Multliplayer UMR Summer TS12

I have now closed my test session. Several people joined me and everything seems ok so far. Mmonti is now running session 3.0 You should now be able to find it in Content manager. dragging it to your download box will also drag the route. Any problems contact us via Teamspeak 3 at 66.45.231.18
 
trainz2012032512132789.jpg


On the right I asking if we could add a siding as there is so much traffic there is not enough room. And on the left if we could get two more sidings and the arrow is for that track to be converted for like switchers to navigate around the yard.

I hope neil you could look at maybe expanding it.

Thank you in advance.
 
trainz2012032512132789.jpg


On the right I asking if we could add a siding as there is so much traffic there is not enough room. And on the left if we could get two more sidings and the arrow is for that track to be converted for like switchers to navigate around the yard.

I hope neil you could look at maybe expanding it.

Thank you in advance.
Poor old Neilsmith. he must be thinking we are never satisified:o We complain about the grass so he went to the trouble of changing it. We complained some more so he brought out a grass and a grassless version and now we have found something else to complain about. Neilsmith must be very tolerant to put up with us. The fact is UMR SUMMER was not intended to be a muti player route with the 15 players all logged on at the same time which we had earlier. In an ideal world Smithville, with it,s three yards, hump and large locomotive Depot would have been much more centrally placed and so there would be no need to expand Palmer. The traffic levels at Palmer have rapidly increased for a number of reasons. The popularity of the session with 10 or more people in the session at peak times, the central location of Palmer, a number of important commodities either produced or consumed at Palmer , A forestry to the east and a sawmill to the west, both of which are within a reasonable distance, a convenient location for players to leave their train when they want to take a break and so on. I think I can say with confidence that should Neilsmith agree to our request we will not bother him again (until the next time)
 
Last edited:
Hi folks.

I was wondering if anyone was around still, as I hadn't heard from anyone in a while!!:hehe: I've been spending a lot of time updating the route, and fixing some things that have always bugged me. I'm working from East to West, and am just a little bit East of Palmer right now. I'll definitely look updating Palmer, as that's one of the areas that I've never been overly happy with. I'm hearing you want more sidings or a bigger yard, which shouldn't be a problem. Let me know if there's any other requests. If they're feasible, I'll definitely look into them.

Some things I've done so far:
-Once again, I re-signalled the whole route, as I finally discovered that the signals could be configured to protect multiple turnouts. This allowed me to get rid of a lot of redundant and unnecessary signals.
-Significant upgrade to Gladston - straightened the approach from the south, got rid of the wye, made the yard bigger, and added a couple more industries.
-Upgraded Lang West - same industries, but more realistic trackwork.
-Removed the wye just south of Lang West.
-Changed the trackwork at the container/crude pier - added a backup track and changed the yard sidings so you can do switching without going onto the main line.
-and a bunch of miscellaneous repairs.

I'll see what else pops up as I move West.

I'm glad you're all enjoying it.

neil
 
Nice. I'd also like to see more multiple-track passenger stations and an area of high commuter density - maybe a separate commuter rail for those who like guiding scheduled passenger trains up and down a line. Of course, that will require some extensive additions to the route, so it's completely up to you.

Is it possible to have the Eso Flats Chrysler Unloading industries behave as a single industry, so that unloading is not so much of a pain?
 
Nice. I'd also like to see more multiple-track passenger stations and an area of high commuter density - maybe a separate commuter rail for those who like guiding scheduled passenger trains up and down a line. Of course, that will require some extensive additions to the route, so it's completely up to you.

Is it possible to have the Eso Flats Chrysler Unloading industries behave as a single industry, so that unloading is not so much of a pain?

I may be able to add some multiple track stations, but I'm not sure about adding entire new sections. That may be a little too much! lol
As far as the Chrysler unloading, the reason it was done like that was so a number of autoracks could be unloaded at once. I haven't really been able to come up with anything to make it simpler. If there was a really long multiple-industry-track, that may do the trick, but to my knowledge, I'm not sure that it exists. If you have any suggestions, I'll gladly listen.
 
