Trainz Plus Beta update - PC# 121380 & Mac# 121370
- Thread starter n3v_laurence
- Start date
Yup - the lines appearing on baseboard boundaries are a 'known issue'.
Certainly seen them myself with route conversions in this beta build.
I converted a fairly detailed, but small route of about 50 baseboards that went from 37MB to 185MB ( or roughly 5X size on disk)
Certainly seen them myself with route conversions in this beta build.
I converted a fairly detailed, but small route of about 50 baseboards that went from 37MB to 185MB ( or roughly 5X size on disk)
Last edited:
Thank you for that reassurance. I do like the ability in HD terrain to create very "uneven" and more realistic track beds (as shown in the bottom right of my screenshot).
Shortkey is M (Ctrl+M is for Surveyor).
Of course: left screenshot shows the max possible zoom-in before arrows vanish!
alfredo_20
Active member
ianwoodmore
Active member
Hardware
MiniPC AMD Ryzen 7 4700U
32GB RAM
1TB NVMe
Using HDMI connection to TCL Android TV
Using external LaCIE 10TB HDD via USB Type C gen2
Software
Windows 10 Pro insiders
Trainz+ v121380 ~5TB Userdata already from DLS + DLC + BI + ~62k Packaged assets. Almost all DLS and some packaged have been locally modified while experimenting and developing TARDIS asset auto repair utility.
D/Ld update ~ 15GB over 2.4GHz Wireless Broadband - No problems but speed obviously constrained by internet performance.
After D/L ADBR started.
First ADBR proceeded slowly until reaching "saving dependencies" phase. Killed ADBR ~24hr+.
Rebooted computer and started 2nd ADBR, Successfully completed after ~12hr.
Beta release performed well in Content Manager. All of the many custom filters were still operable. Gut feeling was that performance had improved but not quantified.
Note: I have previously had a problem with edit filter list not displaying fully in CM so can't delete unwanted custom filters. I am able to do so in Surveyor 2.0. This situation persists in the update.
Ques; Is there a limit on # of custom filters that can be managed in CM?
At this point I loaded a randomly selected route in game and poked around.
Frankly with the lightweight hardware I have, I was anticipating sluggish performance that didn't eventuate.
With some trepidation I trialled "update route". Voila! It worked. As reported by others, several texture limitations were notified.
Ques: Do all layers get updated as a group, or do you need to repeat process for each route and session layer?
First impressions - I love it!!!
Sadly, my enjoyment for future updates will be constrained by lack of gutsy GPU in lieu of APU. I can't afford it. In any case I would have to mount it in external case with its own power supply.
Similarly, I live in a rented studio apartment and can't access fibre broadband.
Stuck between rock and hard place as my main PC has died and is too old to update.
Well done N3V so far. Keep it coming.
Maybe further optimisation by N3V will extend my enjoyment.
PS.
My favourite routes:
a. Sirgibby's NZ Murchison series. Hope he completes Murchison 3 for latest updates.
b. Darjeeling Himalaya Railroad. Is anyone able to continue the update that euromodeller was doing?
MiniPC AMD Ryzen 7 4700U
32GB RAM
1TB NVMe
Using HDMI connection to TCL Android TV
Using external LaCIE 10TB HDD via USB Type C gen2
Software
Windows 10 Pro insiders
Trainz+ v121380 ~5TB Userdata already from DLS + DLC + BI + ~62k Packaged assets. Almost all DLS and some packaged have been locally modified while experimenting and developing TARDIS asset auto repair utility.
D/Ld update ~ 15GB over 2.4GHz Wireless Broadband - No problems but speed obviously constrained by internet performance.
After D/L ADBR started.
First ADBR proceeded slowly until reaching "saving dependencies" phase. Killed ADBR ~24hr+.
Rebooted computer and started 2nd ADBR, Successfully completed after ~12hr.
Beta release performed well in Content Manager. All of the many custom filters were still operable. Gut feeling was that performance had improved but not quantified.
