'Wait for Trigger' does not work

A

acyunczyk

Virtual railroader
Hello,
I am trying to create sessions, and in TRS19 build 105100, when I go to the menu in Edit Session/Driver Setup, the 'wait for trigger' command goes dark gray when I hover the mouse over it. Same thing with the replacement 'VarniTriggernelParancs' command. I cannot create good sessions without it. Any ideas on how to deal with this?
 
I concur with what pware said: Don't use "Wait for Trigger" command. Instead use Trigger Check Rule with child Rules. Bonus is that the child ones can be not only to start a train, but many other functions such switching points, signals etc. Only caveat is that it is a rule, and it has to be set in Surveyor session, not on the command line. I use it all the time and it works pretty well, in TANE.
 
Last edited:
"Wait for Trigger" in TRS19 Build 105096
I have been checking this one out and I have found the following. It appears that the "Wait for Trigger" drive command is route dependent. For example it appears to work on the "Edinburgh - Dundee" and the "Cornish Main Line ... " routes in the above build. I have also purchased the "Carlisle and Skipton" route and installed it in the above build; "Wait for Trigger" appears to work here too.

However, "Wait for trigger" does not appear to work with the "ECML Kings Cross - Edinburgh" route. All the sessions associated with this route have several consists, most of which already use "Wait for Trigger" in their Driver Commands, so I was somewhat surprised that I could not even use this command in an entirely new session on this route. I wonder how they got there. I have to assume that they were Programmed on a separate development system.

I have tried modifying some existing sessions and also creating an entirely new session on this route. In every case the "Wait for Trigger" command in the Driver command popup menu is greyed out as soon as the mouse pointer hovers over it, as described by acyunczyk, above.

(I now wonder if I will be able to create the effect I was after using the "Trigger Check" rule plus child rules as suggested above.)
 
However: Lately I have problems using Trigger check. This rule works well in TANE. But on 19, when I configure it, assigning the loco to be used, sets up as intended (Upper right corner), save the rule and exit so you can test. No good. It does not work. Go back to the set-up menu and the selected driver now shows "undefined". Re-do it and still no good: "undefined" ; at this point this is unusable, leaving me with no way to control a train by the action of another. You can say I am doing something wrong. But I have set this exactly the same way many times in TANE, with success, so it is a bug of 19. I need someone to check it in case it is a local problem. Just in case it is suggested, I have deleted the rule and re-downloaded it 2 times to the same effect.
 
llebrez said:
However: Lately I have problems using Trigger check. This rule works well in TANE. But on 19, when I configure it, assigning the loco to be used, sets up as intended (Upper right corner), save the rule and exit so you can test. No good. It does not work. Go back to the set-up menu and the selected driver now shows "undefined". Re-do it and still no good: "undefined" ; at this point this is unusable, leaving me with no way to control a train by the action of another. You can say I am doing something wrong. But I have set this exactly the same way many times in TANE, with success, so it is a bug of 19. I need someone to check it in case it is a local problem. Just in case it is suggested, I have deleted the rule and re-downloaded it 2 times to the same effect.
Click to expand...

Did you configure the rule in Surveyor or Driver?

TRS2019 likes things such as this to be configured in Driver and not Surveyor. If it still doesn't work in either, then there's a bug that needs to be addressed.
 
I configure it in a session, surveyor. If I do it in driver, it will stay on while the driver session is playing. Next time you start another session, I would have to configure it again. So, I do it in surveyor on a session, currently the only one I have for extensive testing on my transition to 19. It works on TANE but doing the same thing (procedure) does not on 19.
 
llebrez said:
However: Lately I have problems using Trigger check. This rule works well in TANE. But on 19, when I configure it, assigning the loco to be used, sets up as intended (Upper right corner), save the rule and exit so you can test. No good. It does not work. Go back to the set-up menu and the selected driver now shows "undefined". Re-do it and still no good: "undefined" ; at this point this is unusable, leaving me with no way to control a train by the action of another. You can say I am doing something wrong. But I have set this exactly the same way many times in TANE, with success, so it is a bug of 19. I need someone to check it in case it is a local problem. Just in case it is suggested, I have deleted the rule and re-downloaded it 2 times to the same effect.
Click to expand...

Use "Check Trackside" rule instead, it's built-in: <kuid2:122381:10011:6>
You can set any trackside object in there, basically it works the same as Trigger Check, except you don't even have to use triggers, you can set junctions for example instead.
 
I suspect the OP has failed to tick the boxes in Driver Command to add these commands to the list available in a session. By default they are not available. As for 'Wait for Trigger' and 'Trigger Check', I have no problems with them and I've been working on a fairly complex session so I'm using lots of them. Go figure?
 
