A Couple Of "Next"/TRS2018 Questions

V

Vern

Trainz Maverick
As we don't yet have a dedicated forum for the forthcoming new iteration of Trainz, thought I would pose a couple of questions to N3V as to whether certain features have or are likely to make it in, this time round?

1. Support for diamond crossings, i.e. the signaling logic will recognize these and protect the leg with a train routed through it, with correct signal placement. Applicable to both standard and procedural track types. This is a long standing omission from the Trainz track and signaling system - diamond crossings have been about since the year dot on the railway, whether as flat crossings between two separate lines or as part of a junction complex. It is high time these were supported without the need to resort to ATLS or similar complex scripting.

2. Support for different braking systems, i.e. vacuum and air brake and in the case of air brakes modern stepped or Westinghouse style braking, not just set and lap. The current system in Trainz is a hangover from the early days and at this point the programme should support all braking types.

3. Ability to work under the terrain. Essential for working on subway routes or where you have tunnels under high mountains.

4. Better more precise digholes for tunnel placement, so these can be confined or sized to just the portal itself.

5. An option to have the AI find the route for a player train to its destination rather than perpetuating the system of setting the route yourself, from the Trainz CE tail chaser days.

If just one of these items could or has been addressed it would provide considerable more incentive to make "Next" a Day 1 purchase, than a bit of hairy grass!
 
Short answer, aren’t you leaving out one or two thousand other Wishlist items?

Or to put it another way, if these items were included, would it prevent many other similar wish lists from being posted?

There are many items we’d love to work on but our priority, as per the predominant feedback from our customers, has been to ensure that existing systems operate correctly first.

I’d love to expand on this answer but don’t have the time right now. Perhaps if we could charge model railroad pricing rather than mass market game pricing we could deliver everything our customers would like to see.
 
No I'm listing a handful of other items which the other sims, including one that dates from 2001, include as standard.

So basically, short answer seems to be "Next" will be another set of new clothes for the emperor... :)

Understood.
 
Diamond crossings can be set up with the interlocking tower to stop trains going through each other.
Wire view allows for working under the terrain and placement of tunnels and trackside assets like signals with ease.
Dig holes can only be a minimum of 1 square which are available on the DLS.
 
stagecoach said:
Diamond crossings can be set up with the interlocking tower to stop trains going through each other.
Wire view allows for working under the terrain and placement of tunnels and trackside assets like signals with ease.
Dig holes can only be a minimum of 1 square which are available on the DLS.
Click to expand...

1. But shouldn't they just work by default, as in the other sims?

2. You can go into wireframe mode yes, but not under the surface skin. Try fettling a tunnel spline or matching the wall piece when the track is 500m below the surface.

3. So the programmer needs to look at how this can be evolved into a better system.

Oh and as regards money. If Trainz started selling at model railway price levels it wouldn't have that many takers. 3DTS have managed to develop Run 8 (albeit no route editor yet) on a limited budget and the new Diesel Railcar Simulator by Oskari was developed at the hobby level but in terms of driving, the experience exceeds that offered by Trainz.

Look I'm sorry if people regard this as a wishlist but Trainz needs to evolve if it wants to compete with the next generation sims and fluffy grass does not address core simulation aspects which have been sidestepped or ignored for the last 15 years.

Let's hear solutions, not that it can't be done.
 
Vern said:
....

Look I'm sorry if people regard this as a wishlist but Trainz needs to evolve if it wants to compete with the next generation sims and fluffy grass does not address core simulation aspects which have been sidestepped or ignored for the last 15 years.

Let's hear solutions, not that it can't be done.
Click to expand...

Here's one. There are content creators making stuff for Trainz Next/TRS19 that are not "fluffy grass".
 
stagecoach said:
Diamond crossings can be set up with the interlocking tower to stop trains going through each other.
Wire view allows for working under the terrain and placement of tunnels and trackside assets like signals with ease.
Dig holes can only be a minimum of 1 square which are available on the DLS.
Click to expand...