Note: I have previously had a problem with edit filter list not displaying fully in CM so can't delete unwanted custom filters. I am able to do so in Surveyor 2.0. This situation persists in the update.
Ques; Is there a limit on # of custom filters that can be managed in CM?
At this point I loaded a randomly selected route in game and poked around.
Frankly with the lightweight hardware I have, I was anticipating sluggish performance that didn't eventuate.
With some trepidation I trialled "update route". Voila! It worked. As reported by others, several texture limitations were notified.
Ques: Do all layers get updated as a group, or do you need to repeat process for each route and session layer?
First impressions - I love it!!!
Sadly, my enjoyment for future updates will be constrained by lack of gutsy GPU in lieu of APU. I can't afford it. In any case I would have to mount it in external case with its own power supply.
Similarly, I live in a rented studio apartment and can't access fibre broadband.
Stuck between rock and hard place as my main PC has died and is too old to update.
Well done N3V so far. Keep it coming.
Maybe further optimisation by N3V will extend my enjoyment.
PS.
My favourite routes:
a. Sirgibby's NZ Murchison series. Hope he completes Murchison 3 for latest updates.
b. Darjeeling Himalaya Railroad. Is anyone able to continue the update that euromodeller was doing?
Last edited:
My understanding is that The Living Railroad is still in the Alpha testing stage and is not in the current Beta. So you cannot, as yet, implement it.
Attention: found out reasons of the malfunction! It was due to the STD Drive rule. Using simply the "Drive" command everything went smooth. Probably some incompatibility within the 131380 and STD Drive rule.
alfredo_20
Active member
Thak you for your answer!
One thing I have noticed in this Beta is that you don't seem to be able to open the menu for certain 'track objects' to set them up. An example is either the Junction controllers or the TRC4 crossing controller to open/close gates. Whether in Classic surveyor or S2.0, the same properties window opens but I can't access the menus that were previously available in Classic surveyor using the '?' to open the menu/properties dialogue box to make necessary changes. Not sure whether this is a bug or meant to be like this!
derhildener
Member
Thanks mate
I have encountered a strange issue sometimes when laying new ground textures close to track and its ballast texture. The ballast textures under the track will raise up and partially cover the track in some places - not evenly but in random heights. Smoothing the ground under the track will not correct the problem. I have the shader quality set to standard. Undoing the last texture "add" will correct the problem with the track and the ballast.
Anyone else seeing this issue?
Anyone else seeing this issue?
Could this simply be the known issue of PBR vs non-PBR textures meeting and "disagreeing"?
Are you using PBR textures next to track that does not use PBR or vice versa?
Just thinking.
Paul_Bert - There is certainly a dimple-effect of low pits and peaks created at the boundary of your ground height paint circle when modifying the new HD terrain using brush sizes greater than 5m.
It occurs at the periphery of the application circle. Most of the time this is unwanted, unnatural-looking and unattractive, so use the Set-Height mode to smooth out such affected terrain.
I consider this to be a bug - and probably a known one - but think we should submit a bug report to N3V anyway to see if they can reduce this unintended 'feature'
If you look at the images supplied by pware and me in this forum thread, you will see evidence of the artifacts so-created even on routes created using exclusively PBR textures.
It would likely be worse when there's a mixture of PBR vs non-PBR textures.
Personally, I prefer to set my Shader Quality to Ultra (in Trainz Settings) and Texture Detail to High - with Shadows set to Ultra - so that I can see the precise effect of any applied parallax effects/ PBR distortions when painted. (I adjust the Scale and Intensity values to give greater precision to the desired '3D effects' of PBR ground texture application).
That way I get what I want - and not some spoofed view of the PBR ground textures that occurs when the Shader Quality is set to Standard or Low.
The dimple effect I mentioned above is certainly highlighted/ exacerbated by your Shadows settings when set to Ultra, so more easily detected and subsequently resolved.
Here's a recent example: I selected the side road for editing and chose the 'Smooth ground under selected' option. After application, the dimples in the gravel shown below appeared in my rail yard. (All are PBR textures, though the road spline itself is not...)
