (though i saw somewhere recently that that may now be increased to 30MB) . Either way Auran have always been happy to accommodate larger routes on the DLS, though you have to snail mail them in on cd/dvd. Also there are plenty of larger routes available from 3rd party sites.

What really gets my goat though are the assertions that (a) large routes won't run on small machines, which is utter bollocks and (b) that content creation should be aimed at the lowest common denominator which is even bollockser.

If you want a large route Brent all power to you - Skrog may not want it but almost everyone else does....

Andy

 

[PGibbons]

Suggestions

After building several long routes based in NSW I would recommend breaking the route up into manageable chunks...40-50KM track distance.
1. You get the satisfaction of completing each part as you go - its easy to become disillusioned with a large route as it takes a huge amount of time to complete. I would estimate a minimum of 1 hour per kilometer when you add up all of the tasks required. The more detail and scenery you add the longer it takes.
2. Its easier on your PC as you build because each part is smaller thus quicker to load and save etc.
3. Also easier to upload smaller sections than a huge route and easier for others to download.

I would also recommend building in TRS2006 at this stage for the reasons mentioned in earlier posts. I think '09' only provides marginal benefits for route builders at this stage.

As for running the routes I think '09' is much smoother in Driver, also it loads in less than half the time compared with '06'. Its easy to build in '06' and transfer to '09' for Driver.

My consolidated NSW route at about 220Mb runs acceptably in both '06' & '09' but '09' is noticeablely better. (I have 3GbRAM / Core2 Duo system).

PG

 

[Vern]

Depends on your PC.

I can build quite happily on the laptop in TRS2006 and TC3 but try it in TS2009 and it is very laggy - move a track spline point and it sometimes takes 5 or 6 seconds for the display to update. Very annoying when doing fine work. However TS2009 has a few more built in assets that '006 doesn't have but then there is no regional sorting, just huge lists of objects!

 

[Rougespear7mm]

I think this route will be broken up into two 60-odd-mile sections. I'm going to be looking for a third-party site to host this route upon completion for sure. I'm still tossed up on which version of Trainz to use. I REALLY want to build it in TS2009 because by the time it's ready for release, I'm sure TS09 will be a stable platform and much more popular than it is now. But if I build in TRS2006, I will be able to make use of other's help on the project!

As for running it on all computers... I would like to cater to slower computers but to be honest, I'm going to build this thing to run on my computer. When I built it recently, it was under a $600 bill and it's a compentant pc; I don't see why others can't have something similar?? It's a Core2Duo @ 3.4GHz, 4GB of RAM and a 9800GT 512mb of RAM - just for reference

Somebody still REALLY needs to sway me on which version of Trainz to use!! I've invested in TransDEM now, and I'm pretty much ready to begin this project!

Cheers, Brent

P.S. I am most likely going to be looking for help in the scenery department as it's never been my strong point! All engineering will be done by me. PM me if you're interested...

 

[johnwhelan]

I think this route will be broken up into two 60-odd-mile sections. I'm going to be looking for a third-party site to host this route upon completion for sure. I'm still tossed up on which version of Trainz to use. I REALLY want to build it in TS2009 because by the time it's ready for release, I'm sure TS09 will be a stable platform and much more popular than it is now. But if I build in TRS2006, I will be able to make use of other's help on the project!

As for running it on all computers... I would like to cater to slower computers but to be honest, I'm going to build this thing to run on my computer. When I built it recently, it was under a $600 bill and it's a compentant pc; I don't see why others can't have something similar?? It's a Core2Duo @ 3.4GHz, 4GB of RAM and a 9800GT 512mb of RAM - just for reference

Somebody still REALLY needs to sway me on which version of Trainz to use!! I've invested in TransDEM now, and I'm pretty much ready to begin this project!

Cheers, Brent

P.S. I am most likely going to be looking for help in the scenery department as it's never been my strong point! All engineering will be done by me. PM me if you're interested...

Step one define the requirements.