To be honest, would be better to have a collision system (no damage, of course) for that
 
Tony_Hilliam said:
Short answer, aren’t you leaving out one or two thousand other Wishlist items?... Perhaps if we could charge model railroad pricing rather than mass market game pricing we could deliver everything our customers would like to see.
Click to expand...
Thousands of people have provided free content. Hundreds of these people have developed advanced scripts increasing the functionality of the product.

I'd be willing to bet that some of these people would be glad to offer their services to improve the product itself. I'm not talking about Open Source. One N3V paid professional "coordinator" could be assigned to doling out specific tasks to interested developers.

For example, take the interface for setting up driver commands. Over the past decade, Routes have gotten bigger and Sessions more complex. The Driver Setup interface is, to put it mildly, antiquated.

The coordinator could gather recommendations for improving the interface. He would then put out feelers to qualified people who would be interested in implementing the recommendations. He would then select a person (or persons working as a team) to implement the changes. He would also gather a team to act as Beta testers. Finally, he would be responsible for integrating the updated version into the core product.

I believe that an N3V employee acting as a coordinator with teams of volunteers could accomplish much more than an N3V employee on his own. I also believe there is a pool of "users" who would be willing to contribute their time and skills to this.
 
Vern said:
As we don't yet have a dedicated forum for the forthcoming new iteration of Trainz, thought I would pose a couple of questions to N3V as to whether certain features have or are likely to make it in, this time round?

1. Support for diamond crossings, i.e. the signaling logic will recognize these and protect the leg with a train routed through it, with correct signal placement. Applicable to both standard and procedural track types. This is a long standing omission from the Trainz track and signaling system - diamond crossings have been about since the year dot on the railway, whether as flat crossings between two separate lines or as part of a junction complex. It is high time these were supported without the need to resort to ATLS or similar complex scripting.

2. Support for different braking systems, i.e. vacuum and air brake and in the case of air brakes modern stepped or Westinghouse style braking, not just set and lap. The current system in Trainz is a hangover from the early days and at this point the programme should support all braking types.

3. Ability to work under the terrain. Essential for working on subway routes or where you have tunnels under high mountains.

4. Better more precise digholes for tunnel placement, so these can be confined or sized to just the portal itself.

5. An option to have the AI find the route for a player train to its destination rather than perpetuating the system of setting the route yourself, from the Trainz CE tail chaser days.

If just one of these items could or has been addressed it would provide considerable more incentive to make "Next" a Day 1 purchase, than a bit of hairy grass!
Click to expand...

I agree. And to convince N3V, voting with the wallet is the only option.
 
Vern said:
1. But shouldn't they just work by default, as in the other sims?

2. You can go into wireframe mode yes, but not under the surface skin. Try fettling a tunnel spline or matching the wall piece when the track is 500m below the surface.

3. So the programmer needs to look at how this can be evolved into a better system.

Oh and as regards money. If Trainz started selling at model railway price levels it wouldn't have that many takers. 3DTS have managed to develop Run 8 (albeit no route editor yet) on a limited budget and the new Diesel Railcar Simulator by Oskari was developed at the hobby level but in terms of driving, the experience exceeds that offered by Trainz.

Look I'm sorry if people regard this as a wishlist but Trainz needs to evolve if it wants to compete with the next generation sims and fluffy grass does not address core simulation aspects which have been sidestepped or ignored for the last 15 years.

Let's hear solutions, not that it can't be done.
Click to expand...

Great! This what I have been longing for quite some time: Be able to work on tracks 500 mts way down. Be serious, I have made underground stations and all quite deep, with points, moving people and much more using intuition and imagination. N3V limited resources should be used more effectively to resolve current bugs, not on matters that most people don't need that often.
 
Be serious, I have made underground stations and all quite deep, with points
Click to expand...

