Scenarios vs. Sessions... and more

[treblesum81]

Hi All,

I've been steadily trying to build up my collection of assets to "play" with and I've run into some confusion when dealing with Scenarios and Sessions. First of all, whats the difference? I've tried both, and from those that I've tried at least, they are just about interchangeable. I originally thought that one might pertain to actually driving the trains whereas the other might relate more to controlling / conducting them.. an impression that I arrived at after about 9 out of 10 "sessions" failed to produce a drivable train, leaving me to just watch the AI drive around. Seeing as how "scenarios" seem to be about the same 9 out of 10 ratio, I'm really trying to figure out a) What the difference is between sessions and scenarios, and b) What should I look for as an indication of a session or scenario where the primary purpose is to give me something to drive?

While I may at some point want to start enjoying Trainz 2009 from the viewpoint of the conductor / controller, at this point I came to trainz because I got tired of that perspective in RT3 and SMRR, both of which offer plenty of activity on that level. So, hopefully you can see where I'm coming from when I say I'm looking for something a little more 1st person.

Thanks,
Greg

 

[wmmeyer]

Greg,

The difference between sessions and scenarios is subtle from the user's point of view. The main difference is how they come to be. Scenarios are scripted, using software outside of Trainz. TPR (Trainz Pro Routes) developed a nifty scripting interface program called SCS (Scenario Creation System) for 2004, and then again in 2006. To make a long story short, the newer version of Trainz made the scenario scripting more difficult and scenarios kinda fell by the wayside. Most of the scenarios available are left-over from either '04 or '06. Some will work in '09, others won't. Some would work OK, but use rolling stock that is incompatible with '09. Unfortunately, with a scripted scenario, changing rolling stock (or anything else) is not possible without revising the script.

Sessions can do almost the same thing as scenarios, completley using tools and rules within Trainz/Surveyor. There is a mind-boggling assortment of rules and driver's commands available. A very simple example of a session is putting a train on a route, and assigning the driver some instructions to go to a certain industry, load, go to another industry and unload. A vast amount of complexity can be attained by using Triggers, wait-for commands, multiple trains, etc. You can gain some insight into session-building by DLing some routes and sessions from the DLS, opening the sessions in Surveyor, and examining how the author set the session up. Philskene's "Industrail", and "PortOgden&Northern" would both be good for this, as he has created many sessions. PO&N is interesting because there are a LOT of sessions to choose from. It will show some errors and faulty content, but it will work in '09. The trick is selecting a session that uses no faulty rolling stock, which won't show up in '09. Try a few of his sessions, and see if they give you the driving experience you're looking for. Probably the easiest way to get into session-building is to take someone else's session and modifying it for your own use, and learning as you go.

 

[treblesum81]

PO&N is actually where I spend most of my time at the moment, as Philskene has produced a lot of interesting content for the layout. In fact, if you know of other, similar sessions I'd love to be pointed in their direction, as they are exactly what I've been looking for, only longer...

Is there any way to tell whether a scenario is "driver-centric" like Philskene's as opposed to "AI-centric" as many others are, short of d/l'ing and trying them out I mean?

Thanks,
Greg

 

[R707]

PO&N is actually where I spend most of my time at the moment, as Philskene has produced a lot of interesting content for the layout. In fact, if you know of other, similar sessions I'd love to be pointed in their direction, as they are exactly what I've been looking for, only longer...

Is there any way to tell whether a scenario is "driver-centric" like Philskene's as opposed to "AI-centric" as many others are, short of d/l'ing and trying them out I mean?

Thanks,
Greg

Hi Greg,

I agree, Phil Skene made a very good route with his PO&N. I have spent a couple of months configuring all the industries, and adding rolling stock to compliment the route.

There were some errors, but I have fixed most. The others need the help of the creator.

It's a great route, for either long haul driving, or just switching cars ready for mainline trains.

Phil has blended together components of what I think a lot of people are looking for in a route.

I feel this route would be a prime candidate for a multi-player session.

Pete :wave:

 

[R701Rusty]

PO&N is actually where I spend most of my time at the moment, as Philskene has produced a lot of interesting content for the layout. In fact, if you know of other, similar sessions I'd love to be pointed in their direction, as they are exactly what I've been looking for, only longer...