RBrooks said:
Use "Check Trackside" rule instead, it's built-in: <kuid2:122381:10011:6>
You can set any trackside object in there, basically it works the same as Trigger Check, except you don't even have to use triggers, you can set junctions for example instead.
Click to expand...
Very interesting: My system does not show that KUID, built-in, installed nor at DLS. Where is it? I am using built 105096
 
The latest version at the DLS is <kuid2:122381:10011:4> (TRS2004 build). TRS19 build 105096 (standard version) and build 109037 (standard beta) have <kuid2:122381:10011:6> as built-in.

Peter
 
Indeed these KUID's are there and I downloaded them. But the problem persists. Originally I defined the problem wrongly. In my case, the "trigger check", or "check trackside" do perform, ordering a child rule to start a consist when triggered. I use "driver schedule rule". Here you set what to do, and who will do it (At upper right corner). The problem is that when you set the name of the consist (taken as viewed on the list), and you save exiting, it does not save, and when you come back it says "undefined", so the rule does not complete because there is no one to execute.

While I have your attention, I found that up to TS12, we had on the developer options a box to make active the feature of showing KUIDS in surveyor. You click on an asset, and at the lower right corner, the KUID is displayed. I recall having seen it on TANE. Is this still available in 19 ? Could not find "developers option" with that box to tick.
 
A resolution to my "driver schedule rule" problem. I just though that some of you would be interested on how I managed to fix the problem of the driver becoming "undefined" after saving the rules menu.

This is a child rule of the "trigger check". To cut it short (but it took many trials and trouble shooting), in 19, you can select what driver will execute if the name is not changed. When you assign a driver to a loco, it gives you a list of all the available names. Select one and don't change it. Then, when you set at the right upper corner the driver for that child rule, use the name you set for that loco. It will save and the rule will execute normally. Because of the many locos I have, I describe that particular one by a name I decided. If you do that, the child rule will come back undefined. It was not like that in TANE.
 
llebrez said:
A resolution to my "driver schedule rule" problem. I just though that some of you would be interested on how I managed to fix the problem of the driver becoming "undefined" after saving the rules menu.

This is a child rule of the "trigger check". To cut it short (but it took many trials and trouble shooting), in 19, you can select what driver will execute if the name is not changed. When you assign a driver to a loco, it gives you a list of all the available names. Select one and don't change it. Then, when you set at the right upper corner the driver for that child rule, use the name you set for that loco. It will save and the rule will execute normally. Because of the many locos I have, I describe that particular one by a name I decided. If you do that, the child rule will come back undefined. It was not like that in TANE.
Click to expand...

Strange. I always change Driver's names, but I never had this problem, my build is 105175. But thx, I'll remember this if it'll become an issue.
 
Pardon me for reviving a not so old post about a serious problem, although clearly it depends on the route. I would like to point out you can't replace "Wait for Trigger" with "Trigger Check Rule" The first is a "Drivers Command" ie you add it to a specific drivers orders, and the later is a "Rule" that you add to Rules under edit session. I noted from another thread on this, someone said they fixed it by deleing all AWS Ramps. However, the Port Tillamook route that is now giving me this problem, has no such items. However, it does have 100+ ATLS slaves and probably a lot more ATLS Triggers, so that may be the cause. As noted by the OP, I confirm 'VarniTriggernelParancs' has the same issue as does "WaitUntil".

Off hand I don't see how you can replace this by using a 'Rule' instead of a 'Command,' but if it's possible, I'd like to know how you set up a rule, to make an AI drive to various trackmarks or locations?
 
I also have this problem on big routes with 40+ trains, the built-in just doesn't list (greyed out)
So i made my own version based on older search code (sorry)
also I filter out all triggers beginning with ATLS and atls
and made a submenu for the trains so it can handle many
you are free to try this experiment, it works here, no guarantee whatsoever.

https://www.mediafire.com/file/33vjkq2ingmaut9/Wait_For_Trigger_v2.cdp/file
in game its called Wait for trigger 2

It is my firm believe N3V should fix this kind of basic commands (and not me)
hope it works for you
greetings GM
 
I have been delving into rewriting some of my old rules that broke with async. My direction is to use more specific objects for the search. For example, if you use my InstantMoveTrain command, you will note that I limit the trackmarks choices to ones with certain names. I suggest scripters consider this.
 
I did that pitkin, filtered out ATLS and atls, if people use other names, then alas
There is a distinct limit to the ammount a driver command can handle
if i ask about i get no answer ;-) and our routes get bigger and bigger
greetings GM
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
Playing with the Rules...
Replies
2
Views
220
WestSideRailways
W
G
Driver commands
Replies
2
Views
203
Gary_Evans
G
N
Wait for Trigger Command
Replies
2
Views
465
llebrez
L
D
Driver Commands greying out
Replies
6
Views
619
llebrez
L
B
Trigger Issue
Replies
12
Views
822
94jeepyj
9
Back
Top