Bulk Asset update/replace and layers too?
- Thread starter martinvk
- Start date
The move to layer option is still present in the TRS19 SP3 Bulk Update/Replace tool but its use has been "tightened" to remove some problems it created in earlier versions.
The problems with moving track from one layer to another is that
Both outcomes can create issues.
The problems with moving track from one layer to another is that
- it is possible to end up with the track in a lower layer (in terms of layer hierarchy) than the objects attached to the track. This can easily occur when trackmarks and track triggers have been deliberately placed in a different layer for management reasons (I do this on occasion), and
- you can easily forget to include in the move other track types that have been attached to the moved track - e.g. you move the shiny mainline track but forget to move the attached rusty siding track. This results in two attached objects in different layers.
Both outcomes can create issues.
So where is it or how do I access this 'tightened' function? I'm aware of track / object hierarchy so a simple warning would be enough.
The issue is that all tracks auto-created by TransDEM are on the same layer when in reality there are different services, mainline trains, trams, metros, which are often physically close but don't interact. locking or hiding the others would make surveyor work so much easier, but first I have to move them to their own layers.
The issue is that all tracks auto-created by TransDEM are on the same layer when in reality there are different services, mainline trains, trams, metros, which are often physically close but don't interact. locking or hiding the others would make surveyor work so much easier, but first I have to move them to their own layers.
Limiting this in TRS19 does a few things:
1. Martin gets R.S.I. or gives up on the move to other layer, cause its too frustrating
2. Route builders may come to the sad conclusion, T:Ane is better for route building
as you can organize easier.
The newest version of Trainz should have more working features not less
Maybe the thinking and deciding what is wise to use should be left to the user,
not be limited before hand by people that don't build big routes themselves.
1. Martin gets R.S.I. or gives up on the move to other layer, cause its too frustrating
2. Route builders may come to the sad conclusion, T:Ane is better for route building
as you can organize easier.
The newest version of Trainz should have more working features not less
Maybe the thinking and deciding what is wise to use should be left to the user,
not be limited before hand by people that don't build big routes themselves.
or
3. return to T:ANE
Funny how going back to T:ANE feels like a step forward, at least as far as building a route goes. Once the basic parts have been edited from the TransDEM imports, I "might" bring the whole thing to TRS19, or not!. Depends on how all things workout.
3. return to T:ANE
Funny how going back to T:ANE feels like a step forward, at least as far as building a route goes. Once the basic parts have been edited from the TransDEM imports, I "might" bring the whole thing to TRS19, or not!. Depends on how all things workout.
Funny how things go. When T:ANE first appeared there were many posts about "going back to TS12" and before that about "going back to TS2010 (or even to TRS2006)!"
Personally, I have never been happier than with TRS19 SP3. I have deleted all earlier Trainz versions from my system.
But each to their own.
Personally, I have never been happier than with TRS19 SP3. I have deleted all earlier Trainz versions from my system.
But each to their own.
Personal historic overview
TRS2004sp2 the filters were handier in surveyor when placing items
loved the transparent interface and the metal look
TRS2006 content manager screwed all my content because .texture.txt
TRS2010 intro of layers, big improvement
TRS12 dunno i was away, still had engineshed, could merge/rotate
T:ANE big improvement graphics, but too dark greenish for me, (smartest for route building)
no more rotate on merge
TRS19 original, eye-candy, stable but a few features gone compared to TANE (perfect for content creation)
TRS19 SP1 bulk asset replace splines not working, carz broken,
TRS19 SP2 spline issues, CTDs, over the top too USA mainmenu.
TRS19 SP3 the smoothest movement and no sound hickups (perfect for actual driving)
but engine and portal issues, weird moving sliders that overlap text
TRS23 multi monitor support, point lights, surveyor 2, everything is finally fixed
TRS2004sp2 the filters were handier in surveyor when placing items
loved the transparent interface and the metal look
TRS2006 content manager screwed all my content because .texture.txt
TRS2010 intro of layers, big improvement
TRS12 dunno i was away, still had engineshed, could merge/rotate
T:ANE big improvement graphics, but too dark greenish for me, (smartest for route building)
no more rotate on merge
TRS19 original, eye-candy, stable but a few features gone compared to TANE (perfect for content creation)
TRS19 SP1 bulk asset replace splines not working, carz broken,
TRS19 SP2 spline issues, CTDs, over the top too USA mainmenu.
TRS19 SP3 the smoothest movement and no sound hickups (perfect for actual driving)
but engine and portal issues, weird moving sliders that overlap text
TRS23 multi monitor support, point lights, surveyor 2, everything is finally fixed
Last edited:
I agree with GM's assessment of the "progress" over the years. A bit of a rough ride!
I was also an enthusiastic adopter of the improved versions of Trainz with their improved features since the original. but if features are removed or broken then the newest is not necessarily the best. While the performance and the unified interface in TRS19 is wonderful, making a new map more difficult is not an improvement, as I see it. So going to T:ANE is, from my perspective, an improvement, at least while the basic map is being built. Once testing starts, I might move it to TRS19 where the integrated Surveyor / Driver does make it quicker to find and correct things that are not right in the map.
I was also an enthusiastic adopter of the improved versions of Trainz with their improved features since the original. but if features are removed or broken then the newest is not necessarily the best. While the performance and the unified interface in TRS19 is wonderful, making a new map more difficult is not an improvement, as I see it. So going to T:ANE is, from my perspective, an improvement, at least while the basic map is being built. Once testing starts, I might move it to TRS19 where the integrated Surveyor / Driver does make it quicker to find and correct things that are not right in the map.