Some of the updates I've been working on...

Palmer:

neilsmith74920120327000.jpg


neilsmith74920120327000.jpg


neilsmith74920120327000.jpg

Added backup tracks at both ends so switching can be done without entering the main line.


Gladston:

neilsmith74920120327000j.jpg


neilsmith74920120327000.jpg


neilsmith74920120327000.jpg



Lang West:

neilsmith74920120327000.jpg


neilsmith74920120327000.jpg


neilsmith74920120327000.jpg


To be continued...
 
You could shorten up the distances between points. It takes way too long to long to get from one point to another. This also causes the route to take way to long to load.
 
Alternatively, add intermediate points. It'd be more worth the wait if there's more to do once we're in.

Also, Palmer has become a major waypoint in the Multiplayer. Perhaps a loco maintenance facility would suit nicely there?
 
I've been talking to Carl Lewis about things, and he also mentioned that Palmer is a busy area now. I've added a small loco facility and a damaged car siding. Also, I've made the main yard bigger - it's now 5 long sidings. There is also a small 2-track local industry yard. I'm pretty happy with how it has turned out.

As far as distances between points, I'm assuming you're talking about the distances between industries and towns. If that is indeed what you're speaking of, that was completely intentional. I've done my best to make this a believable and realistic operating railroad. In the real world, railways are (mostly) for long distance movement of goods. If you had to pick up some commodity and deliver it to somewhere only a few miles away, then that would likely have been done by truck. I know it may be frustrating for the multiplayers, but this is something I'm not really willing to change. I hope you understand.

I've also retired the three AI trains that were running between the mines and powerstations. I know they didn't show up in MP, but in the base session, they were there. I've just gotten tired of them, and I believe they caused more problems than they were worth. Having said that, I'm also removing the Gladston, Caldwell and Barton powerstations, as I feel they look out of place, and I've never been happy with how they looked anyway. I checked with Carl, and he said that he thought most people weren't using them anyway, so hopefully they won't be missed.

Thanks for you understanding.
 
I'm a railroader and I won't go into your route. This is supposed to be fun, but when it takes 15 minutes for the map to load and almost a hour to get between locations, it becomes more of a job than fun. You can switch out the yard and service industries all day long, but when no one wants to run the trains over the road, what good is it? You might not be hearing it, but a lot are saying the same thing. Kind of the way it was with the grass, no one spoke up until I did then they all did.
 
I'm a railroader and I won't go into your route. This is supposed to be fun, but when it takes 15 minutes for the map to load and almost a hour to get between locations, it becomes more of a job than fun. You can switch out the yard and service industries all day long, but when no one wants to run the trains over the road, what good is it? You might not be hearing it, but a lot are saying the same thing. Kind of the way it was with the grass, no one spoke up until I did then they all did.

Well, as I've said before, this was a route I created for myself. The fact that people wanted to use it for multiplayer is great, but that was not the reason for the route. If you don't want to use it, that's entirely your decision, and I respect your opinions. Have you tried creating a route yourself for multiplayer? That way you could get exactly what you want. I wish you all the best.

neil
 
I have a session I recently started putting together. With a 1.5 mile coal train, UMR is one of only a few routes really long trains seem to fit in with (in my opinion).

Passenger train sessions work very well on UMR also.

I believe I was the first person to suggest using this route for multiplayer, so the haters can gang up on me.:p

The Trainz engine itself obviously needs some work in order to make really large maps like UMR a more viable multiplayer route.

A stand alone server version that can run on a dedicated high speed server (and be remotely administered) would be the ticket. Car racing sims have been doing it for years. Because even with high speed cable internet, my upload speed is only a fraction of my download speed so it really limits the ability to use my home computer as any kind of server.
 
my upload speed is only a fraction of my download speed so it really limits the ability to use my home computer as any kind of server.