My two cents, think about trees. If TRS2009 in either compatibility mode or native mode meets your tree requirements today then go TRS2009.

If it doesn't then look for the latest stable release that provides good trees. To me that would be TC3. You can always change the version down to TRS2006 at a later date but for stability TC3 together with the TRS2006 .ja files for the built in content.

Cheerio John

 

[Tokkyu40]

...What really gets my goat though are the assertions that...(b) that content creation should be aimed at the lowest common denominator which is even bollockser...

Andy

Exactly. Anyone worth building content for should spend a few thousand every six months to get the latest super gaming computer and the newest Trainz version. If they can't afford it or are still happy with TRS04 they'll just miss out.
Personally, I make my items for the earliest version of Trainz I can so people with older versions can still use it, but that's my choice.

... I'm still tossed up on which version of Trainz to use. I REALLY want to build it in TS2009...

Then build it in TRS09. In the end you're making the route because you want to make it. It would be nice if other people like it, but that's not the real point to making a route. It's to make the route you want the way you want to make it. If you want to use 09, then use it.

Claude

 

[ex-railwayman]

I REALLY want to build it in TS2009 because by the time it's ready for release, I'm sure TS09 will be a stable platform and much more popular than it is now. But if I build in TRS2006, I will be able to make use of other's help on the project!

Somebody still REALLY needs to sway me on which version of Trainz to use!! I've invested in TransDEM now, and I'm pretty much ready to begin this project!

Cheers, Brent

Hello Brent,

I'm sure there are content creators who use TS2009 who may chip in with a few ideas and suggestions, after all, some of them want to practice their skills in this version, so you may open the door for them.....
Build it in whatever version you are happier using, never mind about the number of downloads it achieves upon completion, quality layouts with the right blend of texturing and creativeness will always be downloaded irrespective of the version it's built in....And if those who haven't got TS2009 feel jealous that they cannot play on your map when you've finished it, then that's their hard luck.....:hehe:
And Dermmy is quite correct in stating that large maps should run well on most computers of any size, we should all be aware of the minimum specs recommended to play this game and if we 'aint got a PC to run big layouts then that's not your problem....Marias Pass is nearly 300 miles long and works just fine on my antiquated laptop of over 7 years with the barest of minimum specs, it's the resource hungry splineage and other things that make a route stutter, and of course those Trainzers amongst us trying to place 50 huge train consists on the same map and wondering why it lags so much....So if you go steady on the textures, track, roads, trees, spline telegraph poles and fences, buildings, etc, etc, etc, you should be able to run a route for hundreds of miles without any noticeable stuttering and all of us who run low-medium spec computers and laptops will also enjoy playing on your route.....

Cheerz. ex-railwayman.

 

[Dermmy]

Exactly. Anyone worth building content for should spend a few thousand every six months to get the latest super gaming computer and the newest Trainz version. If they can't afford it or are still happy with TRS04 they'll just miss out.
Personally, I make my items for the earliest version of Trainz I can so people with older versions can still use it, but that's my choice.
Claude

C'mon Claude - that is way out of context and nothing like what I meant. I build my routes exclusively on TRS04 despite owning later versions. My current 'puter is by no means a racehorse and with the exception of Clovis everything of mine was built on my last rig which was an ancient PIII which was below minimum spec for TRS04. All of my routes (to date) are built lo-poly and will run on just about anything. But I do it that way because that's the way I like to do it. I like to run long trains with hi-poly rolling stock so I cut the route clutter to an absolute minimum.

Any completed Trainz route is an act of commitment and dedication. To complete anything of the order of 120 miles requires that the route builder be absolutely dedicated to the task. The first fires of enthusiasm will be thoroughly extinguished long before the completed route sees the light of day. To get to the end of the project Brent must build exactly the route he wants. If others like the result then that is a fabulous outcome. If others don't run it or can't run it then too bad. What might or might not suit another user cannot be an issue. If Brent (or any other route builder) sets out to build the route of some-one else's dream or to suit some-one else's needs then it is doomed to end as a frustratingly half-completed project in a dusty corner of his hard drive.....