I am serious... I am so joyous that you have no issues but it does not mean it is something that shouldn't be addressed. I have started and abandoned several projects largely because it becomes impossible to deal with tunnel sections and joins far beneath the ground. The only solution is to flatten the terrain which might be fine for a subway or transit route where the surface won't be visible and you can just patch it, but not in the mountains where there is no means of restoring the DEM data without overwriting the whole route back to the start.

In TS2018 you can dive under the terrain surface as you can in old MSTS. In TS2018 with the built in DEM importer you can also use the alt method and re-apply the terrain over the section afterwards. MSTS also allows you to undo one terrain operation so again you can flatten the terrain to attach the next tunnel section and hit ¬ to put the terrain back.

One thing I want to see come back are actual wrecks, and changing the switches when a train is on one
Click to expand...

That is just stupid and juvenile. Please go away if you have nothing useful to contribute to a thread discussing whether N3V have managed to introduce some features of interest to those of us wanting to make a positive contribution to the sim/hobby.
 
Last edited:
Vern crashing digital Trains might have a place but not in Trainz. I am thinking when they test cars and ram them into a solid to test the strength of materials or damage to dummies re. seat belts etc. Perhaps some cars allow the front to crumple to absorb the shock.
Do they have a test system for train carriages and the stresses they can stand...perhaps digital testing which might save more lives in the long run?..but certainly NOT for entertainment.

Barry.
 
Last edited:
Vern said:
That is just stupid and juvenile. Please go away if you have nothing useful to contribute to a thread discussing whether N3V have managed to introduce some features of interest to those of us wanting to make a positive contribution to the sim/hobby.
Click to expand...


In the words of Nick-Le: I'M HIGHLY OFFENDED!!
 
It would be great to see some features like if there so much coaches for a loc then the couplers can break or we can have procedural tracks in 3 way-switch
 
With Trainz 2018/NEXT/????? due out sometime this year I would have thought that this might just be just a "bit too late" in the development process to be throwing significant changes (if those features are not already present) into the works.

I must also state that none of the items in the original posters list would be on my short list of new features that I would like to see in the next version of Trainz. My number one item would be to get the current features working correctly to everyone's satisfaction, and given the diversity of views frequently expressed in these forums, that would be a mighty effort in itself.
 
pware said:
With Trainz 2018/NEXT/????? due out sometime this year I would have thought that this might just be just a "bit too late" in the development process to be throwing significant changes (if those features are not already present) into the works.

I must also state that none of the items in the original posters list would be on my short list of new features that I would like to see in the next version of Trainz. My number one item would be to get the current features working correctly to everyone's satisfaction, and given the diversity of views frequently expressed in these forums, that would be a mighty effort in itself.
Click to expand...

Well I understand that, but not that guy being a jerk to me just for suggesting bringing some back that TANE bugged with
 
Prior to TANE we did have a vote for features. Unfortunately, I didn't keep a copy of the results.

Perhaps the only item on Vern's wishlist should be an on-line feature feature request system that registered Trainz users can vote on.
 
For goodness sake, this was not posted as a wishlist. It was direct questions asking whether key components of a train sim might have been added. Seems given the responses from N3V and others the answer is a resounding "No".
 
Vern said:
For goodness sake, this was not posted as a wishlist. It was direct questions asking whether key components of a train sim might have been added. Seems given the responses from N3V and others the answer is a resounding "No".
Click to expand...

Looked like a wish list to me. But if my attempt to help was offensive, then I'll leave you to winge and moan by yourself. I'd rather get on and do more practical things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
EURSIG - Set Up, Switch On, Depart - a new backend for European signals - German and general broken scripts European signal replacement project
Replies
3
Views
472
ricomon35
R
B
Confusing Reporting - Dead End
Replies
1
Views
206
JCitron
J
V
Couple of Q's on camera placement
Replies
1
Views
196
FootplatePhil
F
D
Assets are hidden in Surveyor & Driver After moving a Route & Session from TANE to TRS 19
Replies
6
Views
195
ricomon35
R
P
Clutter Questions
Replies
7
Views
477
MasterTracklayer
M
Back
Top