Sessions Quessions

[nicky9499]

Hello guys,

I'm beginning to get warmed up to using sessions to enhance entertainment value on my routes and would like to clear up some doubts, now that one of them is close to public release. It's not about how to get them working but rather, the sessions as a whole and how they work in relation to a route. This is unrelated to Saved Sessions, which are more like a "snapshot in time" where all changes made to the route are not reflected.

Take for example, we have Route R1 and session S1.
So, I create session S1 for route R1, everything works properly.

What happens if I update R1 to R1.1 by updating the filename instead of saving as a new route and leave S1 as it is? Will there be problems with the distribution?
Next, I make significant extension to R1.1 and it now becomes R2. What happens if one were to take the S1 CDP and try to run it on R2?

Thanks in advance to all who help in clearing up this mild confusion. It'd be terrible if down the road all my past sessions stopped working because I added a lamppost to the route.

Cheerio,
Nicholas

 

[shaneturner12]

Simply updating your route (R1 to R1.1) will not affect S1, as S1 will simply use the :1 version of the KUID.

However, if you use Save As on R1, creating R2, S1 would then need to be updated in Content Manager to point to R2 by manually updating it's config file.

Shane

 

[dnevans8]

In addition to what Shane has said if you have made significant changes to the trackwork in going from R1 to R2 and you change the map reference in S1 to point to R2, you may find that any consists placed near those changes will be derailed or lost off the edge of the route.

 

[nicky9499]

Hi guys, thank for the replies.

The naming convention is to make it easier for users to determine which version of the route they're using. Subsequent revisions may extend the line or make changes, for example. Of course, the existing trackwork will not be touched to preserve routing integrity. Ok, what if I just rename the route R1.2, 1.3 and so on, I can still run and distribute the sessions under it without any problems, yes?

 

[dnevans8]

In the world of Trainz nothing is certain, just look at all the questions raised in different threads that one or two people experience that others never see, so I think the best answer to your question is probably.
I would again add the proviso that it is best not to change or replace a piece of track or industry on which a consist has already been placed as strange things can happen to that consist (you can always go into the session and move the consist before making the changes to the route then move the consist back afterwards).

 

[stagecoach]

It is not always as simple that, sessions can be corrupted if they lose the original map as all names and placement of track objects may get moved. If you intend to update a route I would always do it through edit session and not edit route. Then when you save, the session and route will be linked still. So open S1 and edit the route then save, S1 is still connected to R1. You can name the route in the config file to R1.1 without effecting the session. The session only looks for the kuid of the map.
The second way again open edit S1 alter the route then save as R2, the session will also be saved but will retain S1. This S1 will only be linked to R2, it cant see R1 or R1.1

 

[nicky9499]

Ah, Stagecoach, that was very clear and concise. So what we're doing (in 2nd method) is creating 2 copies of the same session, one for the old route and one the updated route.

 

[stagecoach]

Exactly, The session will only appear next to the route it is attached to, so you cant get the S1 belonging to R1 to show if you Select R2 but it is still in CMP as two sessions with the same name but a different kuid.