Andy

 

[cascaderailroad]

This seems like a good idea for me to create my route in TRS04...I have a Vista OS though and presently have TRS2006...are there really alot of 04 users out there...show of hands: who wants the Horseshoe Curve in 04 or 06 ? Perhaps I should get a copy of the 04 program to create a route ?

If you want the widest distribution of your route, make it in TRS04.

There are many more users of TRS04 than any other version of Trainz.

 

[johnwhelan]

This seems like a good idea for me to create my route in TRS04...I have a Vista OS though and presently have TRS2006...are there really alot of 04 users out there...show of hands: who wants the Horseshoe Curve in 04 or 06 ? Perhaps I should get a copy of the 04 program to create a route ?

By the time its built people will have moved onto TRS2009 anyway. With routes most scenery items are TRS2004 or lower, although there are some quite decent normal mapped scenery items available at the moment these work better in TRS2009, the 4:1 texture compression in TRS2009 means you can use bigger textures to have better looking scenery objects as well on the same hardware.

Basically only people with very high end machines can afford to run TRS2004 these days for the rest of us TRS2009 helps keep putting off the evil day of machine upgrade.

TRS2004 can only make use of one core on a cpu, TRS2006 makes limited use of dual core, TRS2009 makes better use of multi core machines.

Cheerio John

 

[Rougespear7mm]

Well I was going to build it in TRS2006, but after dealing with CMP I think I will be sticking with TS09 - CMP is utterly horrible! Now I understand all these posts on the forum complaining about it... lol. All it seems to do is freeze up! Hopefully by the time my route's ready for trees, there will be TS09 native content available.

 

[edion2]

Hello,

I started building my large and complex route using 2006.

ALL Trainz versions have to deal with a 2GB maximum memory limit imposed by 32 bit Microsoft OS. Different versions deal with this limit in different ways. This is a limit that can be reached by many large route builders. TS2009 deals with this limit better than previous versions. But, TS2009 is still under development.

In 2006, when you reach this limit, your SAVE function stops working. You will only be able to use the SAVE AS options. The problem is, every time you use the SAVE AS option, you end up with a NEW kuid number for each save. Other annoying symptom is that any "copy/paste" or "move" function starts to take a MINUTE or more for each operation. TS2006 will become unusable in short order if you reach this memory limit. I stopped working on my route for 6 months.

With the release of TS2009, I decided to start working on my route again. As expected, the route is still too large in 09. I split the route into 3 pieces, it worked. I still wanted my "series" of routes to function as ONE large route so I decided to use the "I-Portal" to move my train from one route to the next one. With the use of the I-Portal, I can run sessions that are over 4 hours in length which includes more than 2 hours of driving time. The OTHER BENEFIT of I-Portal is that it can unite all your collections of routes into one large personal railroad system within your computer. You can pick up a load in the US and unload it in UK . . . if you don't mind seeing a Union Pacific train pulling into London. You can do this all within your computer.

Initially, I was planning to keep my series of routes to myself, but now I've decided to eventually upload to DLS. I'm hoping to do this within the next 12 months. I've started writing the "route manual", which is a monumental task in itself.

What ever version you use, it is IMPORTANT to mostly "finish" a large section at a time. This would be a test to see "how large" the route is getting. You will need to add textures, majority of planned trees and buildings to see how big your route is getting. You do not want to hit the 2GB limit. Otherwise, like in my case, you may have to abandon miles of trackage because once you start to put in the scenery, you run into the 2GB limit. Baseboard numbers are not even close to giving you the "true size" of the route you are building.

Seeing is believing. I started a thread long time ago that shows many of my "industries" on my routes. Some late modifications have been made but 95% of what you see still remains.
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?t=23447&highlight=kitbashed+industry

Here are some general screen shots so you can see the "general 3D complexity" that is prevalent throughout my series of routes.



