Smaller/Simpler Railroads are more Fun?

[Sampug394]

IDK, this is mainly to throw out to Anybody. I personally believe that Small, 1-2 Purpose Railroads, (Steam Powered Usually), that are Short, but Long enough to get a Decent run in, are More fun that Absurdly Long Routes.

Plus, there were a plethora of Small Railroads in the USA, and they were always interesting in their way of Operations.

It doesn't matter if it's Narrow Gauge or Standard, Uses geared steam or Rod Lokies, or is a Switching line or a Logger; If it's Small and well Detailed, It's definitely got more Play Value than getting Lost in a Massive, Lonely Mainline Map...

 

[davesnow]

I have created both very long routes, and small routes. I get equal enjoyment from both. I run only modern diesels, though, on standard gauge. I'm not sure about the fascination with steam. If you like that, more power to you. I just don't like riding through my routes in a steam cab.

I have designed very long, hilly & mountainous routes, broken by the occasional stretch of farmland. It takes five to eight hours just to make the complete loop around these type routes.

I have also created several Island routes, with the "whole world" if you will, designed all around the islands. These Islands are connected by bridges, with industries located here and there along the routes--- some nestled deep within one of the larger islands. It takes roughly 1-3 hours to loop the island routes.

As I said, I get equal enjoyment from both my long and shorter routes. I imagine some people only like very long routes, while others like only short ones. It's just whatever one enjoys the best.

 

[JIb228]

I have found that both long and short routes are fun. I like the long routes for more serious work, and like shorter routes for just messing around. I tend to build little 2-3 base bored routes just to mess around on.

 

[Vern]

As a virtual driver I prefer the longer routes, but as a route builder I find it increasingly hard to retain the motivation to build other than short routes. My latest 120 mile epic has stalled after the track placement stage, the thought of having to manually place objects and texture all that baseboard - even though Surveyor is the most efficient of the "big three" at doing so - gives me the heebie jeebies.

 

[angelah]

Like Vern

An interesting thread, and like Vern I also get bored creating long routes, especially housing which drives me nuts. The main problem is keeping interest because the end of the route never seems to get any nearer, or only very slowly.
And likewise a ficticious long route takes a lot of concentration and inspiration, like even the moderate one I am working on now.
I find that having a couple of routes 'on the go' means I can swap between them, so when I lose interest in one, do some work on another, get fed up with that so go back to the original. They do say that choice is the spice of life.
I have done Paddington to Reading which is fairly long and for the most part on a DEM and in between made several shorter routes. Now I am working on two larger ones at once, Reading to Westbusry (all DEM, thanks John for the maps) to carry on from the Paddington section, and Overhills and Faraway and as that same suggests, it's a moderate route with a variety of landscapes and scenery.
But that kind of route continually needs inventiveness and inspiration where a DEM needs detrmination and staying power because by using Google Earth or a similar 'look at the area' tool you only need to place things and texture. I say only, of course you need to troll through miles off assets to find a near match to what you're seeing and get everything to fit in, not always so easy.

But it keeps me busy and I need that, so bully for Trainz no matter what you are doing, be it small medium, large, prototypical or ficticious - or even hare-brained!

Bless all Trainzers,

Angela

 

[nicky9499]

I feel, that a good way to keep interest in a (freelanced) layout is to build it in stages. Perhaps now that stage one is complete you can run it satisfactorily and continue to lengthen it when you've got fresh inspiration.

Cheerio,
Nicholas.

 

[angelah]

Another way

I feel, that a good way to keep interest in a (freelanced) layout is to build it in stages. Perhaps now that stage one is complete you can run it satisfactorily and continue to lengthen it when you've got fresh inspiration.

Cheerio,
Nicholas.

Another way is to work on different parts of the route. When you get 'builders block' go somewhere else and do a bit there etc.

And look on Google Earth for inspiration too, that can help a lot. What does a real dockyard look like? Go see. You can do that with many thinkgs.

Angela

 

[Yoshi112]

Smaller railroads typically takes less time to make. I'm currently trying to create a route myself (most likely a small tram line that loops around a fictional town).

