New error in SP5?

Forester1

Well-known member
After installing SP5 I am getting a new error regarding product queues. It affects several assets by several authors so it looks to me like it was once legal, but now showing up as not legal? That is declaring commodities as their own conflicts. It seems strange, but is that so only one of an item can be loaded?
Here is the error:
- <kuid2:756113:16001377:2> : Queue 'load1' specifies itself as a conflict at index 1
- <kuid2:756113:16001377:2> : Queue 'load2' specifies itself as a conflict at index 2
- <kuid2:756113:16001377:2> : Queue 'load5' specifies itself as a conflict at index 5
Here are the stanzas. This is only one example, but as I say, it is a consistent error across several assets by several authors. Oddly it does not appear to affect load 0, which can have itself for a conflict:

queues
{
load0
{
size 68
initial-count 0
product-kuid <kuid:439337:110415>
per-hour 3

allowed-products
{
0 <kuid:439337:110411>
}

attachment-points
{
1 "a.load01"
2 "a.load02"
3 "a.load03"
4 "a.load04"
5 "a.load05"
6 "a.load06"
7 "a.load07"
8 "a.load08"
9 "a.load9"
10 "a.load010"
11 "a.load011"
12 "a.load012"
13 "a.load13"
14 "a.load014"
16 "a.load015"
17 "a.load016"
18 "a.load017"
19 "a.load018"
}

conflicts-with-queues
{
0 "load0"
1 "load1"
2 "load2"
3 "load3"
4 "load4"
5 "load5"
}
}

load1
{
size 68
initial-count 0
product-kuid <kuid:439337:105887>
per-hour 3

allowed-products
{
0 <kuid:439337:105879>
}

attachment-points
{
1 "a.load01"
2 "a.load02"
3 "a.load03"
4 "a.load04"
5 "a.load05"
6 "a.load06"
7 "a.load07"
8 "a.load08"
9 "a.load9"
10 "a.load010"
11 "a.load011"
12 "a.load012"
13 "a.load13"
14 "a.load014"
16 "a.load015"
17 "a.load016"
18 "a.load017"
19 "a.load018"
}

conflicts-with-queues
{
0 "load0"
1 "load1"
2 "load2"
3 "load3"
4 "load4"
5 "load5"
}
}

load2
{
size 68
initial-count 0
product-kuid <kuid:439337:110510>
per-hour 3

allowed-products
{
0 <kuid:439337:110554>
1 <kuid:439337:110551>
2 <kuid:439337:110548>
3 <kuid:439337:110545>
4 <kuid:439337:110542>
5 <kuid:439337:110538>
6 <kuid:439337:110535>
7 <kuid:439337:110529>
8 <kuid:439337:110532>
9 <kuid:439337:110525>
}

attachment-points
{
1 "a.load01"
2 "a.load02"
3 "a.load03"
4 "a.load04"
5 "a.load05"
6 "a.load06"
7 "a.load07"
8 "a.load08"
9 "a.load9"
10 "a.load010"
11 "a.load011"
12 "a.load012"
13 "a.load13"
14 "a.load014"
16 "a.load015"
17 "a.load016"
18 "a.load017"
19 "a.load018"
}

conflicts-with-queues
{
0 "load0"
1 "load1"
2 "load2"
3 "load3"
4 "load4"
5 "load5"
}
}
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

load5
{
size 68
initial-count 0
product-kuid <kuid:439337:105870>
per-hour 3

allowed-products
{
0 <kuid:439337:104980>
1 <kuid2:439337:100576:2>
3 <kuid:439337:104942>
4 <kuid:439337:104953>
5 <kuid:439337:104950>
6 <kuid:439337:104947>
}

attachment-points
{
1 "a.load01"
2 "a.load02"
3 "a.load03"
4 "a.load04"
5 "a.load05"
6 "a.load06"
7 "a.load07"
8 "a.load08"
9 "a.load9"
10 "a.load010"
11 "a.load011"
12 "a.load012"
13 "a.load13"
14 "a.load014"
16 "a.load015"
17 "a.load016"
18 "a.load017"
19 "a.load018"
}

conflicts-with-queues
{
0 "load0"
1 "load1"
2 "load2"
3 "load3"
4 "load4"
5 "load5"
}
}
 
My mistake, apparently this is also an error, so at least consistent:
- <kuid2:756113:16001376:2> : Queue 'load0' specifies itself as a conflict at index 0
 
@Forester1 I think this was a warning before and now it's an error. The "rules" haven't changed, so to speak, this always happens with the new patches - some warnings become errors in the newer versions of the game.
 
Thanks, RBrooks. I suppose there is some reasoning behind it that they do not explain. Myself I wish they would start going the other direction and turn some of these errors back to warnings. If things were working well before, why break stuff seemingly arbitrarily.
 
Thanks, RBrooks. I suppose there is some reasoning behind it that they do not explain. Myself I wish they would start going the other direction and turn some of these errors back to warnings. If things were working well before, why break stuff seemingly arbitrarily.
The reasoning is there's less ignoring so the asset will load faster. It makes sense but... Why didn't they tell the users that there are going to be changes? This error is going to confuse the non-techy Trainzers and further chase them away from using it.
 
Thank you for the explanation, John. I agree, and it also doesn't give the creators an opportunity to update their assets, but leaves us all as end users to figure out how to fix things individually. I have the ones I have come across fixed now, but I am sure there will be a lot of other folks fixing the same assets around the world.
 
Odd way to manage - let customers, one-by-one, fix the problems. And, as said, Hundreds of CUSTOMERS are being forced to fix errors that the vendor could fix in one go.
Lack of mature management.
 
Back
Top