Ecco, my preferred method of working is exactly the opposite of yours. I place all consists in the session layers and do not have any problems (but I have no problems with your method either - different creators can work in different ways).
So, what am I supposed to do if I want three AI trains working away while I have two Sessions:
If I wanted to have the same 3 consists running in exactly the same way in two different sessions (which is a possibility I have not yet tried), then I see nothing wrong with placing all three consists in the route layers and have the consists that will be different between the sessions placed in the session layers. However, as I am sure you are aware, all driver commands for all consists regardless of whether they are session or route based have
always been held in the session, not the route. So you would still have to copy those commands from one session to another.
If that is the case, Trainz Plus and Platinum are definitely not in my future.
I have experienced no difficulties in moving from TANE and TRS19 SP1 to TRS19 Platinum in regards to running sessions.
As I noted in my previous post the problem caused by using portals, where the consist
seems to emerge (I have only tested one portal asset and not exhaustively) in the same layer as the portal, would only be a problem if you then used the Platinum/Plus UDS to edit and save the route/session with a consist that has emerged from a portal - it would be saved in a different layer from the one that it was originally placed. How much of a problem this would be I do not really know as, apart from the use of the
Show/Hide Layers Rule or the
Layer Control Driver Command, I cannot immediately think of any.
The Trainz Wiki quotes at the start of your post, apart from the one about changes in the Platinum and Plus Trainz versions (which was a
recommendation only), were not from N3V as they did not create that wiki page.