 

[cascaderailroad]

Ahhhh Simplicity

I'm trying to re-create Altoona's Trolley System. It was pretty huge, and it is a monumental chore ! I have a book on the system, hundereds of oldtime photo's.

 

[Approach_Medium]

I have a thing for long mainline routes. My first creation was [is] the CSX River Line from Jersey City, NJ to Selkirk (Albany) NY. I threw in the Oak Island yards in Newark, Kearny yard, and the National Docs secondary track so that I have a source for traffic on the main line.
I used Transdem to create the terrain and place track and roads. I used Google Earth and MS Live (Bing) to locate the track, even switches and sidings were visible.
The total length of the route is about 150 miles.

I have been working on detail in and around the areas I am most familiar with, and do have to admit that it gets tiring sometimes. My least favorite phase is placing buildings. Since this is a prototypical route, I was originally very stubborn about deviating from the real thing.
But it is impossible to find buildings on DLS or 3rd party sites for everything along this route. Seems that there is not an abundance of USA type buildings in Trainz.

I have decided that I will allow myself to deviate from the prototype route for buildings and ground textures, since I find it more fun and relaxing to go "free" on these things.
For track though, I have not deviated much. I re-created the entire Selkirk yard (it's the largest in the Northeast US) using sat maps (GE & Bing), and track maps.
At one point, this route also included NJT's Hoboken lines. I had the entire Hoboken yard laid out using sat maps and track maps.
Later, I decided that the route was too large, and I cut the NJT portions, except where they cross or interchange with CSX, NS, or Conrail.

When I get bored with building, I run my trainz. I have signals installed on a 30 mile stretch of the route, and spent some time working with the scripts to create more prototypical operation, then inspired the creator of the assets to modify his script himself. The result is a very prototypical signal system.

Recently, I became a bit bored with this long mainline railroad. The problem is that there aren't enough industries or branch lines to keep things interesting.
I could of course add my own, but I really want to keep it prototypical.
So I started a second "near" prototype route. This route is the line from Allentown to Scranton PA, which includes the famous Lehigh Gorge. I have included the branch lines to Hazleton, the one to Tamaqua, and several others along the route.
I used Transdem again to create terrain, track, road, and water splines.
For this route, I have decided that it will be a "quasi-prototype" route. The main line track will be correct, as will placement of tunnels, major branch lines and industry, etc.
But I will decide where to place passing tracks, and will place most of my own industries. I will also go free in texturing and placing buildings.

I think this latest route gives me the best of both worlds. While I have no intention of abandoning my first route, which I have been working on for more than a year, it is nice to have a variety of routes in the building and running stages to keep me interested as my moods change.

I find that at night, when I'm winding down towards bedtime, I like to do track laying and texturing, but never buildings. Honestly, if I could get away with it, I would create a route with no buildings at all! Problem is that I wouldn't have any reason for the railroad to exist<g>.

As for small routes, I do not enjoy them. I have always been more interested in activities that progress over a longer period of time than those that are completed in a short period.
I do have to agree though, that a highly detailed small route would be very interesting to look at. I have looked at some of the routes supplied with TS2009, and the Carbon City route I was beta testing a few weeks ago. A lot can be done with a small work area if you follow a plan before you start.
But, my brain is "wired" in such a way that I have always enjoyed longer, and often slower activities over fast and short ones.

The major drawback for large routes is that they are usually too large to fit in DLS.
I had planned to create a route for DLS, but both my CSX and the Allentown-Scranton route are far too large for DLS. I plan to make these routes available for DL on a future website I am planning.

FW

 

[jrfolco]

The major drawback for large routes is that they are usually too large to fit in DLS.
I had planned to create a route for DLS, but both my CSX and the Allentown-Scranton route are far too large for DLS. I plan to make these routes available for DL on a future website I am planning.

FW

Trainz Pro Routes will accept very large routes for their download station, but you need to contact them first. I'm not sure of the of the maximum size file they will accept before permission is required.