Using the above as example, I try to keep the Maximum "drive time" from one end of the route to the other end to less than 90 minutes on an an average of 3 baseboard width for main lines. Scenery will be limited to viewable areas from the track. I always try to use large QUANTITIES of small VARIETY of objects rather than the other way around. Large variety of objects are always FPS killers.

IMO, I have found the 2009 version to be the smoothest and most stable so far. But, I am running the Current Beta version which is a test version that is not available to everyone.

When my route is eventually uploaded, it will include a minimum requirement for my routes. Currently that is, Core 2 Duo 3Ghz - 3.5MB RAM - GTX280 with 1MB video RAM, Trainz setting at 2048 resource cache - no shadow - compatibility mode, ON. MUST accept occasional FPS drop to 6FPS.

Hope this helps some.

 

[johnwhelan]

Hello,

I started building my large and complex route using 2006.

ALL Trainz versions have to deal with a 2GB maximum memory limit imposed by 32 bit Microsoft OS. Different versions deal with this limit in different ways. This is a limit that can be reached by many large route builders. TS2009 deals with this limit better than previous versions. But, TS2009 is still under development.

In 2006, when you reach this limit, your SAVE function stops working. You will only be able to use the SAVE AS options. The problem is, every time you use the SAVE AS option, you end up with a NEW kuid number for each save. Other annoying symptom is that any "copy/paste" or "move" function starts to take a MINUTE or more for each operation. TS2006 will become unusable in short order if you reach this memory limit. I stopped working on my route for 6 months.

With the release of TS2009, I decided to start working on my route again. As expected, the route is still too large in 09. I split the route into 3 pieces, it worked. I still wanted my "series" of routes to function as ONE large route so I decided to use the "I-Portal" to move my train from one route to the next one. With the use of the I-Portal, I can run sessions that are over 4 hours in length which includes more than 2 hours of driving time. The OTHER BENEFIT of I-Portal is that it can unite all your collections of routes into one large personal railroad system within your computer. You can pick up a load in the US and unload it in UK . . . if you don't mind seeing a Union Pacific train pulling into London. You can do this all within your computer.

Initially, I was not planning to keep my series of routes to myself, but now I've decided to eventually upload to DLS. I'm hoping to do this within the next 12 months. I've started writing the "route manual", which is a monumental task in itself.

What ever version you use, it is IMPORTANT to mostly "finish" a large section at a time. This would be a test to see "how large" the route is getting. You will need to add textures, majority of planned trees and buildings to see how big your route is getting. You do not want to hit the 2GB limit. Otherwise, like in my case, you may have to abandon miles of trackage because once you start to put in the scenery, you run into the 2GB limit. Baseboard numbers are not even close to giving you the "true size" of the route you are building.

Seeing is believing. I started a thread long time ago that shows many of my "industries" on my routes. Some late modifications have been made but 95% of what you see still remains.
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?t=23447&highlight=kitbashed+industry

Here are some general screen shots so you can see the "general 3D complexity" that is prevalent throughout my series of routes.



Using the above as example, I try to keep the Maximum "drive time" from one end of the route to the other end to less than 90 minutes on an an average of 3 baseboard width for main lines. Scenery will be limited to viewable areas from the track. I always try to use large QUANTITIES of small VARIETY of objects rather than the other way around. Large variety of objects are always FPS killers.

IMO, I have found the 2009 version to be the smoothest and most stable so far. But, I am running the Current Beta version which is a test version that is not available to everyone.

When my route is eventually uploaded, it will include a minimum requirement for my routes. Currently that is, Core 2 Duo 3Ghz - 3.5MB RAM - GTX280 with 1MB video RAM, Trainz setting at 2048 resource cache - no shadow - compatibility mode, ON. MUST accept occasional FPS drop to 6FPS.

Hope this helps some.

Can you raise this in Trainzdev? There is a way to let 32 bit programs access 4 gigs of memory under a 64 bit operating system. Auran knows about it and has mentioned its a possibility but your layout I think demonstrates the requirement / need.

Cheerio John