Is there any way to tell whether a scenario is "driver-centric" like Philskene's as opposed to "AI-centric" as many others are, short of d/l'ing and trying them out I mean?

Thanks,
Greg

Hi Greg,
As far as I can tell there is no way of telling whether a scenario will be "driver-centric" or "AI-centric" until you actually activate them. However I stand to be corrected if wrong.
Personally, I get a lot of satisfaction when a session I have built up begins to work to my requirements. Most of my sessions are "Work in Progress" as I will usually make additions to each one after using them for a while! I suggest you give it a go, it adds another dimension to Trainz.

Cheers
Russell.

 

[mikeaust]

Hi Greg
If you want to try some good scenarios in either TRS2004 or Trs2006 then take a look at the Razorbackrailway.com site. you drive the train in these and interact with AI trains.

Mike

 

[john259]

The difference between sessions and scenarios is subtle from the user's point of view.

It's probably even more subtle from the programmer's point of view, as they both use the same programming language and it's possible to make a session look very similar to a scenario (as we do with our activities for TRS2006).

Scenarios are scripted, using software outside of Trainz.

The only additional software you have to use for manual scenario creation is a text editor such as Notepad. SCS is superb but an optional alternative method.

If anyone's interested, I've created a TRS2004 scenario creation tutorial.

John

 

[jimisham]

Hi Greg
If you want to try some good scenarios in either TRS2004 or Trs2006 then take a look at the Razorbackrailway.com site. you drive the train in these and interact with AI trains.

Mike

I agree.
http://razorbackrailway.com/forums/index.php?autocom=downloads

 

[john259]

Please don't go straight to our downloads if you're a new RBR user. You need to register (free) and download a set of essential files before our activities will work. The Getting Started section of our FAQ explains the procedure (or tries to )

John

 

[treblesum81]

As much as $15 a year is a good deal, I've reached my spending cap for this program after buying the game plus a download ticket. Honestly, I really tend to shy away from payware / pay-to-play sites for programs that weren't MMORPGs to begin with, which is part of the reason I chose to buy Trainz in the end... the large selection of community downloads available. As I've said before, I come from a Flight Sim background and find such things rather important.

I've started to notice, though, that a most of what people consider to be worthwhile downloads containing the features I want are all payware in some way (Murchison, RBR now), which makes me wonder why the download station is advertised as a great selling point for TRS2009... Even TRS2004 seems to have more available offsite than on...

 

[john259]

As much as $15 a year is a good deal, I've reached my spending cap for this program

Fair enough, not a problem. Our layouts, essential assets, asset management utilities, rolling stock asset paks and quite a few of our activities are completely free and we invite you to try them with absolutely no obligation. Subscription is an optional extra for those people who decide that they want more activities.

We wish we could offer everything free of charge but unfortunately we have to have some form of income to pay our web site hosting fees and our software licence and support costs.

John

 

[wmmeyer]

PO&N is actually where I spend most of my time at the moment, as Philskene has produced a lot of interesting content for the layout. In fact, if you know of other, similar sessions I'd love to be pointed in their direction, as they are exactly what I've been looking for, only longer...

Is there any way to tell whether a scenario is "driver-centric" like Philskene's as opposed to "AI-centric" as many others are, short of d/l'ing and trying them out I mean?

Thanks,
Greg

Greg,

Knowing this, I think where you're headed is putting together your own sessions. One of the activities I enjoy is starting with one of the "longer" routes, such as: Montana Rail Link, Canada Impressions, Cumberland to Connelsville, Alberta Run, Tehachipi, Manatee 7, anything NorthAmerican and long. Open the route in Surveyor, and go thru and quickly and randomly spot tons of rolling stock on all the sidings. Place a loco at one end and save to Driver. Then just go down the line and pick up all the rolling stock you come to. Some of the places becomes a challange to hook on and get it out on the mainline.

If you copy Philskene's use of portals to randomly emit AI trainz to run against, it makes it more interesting. I also saw a post just yesterday about a revision to the "Emit Train Now" rule, which will allow you to shoot a train of your chosing from any portal on your route, at any time. (Its prefectly acceptable to add portals where ever you like on someone else's route, for your own use.)

I've found that tinkering around on a route this way sometimes inspires me to set up a more elaborate game plan. For example, using switcher engines to load cars at the lumber mill and spotting them on a siding, to await the Mainline train to pick them up. The sky's the limit on what you can do.

