route rant

As I work on my latest real routes, one of the cardinal rules is knowing when to stop adding details. And that is when the details are known. In a way, you're lucky if the original no longer exists or is so obscure that they are almost impossible to find - then do what you like. If anyone complains, have them prove it.
... most of us who build model railways in Trainz use is to have 'MR' in the layout title.
Good point, wish more people would do that. As well, if all the works-in-progress had WIP in their titles, there would be a lot less confusion as to what to expect.
 
I usually figure to set the terrain extraction when using Transdem to 7 boards either side of the track line, which comes out at around 5.5 - 6km.

That is generally more than enough to cater for the achievable draw distance unless you're running a RTX3060 or similar with an I9 processor. Of that 6km I will generally only detail out to around 2km either side of the track, maybe less in flat terrain and beyond 500m tend to copy and paste blocks of housing and trees rather than a defined pattern. Anything beyond 2km gets painted with a neutral terrain texture, in the same way that MSTS used distant mountains.

Maybe that's not the correct approach but many of us are getting on for 20 years with this caper and burnout occurs faster and more frequent than ever before. I've even deleted humble model railway style layouts as I simply couldn't stand the sight or thought of working on them one more day. So while on the one hand I understand where Martin is coming from, especially in the light of programmes like TSW/TSW2 which really do showcase the scenery, equally allowance has to be made for the creative limits of the route builder.

If we want to see super far away detail on prototype routes then N3V are going to need to take a look at features such as photogrammetry as used by the new flight sim, to get a more realistic appearance. One of the things that always rankles on the odd occasion I dip into DTG TS to plod away on an old route project, with the Google Earth overlay switched on the distant hills and mountains look lovely, photo realistic. No way of achieving that with the limited terrain texture palette.
 
Maybe that's not the correct approach but many of us are getting on for 20 years with this caper and burnout occurs faster and more frequent than ever before. I've even deleted humble model railway style layouts as I simply couldn't stand the sight or thought of working on them one more day. So while on the one hand I understand where Martin is coming from, especially in the light of programmes like TSW/TSW2 which really do showcase the scenery, equally allowance has to be made for the creative limits of the route builder.

If we want to see super far away detail on prototype routes then N3V are going to need to take a look at features such as photogrammetry as used by the new flight sim, to get a more realistic appearance. One of the things that always rankles on the odd occasion I dip into DTG TS to plod away on an old route project, with the Google Earth overlay switched on the distant hills and mountains look lovely, photo realistic. No way of achieving that with the limited terrain texture palette.

I agree here, I've work in Railworks also. Those distant mountains are important as my routes are all in a big valley setting and need to be shown. I've been looking at this way. The route may be overdone...for now. My computer may struggle with it a little, but in the near future the game will be updated and the route will be updated. If the route is good, somebody will updated it and the content for it. Computer power is always being updated. These route project take so long you need to think of the future...if you ever do manage to finish it.

I must admit I feel kind of relieved in a weird way to see so many people have gone through what I've been going through with route building. It also explains why I could never get a group of people together to work on a historical route...they know what a pain in the buttinsky it is!
 
...NO WORKING STATIONS! Really bugs me and I feel like shouting (won't do it here), what is the sole purpose of all trains from the being of time to eternity? It is to move goods and people from point A to point B, period! I route that can't do that is not a realistic train simulation at all. I could go on but don't want to bore you, so I better get back to working on my latest route :)

Personally, I don't passenger-enable the routes I'm working on, simply because the AI does not behave realistically when interacting with stations. In real life, a train making a stop (at least in the country that I model) will decelerate smoothly down from linespeed, aiming to come to a stand at the right position on the platform. They don't generally slow to a crawl just outside the station, then sidle in at 5mph while the passengers stand there tapping their feet.

The correct behaviour is much easier to achieve with trackmarks, and using door control commands and scenery passengers to emulate station calls is by far my preferred approach. Also using trackmarks means I can let the schedule allow for different train lengths and stopping points. Using PE stations, the train stops in the middle, regardless of whether that's appropriate or not
 
Personally, I don't passenger-enable the routes I'm working on, simply because the AI does not behave realistically when interacting with stations. In real life, a train making a stop (at least in the country that I model) will decelerate smoothly down from linespeed, aiming to come to a stand at the right position on the platform. They don't generally slow to a crawl just outside the station, then sidle in at 5mph while the passengers stand there tapping their feet.

The correct behaviour is much easier to achieve with trackmarks, and using door control commands and scenery passengers to emulate station calls is by far my preferred approach. Also using trackmarks means I can let the schedule allow for different train lengths and stopping points. Using PE stations, the train stops in the middle, regardless of whether that's appropriate or not
Same here, I removed all the passenger enabled stations from timber ridge, the passengers were dressed in the wrong clothing for the route era, there were far too many of them, they chattered incessantly when on the platform and when they were in the coaches they drove me mad with their endless noise . They also hang around 24/7 and in all weathers The issue is, almost all of these are old assets, I can't remember when anyone made a new version , is there anything that has improved the experience?
 
Passenger enabled stations work well (in terms of waiting passengers) on commuter and metro lines but not on lines that may only see a passenger service 3 times a week. Nothing funnier (or worse depending on your point of view) than seeing a peak hour load of passengers waiting at a station where the next passenger service is not due for another 3 days.
 
Back
Top