lovetrainzloathen3v
New member
Where is the merge point with the ECML route proper please.
Looked at both routes a few times but cannot work out where it is.
Looked at both routes a few times but cannot work out where it is.
Edinburgh - Dundee Route Test
- Thread starter Pug
- Start date
lovetrainzloathen3v
New member
Thanks for nothing N3V, found a good merge point south of Edinburgh.
Deleted the necessary boards on both routes (very tedious, needs to be a better way).
Tried to merge the 2 ECML sections and i get told it is not permitted, as one of the routes is payware.
They are both clones of the originals.
So i guess this being able to edit and do as we wish with a cloned copy, is just a fallacy
Deleted the necessary boards on both routes (very tedious, needs to be a better way).
Tried to merge the 2 ECML sections and i get told it is not permitted, as one of the routes is payware.
They are both clones of the originals.
So i guess this being able to edit and do as we wish with a cloned copy, is just a fallacy
Laurinlaki
Script Developer
So I only really had time to look over the route now, and my first impression was... Meh. But its only beta and this has been discussed often enough, I'll forward the issues I encounter the usual way over the bug report forms.
But one thing I wanted to specifically ask about, because I already spotted this on the Niddertalbahn in TRS19 and submitted it in the feedback form, why are you using this desert-like sand texture around the tracks again?
Europe is much more green than that, as you can see on some real life pictures of the Niddertalbahn here http://www.bahn2001.de/nidder/k634-2007/k634-2007b.htm we mostly have green grass around the tracks on the route sections (and some muddy/grassy/ballst mix in yard areas).
I imagine a simmilar style in Scotland as well and not yellow sand below the ballast.
Greets, Mika
But one thing I wanted to specifically ask about, because I already spotted this on the Niddertalbahn in TRS19 and submitted it in the feedback form, why are you using this desert-like sand texture around the tracks again?
Europe is much more green than that, as you can see on some real life pictures of the Niddertalbahn here http://www.bahn2001.de/nidder/k634-2007/k634-2007b.htm we mostly have green grass around the tracks on the route sections (and some muddy/grassy/ballst mix in yard areas).
I imagine a simmilar style in Scotland as well and not yellow sand below the ballast.
Greets, Mika
So i guess this being able to edit and do as we wish with a cloned copy, is just a fallacy
Your earlier point in the same post disproves part of that ...
Merging DLC routes has always been a "no-no" but you can now edit as much as you like.
"Merging DLC routes has always been a "no-no" ... -- Well never having tried to do that I wasn't aware, and doubt it would upset me. But with the new claim of edit ability I can see the point. Also, it made me think of a related question: Could one add a baseboard to route A, and a baseboard to route B, and then merge A-B at the added baseboards?
To paraphrase a political slogan - "Yes You Can".
The Trainz Wiki link at http://online.ts2009.com/mediaWiki/index.php/How_to_Merge_Routes has a section on common problems and their solutions which covers that.
You can merge different DLS routes and bridge the height gap by adding baseboards to both or, better still, create a bridging route with the "in-between baseboards" to bridge a height gap in a two step merge process.
I just tried your suggestion of adding baseboards to each of two cloned DLC routes and attempting to merge that way but it still does not work.
The Trainz Wiki link at http://online.ts2009.com/mediaWiki/index.php/How_to_Merge_Routes has a section on common problems and their solutions which covers that.
You can merge different DLS routes and bridge the height gap by adding baseboards to both or, better still, create a bridging route with the "in-between baseboards" to bridge a height gap in a two step merge process.
I just tried your suggestion of adding baseboards to each of two cloned DLC routes and attempting to merge that way but it still does not work.
Last edited:
lovetrainzloathen3v
New member
Merging routes is a piece of cake normally.
But in 17 years of Trainz, i have never been told i couldn't merge two compatible routes together.
But in 17 years of Trainz, i have never been told i couldn't merge two compatible routes together.
n3vpolsen
Administrator
This is the current in-house version to give you some idea on what it will look like:
For those wondering why grass splines still exist, it is because turffx isn't supported on Mac currently so it allows mac and hardware that can't run turf to have ground detail still.
For those wondering why grass splines still exist, it is because turffx isn't supported on Mac currently so it allows mac and hardware that can't run turf to have ground detail still.
Attachments
Last edited:
As I had seen some hesitation and stuttering on some other more complicated routes, I had turned the Detail scenery to Off. Also, I am not a perfectionist as far as scenery requirements are concerned and usually always have it set to Off so that I have good operating performance. Looks like I will have to turn it on to Clutter + TurFX when testing so I don't cause anymore problems!
PharmboyNorth
New member
If you need to keep those ugly splines why not do the sensible thing? Put them all in a separate layer which could be turned off by those of that don't need or want to look at them. Please quit watering down all the graphics to support the least common denominator. We are already shown blinking shrubs and track even with ultra settings because the LOD transitions need to be set conservatively to maintain FPS instead of providing this option to the user.
Glenn
Glenn
I spotted that late last night testing the session from Dundee towards Edinburgh, the crossing gates did not open and I went straight through them. Maybe I am a bad driver... I have submitted a bug report.
lovetrainzloathen3v
New member
Most of the people on here, do not even know what you are talking about.
As for merging, not a problem i deleted the whole sorry mess last night.
That's me done with Trainz after a very long and painful experience.
Delete my bogus forum login N3v.
IsambardKingdomBrunel has left the building.......................for good.
Well after sampling that the lovely new Class 33 in TSW (compare its cab* with the one being shown with the Class 27 bundled in TRS2019), it is a bit of a struggle to find much enthusiasm for TRS2019.
* Apologies for external link - hope it works. http://railworksamerica.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=20696
DTG seem to have taken on board criticism of their product and have released an add on which is not only an excellent graphical model but has superb cab, sounds and accurate physics. Take heed, N3V.
* Apologies for external link - hope it works. http://railworksamerica.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=20696
DTG seem to have taken on board criticism of their product and have released an add on which is not only an excellent graphical model but has superb cab, sounds and accurate physics. Take heed, N3V.
really, you know what other people know and understand?
bye-bye.
Any bets he'll be back?
with little to no interest in BR rolling stock, I'll take your word for what looks good / bad in that area. Personally. I find all the rest of TRS19 very good, even if there are still a few rough spots.
that has got to be an historic event, considering how on DTG centric sites there is an an almost constant bemoaning their lack of response to obvious flaws and missing features.
jeffmorris
Active member
I tested the route. I wish that I have a PC with the fastest CPU, fastest GPU, fastest and biggest SSD, and a lot of system memory so that the route runs very smoothly. I have some screen jerkiness and the route creator made some mistakes: the railroad crossing gates are across the tracks instead of the roads and a tunnel portal is too high.