I contacted them before I uploaded the Cumberland to Connellsville route which is 60 MB in size, and there was no problem getting permission.

Joe

 

[Approach_Medium]

Trainz Pro Routes will accept very large routes for their download station, but you need to contact them first. I'm not sure of the of the maximum size file they will accept before permission is required.

I contacted them before I uploaded the Cumberland to Connellsville route which is 60 MB in size, and there was no problem getting permission.

Joe

Thanks. I'll check them out. Not yet ready to upload my routes, but I have bookmarked the site.

FW

 

[cascaderailroad]

60 mb ?

I think I'm really going to have problems uploading, mine is 567 mb and 10,000+ baseboards and growing lol

 

[Approach_Medium]

I think I'm really going to have problems uploading, mine is 567 mb and 10,000+ baseboards and growing lol

You're joking, right?
10,000 bbds? Can TS handle that large a layout?
I can't imaging how long it would take to save/load such a route, unless you're running a "super computer".

My CSX layout had over 4,000 at one point, but it was taking so long to save it, I had to cut it way back. It had been over 300MB, but now it's down to 112MB.

FW

 

[cascaderailroad]

When it loads it takes @ 3 minutes to build all the baseboards from one end to the other end.

It presently runs on a 1 gb laptop, that has a basic video card.

When saving sessions it takes @ 4 min to take the (thinking) hourglass to disappear.

I continually back my route up as CDP, on a RW-DVD just in case.

And I plan eliminate un-needed baseboards, and to break up the route into at least 2, or as many as 7 separate routes (something I hate to do).

 

[NIARTcar]

It's like this thread is asking for me to post!

Personally, I enjoy smaller routes which I can place more detail into... One such example being my Disneyland route(which im sure everyone here is tired of hearing about). It's only about six baseboards large (2x3) with most of the space not pertaining to the visable route.....but it has a massive amount of detail and is always a pleasure to run or just explore.

 

[Approach_Medium]

When it loads it takes @ 3 minutes to build all the baseboards from one end to the other end.

It presently runs on a 1 gb laptop, that has a basic video card.

When saving sessions it takes @ 4 min to take the (thinking) hourglass to disappear.

I continually back my route up as CDP, on a RW-DVD just in case.

And I plan eliminate un-needed baseboards, and to break up the route into at least 2, or as many as 7 separate routes (something I hate to do).

You're a lot more patient than I am. I couldn't sit there and wait 4 minutes every time I save the route. When I'm building, I usually save about every 10 mins.

Both of my routes were started in Transdem, and there is a limit to the size for importing into TS 2006 or 2009.
I have continued to use 2006 for my Transdem imports because I can get the track splines onto them. That doesn't work for TS2009 because the file structure is different.

I would love to expand my newly created Allentown-Scranton route to Reading, but that's another 60 miles west, and I doubt TS will accept it. I'm probably gonna try though.
A lot of interesting stuff in that area. RBMN, NS, lots of branches and industry.

Perhaps though I will build a small route with lots of detail someday.

FW

 

[Dap]

Operations

I like a route on which prototype operations can be run. It can be small, it can be large, but it can not be a model train layout with trains running in circles. It must have portals and interchanges and industries and every freight car on the route must have a specific destination. Passenger service is optional.

 

[Tokkyu40]

Oddly enough, I do like trains that run in circles, and especially like prototype trains that run in circles.
I have the most fun on small layouts under 10 boards, and love to see what can be done with only one or two boards.
On the other hand, I have done layouts that were 100 boards long and ran high speed super trains.

Claude

 

[obo]

As a user I like short routes because they're more likely to get finished and released.

Also, it can be frustrating when somebody posts a great-looking screenshot of a work in progress only to say "I still have another 100 miles to go!" It would be nice if more people considered building modules: tiny routes usually focused on a single point of interest like a station or an industry.

Lastly, I like the load times on small routes.

That all said, as a user I wouldn't presume to tell route builders what they should do and I'm grateful for whatever gets released, be it big or small, steam or diesel, freight or passenger, whatever. I like them all.

Regards,

Rob.