 

[MountE]

Just wanted to add that the feature that makes Trainz a better choice than MS trains is that sessions are easy to set up. Workorders or session in MS are very difficult to do. In Trainz you place some car and an engine and your set to go. I like to build a consist and put some random cars out at industries and just swap them out. Adding AI is easy just place them on route and give then some comands.

Remember that with Phil's session if your computer takes a hit you can always go into portal control and increase the time between the emits.

Another thing if you have trouble running large routes just imagine several smaller route as being connected and run from one end to the other with a consist and place it in the next route and continue on. You could go on forever.

Rob

 

[treblesum81]

I've actually just had an idea about this... I want to try to merge all of my routes together into one massive conglomerate... a sort of pangea if you will... since my computer doesn't seem to have any troubles running large routes.

Is this possible? I know I'd have to go in and make some connections manually, but aside from that, what other issues might arise? Also, is it possible to merge two (or more) routes without losing the originals?

Thanks,
Greg

 

[mikeaust]

I've actually just had an idea about this... I want to try to merge all of my routes together into one massive conglomerate... a sort of pangea if you will... since my computer doesn't seem to have any troubles running large routes.

Is this possible? I know I'd have to go in and make some connections manually, but aside from that, what other issues might arise? Also, is it possible to merge two (or more) routes without losing the originals?

Thanks,
Greg

Hi Greg,
the idea to merge your routes is a good one. I have done this with a number of large routes.

The biggest problem you face is that each route you add will have most of the industry tracks disconnected(usually on one end). You have to go through and check. I find the best way is to put a loco on the track and let it cruise around with the "drive to" or "drive" instructions. The AI driver will stop before the offending break. You can see some of the breaks clearly but some you wont find until a train goes over it.

The other thing to check before merging is that the height of the maps (you can do this with the "get vertex height" tool in the track editing section of Surveyor). Sometimes you need to add some baseboards first to get from one to another, otherwise your train might have a cliff wall to climb.

All you need to do to save them is to save the first one under a new name before you start merging, then save under that name as you add more.

The other suggestion I would make is that you run some rolling stock on the combined route as you add each one so that you dont end up overloading your computer. It is a real pain if you have to try to remove a large layout one board at a time.

A couple of suggestions for long routes :
RBR Classic 6.2 that has the ability to run AI trains as well as user trains. The map is free but you have to register to download(free as well).
Urban Industrail 8a is a fairly long track with heaps of industries for shunting etc.
Another layout that gives a good long run is Austral Bay 5a. This is similar to PO&N but has the connections for Urban Industrail 8a already in place. It has 2 other layouts already merged, Beside the River and Mad River.
I merged RBRclassic 6.2 to a short spur line near the Mad River Station, by extending the track past Lewisham Station. You can also add Port Switching yard 1a and Yard Switching Co can be added at connection points already on AB5a

Hope this helps
Cheers Mike

 

[treblesum81]

Thanks for the tips, I've been playing around with some merges and have run into a problem. When I try to merge 2 long routes which are perpendicular (in this case montana rail link and clinch 2), I find that I can't move either one enough to avoid a conflict of tiles. If I try to move the vertical route up or down, it stops after about 15-20 steps and vis versa.

I tried to follo. Transdem guide by keeping them separated by a tile, but I still ran into trouble. It could be because I had already merged po&n before without saving, closing, and reopening a new session, but I'm not sure.

 

[wmmeyer]

When you're merging two routes, and have the mini-map up with both maps, the 2nd one rendered in pink, you can hold down the Ctrl key and use the left-right arrow keys to rotate the pink section. Don't know if that will help with your specific problem. You might also consider adding a short section between the 2 longer sections and put in either a 90 degree or 180 degree bend in the track.

I don't know anything about the ePortals, but it might be that they will do what you want without any merging. If you could drive off the edge of one map and magically appear on the edge of the next map, that would be cool. Maybe someone who knows how ePortals work could jump in here?

Another thing you might want to check out, if you haven't already, are the Canada Impressions routes by neandertal on the DLS. The original Can Imp route and the Summer Lake (I think, or it might be Summer Pass) have the merge points built right into the maps and with a single click of the mouse you can turn two long routes into a huge one.