This is relevant to my situation when I visit my parents. We have AT&T uVerse Internet with an absolute maximum download speed of 6.0 Mb/s and an average upload speed of nearly 750 kb/s. Definitely too slow for seamless multiplayer (or even multiplayer with seams).
 
This is relevant to my situation when I visit my parents. We have AT&T uVerse Internet with an absolute maximum download speed of 6.0 Mb/s and an average upload speed of nearly 750 kb/s. Definitely too slow for seamless multiplayer (or even multiplayer with seams).

I just ran a test with speedtest.net. With 8 open tabs in google chrome (one of which is streaming audio via pandora.com) speedtest.net reported my speeds as 20.10 mps download and 0.98 mps upload. Road Runner is what I am using.

We both have great "client" speeds but terrible "server" potential.

With an upload speed of 750 kbs or .75 mbs you could probably act quite well as a server with a small route and a limited number of players (which is what I am working on developing).
 
I think Neilsmith shouldn,t take too much notice of people who complain that they don,t like this or that this should be changed in the route. The fact is UMR SUMMER, like Neil says, was never intended to be a multi- player route and it is very good of him to have done all the extra work that has been requested by Mike and Carl. What is true is that Mmonti,s session is proving itself to be a new concept in the story of Trainz, in that it is the first multi-player game to run 24 hours a day (as much as possible), 7 days a week with a number of players in the session at any one time due to it,s popularity. Because UMR SUMMER is a "ground breaking" session, it is a learning process which leads to changes being made, not just to the session but the route as well. In this regard Mike, Carl and Neil have done an excellent job but this is an ongoing process and you should not expect it to happen overnight. As it is, Neil is working on the latest route version as you know, which should be released shortly followed by Mmonti,s latest session version to reflect the changes in the route that they requested. THe biggest change in the session will be the re-location of locomotives and rolling stock to Palmer with it,s geatly expanded infrastructure. This is in response to changing traffic flows and an rapid increase in operations at Palmer. Suggestions as to future changes are, of course, welcome as it is important for the future of the session to consider new ideas, as they will result in the continued growth and popularity in UMR SUMMER. What I would say to Neil is, consider ideas for changing the route by all means but remember you can,t please eveybody.
 
I'm a railroader and I won't go into your route. This is supposed to be fun, but when it takes 15 minutes for the map to load and almost a hour to get between locations, it becomes more of a job than fun. You can switch out the yard and service industries all day long, but when no one wants to run the trains over the road, what good is it? You might not be hearing it, but a lot are saying the same thing. Kind of the way it was with the grass, no one spoke up until I did then they all did.
In response to Mouse,s post I,m not technically minded so I can,t say with any degree of certainty why it takes 10-15 minutes on average to download whatever it is that needs downloading or whether it is possible to shorten the process. But what I will say is the reason it takes so long is becauuse UMR SUMMER is what it is, an extremely large route with a large number of locomotives and rolling stock and if you want to play it you,ll probably have to continue putting up with it. Otherwise find a smaller route to play. And I totally disagree with the comment that nobody wants to run trains over the road. The fact is I have prepared trains for dispatch at Smithfield which is about as far away as you can get from the rest of the route and people still drive them out quite happily without complaining "how far it is" to their destination. I can also name players that quite happily jump into a train at Gunnison and drive all the way to Smithfield, a journey which is likely to take 3 hours or more. That,s not for me but they seem to enjoy it or they wouldn,t keep on driving long distances. In my opinion it is the distances between towns and long journey times that gives UMR SUMMER it,s popularity as well as the large number of industries and yards and for people who prefer shunting and switching to driving long distances. UMR SUMMER provides something for everyone whatever your personal preferences in a social as well as an interactive environment. What i would say to Mouse and others who think in the same vein "Put up or shut up". Play another route or build your own. Suggestions and constructive criticism is one thing but whinging and complaining is something else. Mouse did make a good point with the grass, however. It was constructive criticism from a number of people that led firstly, to it being changed then removed entirely. THis should be welcomed but if you dislike UMR SUMMER that much stop whining and find another route to play.
 
Back
Top