The radius of the unwanted effect probably mirrors the radius currently set for modifying the terrain - so can be mitigated somewhat by carefully setting that value.
It occurs at the periphery of the application circle. Most of the time this is unwanted, unnatural-looking and unattractive, so use the Set-Height mode to smooth out such affected terrain.
I consider this to be a bug - and probably a known one - but think we should submit a bug report to N3V anyway to see if they can reduce this unintended 'feature'
If you look at the images supplied by pware and me in this forum thread, you will see evidence of the artifacts so-created even on routes created using exclusively PBR textures.
It would likely be worse when there's a mixture of PBR vs non-PBR textures.
Personally, I prefer to set my Shader Quality to Ultra (in Trainz Settings) and Texture Detail to High - with Shadows set to Ultra - so that I can see the precise effect of any applied parallax effects/ PBR distortions when painted. (I adjust the Scale and Intensity values to give greater precision to the desired '3D effects' of PBR ground texture application).
That way I get what I want - and not some spoofed view of the PBR ground textures that occurs when the Shader Quality is set to Standard or Low.
The dimple effect I mentioned above is certainly highlighted/ exacerbated by your Shadows settings when set to Ultra, so more easily detected and subsequently resolved.
Here's a recent example: I selected the side road for editing and chose the 'Smooth ground under selected' option. After application, the dimples in the gravel shown below appeared in my rail yard. (All are PBR textures, though the road spline itself is not...)
The radius of the unwanted effect probably mirrors the radius currently set for modifying the terrain - so can be mitigated somewhat by carefully setting that value.
Last edited:
Post 74 by PC_Ace showing the dimple effect is exactly what I am seeing, only in my case track is on top of the ground covered by the dimples. So some of the dimples actually cover some of the track.
As far as I know all my textures around the track are all PBR textures. I use many of the textures created by JohnnyC1.
As far as I know all my textures around the track are all PBR textures. I use many of the textures created by JohnnyC1.
In my route that I converted to HD I have seen a few examples as shown in the screenshot, but nowhere near as severe. In all cases (so far) it is under or next to track. It is an older route with no PBR textures. I have (so far) successfully used the Brush Set Height tool with a small radius (about 5m) to resolve all cases.
In my case the Brush Height Tool did not fix the problem.
Tony_Hilliam
Trainz Plus - enjoy Trainz from just 20 cents a da
There's an issue with smaller brush sizes creating unwanted deformations. You may find that a large brush size and 1% sensitivity over the affected area is enough to "reset" the data. I wouldn't be too concerned about tidying things up at this stage as it's likely the bug fix will resolve smoothing out these areas automatically.
We're also looking into issues with certain textures creating larger than desired displacements.
We're also looking into issues with certain textures creating larger than desired displacements.
Thanks for the confirmation, Tony, though I've found that larger brush sizes (say 20m) will still create lines of unwanted deformations at the periphery of the brush application zone/ circle in the direction that they are applied.
It is indeed easy to fix afterwards with judicious Set Height painting... but it is not always easy to spot if you're working on multiple adjacent areas.
It is indeed easy to fix afterwards with judicious Set Height painting... but it is not always easy to spot if you're working on multiple adjacent areas.
I have the new build installed on two computers: one is nearly top of the line, and the other is about 4 years old.
Both computers run a route I converted to HD very smoothly. I see no difference between the two running the HD version and the non-converted version.
Where I do see a big difference however is when I paint textures. The brush strokes on the newer computer are very smooth, however on the older computer the brush strokes are jerky. When the final release is out will this remain the same or will the final release have some further optimization to smooth out the brush strokes?
Both computers run a route I converted to HD very smoothly. I see no difference between the two running the HD version and the non-converted version.
Where I do see a big difference however is when I paint textures. The brush strokes on the newer computer are very smooth, however on the older computer the brush strokes are jerky. When the final release is out will this remain the same or will the final release have some further optimization to smooth out the brush strokes?
Similar threads
- Locked