View Full Version : Question about procedural track development

July 27th, 2015, 11:50 PM
To answer a question over on the main forum, is the code for procedural track being developed further, to cover things like slips and diamond crossings? If so, are there likely to be any changes to procedural track assets, or are you happy that the range of components in existing assets are sufficiently flexible to cover any future configurations?


July 28th, 2015, 12:05 AM
As with any component of Trainz, procedural junctions will continue to be developed over time. It is not, however, a current area of focus. Aside from minor tweaks to the algorithms, you can expect that the current behaviour and associated requirements will remain the state of the art for a while.


July 28th, 2015, 12:37 AM
This comes as no great surprise but its a very disappointing climb down from your past positions, especially in respect of diamond crossings.

Do you at least intend to finish the current implementation in respect of slide_chairs?

July 28th, 2015, 12:55 AM
I think the above answered that. There's a lot more we can do with it, and we will continue to do so, but it's not our priority right at the moment.


July 28th, 2015, 07:32 AM
I hate to do this to you (because you probably aren't the correct target) but if I may quote from the thread 'Stretch Goals Discussion (http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?107043-Stretch-Goals-Discussion)' which was current during the Kickstarter campaign:

My Question in Post 36: (http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?107043-Stretch-Goals-Discussion&p=1221493#post1221493)

Item A:
Procedural Junctions: Are you thinking about going the whole hog, eliminating mismatched overlapping sleepers and including diamond crossings, crossovers and slips - or just planting a frog and blades?

Your answer in Post 40: (http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?107043-Stretch-Goals-Discussion&p=1221656#post1221656)


You might also find posts #84 (http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?107043-Stretch-Goals-Discussion&p=1223271#post1223271) to #88 in the same thread relevant.

July 28th, 2015, 07:54 AM
Unfortunately, you are correct, quoting that to me doesn't really change anything. You can call it my fault for being overoptimistic about what someone could achieve in the time allowed.


July 28th, 2015, 08:33 AM
You can call it my fault for being overoptimistic about what someone could achieve in the time allowed.

Given the history of these objects during the beta test period, I suspect it might be more appropriate to blame 'someone' for not being very good at achieving it.

July 28th, 2015, 09:28 AM
It was a hard task, it was a new employee, and the environment was changing rapidly. At the end of the day, what was delivered does work. There's no need to make accusations.