WCML North dilema

[overmarze]

Just upload it

Wont be a problem for me i had the welsh borders route working on the very 1st verson

[growler37]

Hi Route Builders,
It's just my own opinion, but it seems to me the biggest problem all round is the quest for absolute accuracy and reality.
Is the West Cornwall route really on hold just because of the lack of an accurate train shed for Penzance? Isn't it better to release that route with a stop gap roof, or no roof at all, and let the user go into edit and replace it at a later date when one becomes available?
Reading this thread, there seem to be a lot of routes put to one side because of the difficulty in having every structure etc absolutely accurate.
regards Ted.

Hi Ted
i take your point,but West Cornwall has a bit more to do than just the Penzance trainshed,but it is such a vital part of the route,iconic really, so very important that its right,the other problem is none of the default structures in RW fits over the penzance platform arrangement.
Regards
Kevin

[chimboro]

Hi Keith,
I think it is worthwhile to release a beta version of the route and anyone interested can download. We have just had the amazing Class 390 which would really look appropriate on your route. Those with time and patience to look up relevant assets will do so while appreciating that this is a beta with work still to be done.

[RyanT001]

Well I think it is up to the author to decide when/if there is a beta, and about the asset problem, I'd say a list with the UKTS numbers so you can bulk search them and web urls for direct download of the non UKTS assets like with W&B.

[AndiS]

My two or five cents on the issue.

First of all, thanks to Vern for making me and my shelved projects look "not the only bad boy". Honestly, I am always swimming in a pool of unfinished things, or being hounded by them. But, honestly, in my spare time, I must do something that makes me feel better after I did it than I felt before I did it. So if something does not feel like fun at the moment, chances are that it does not get done. There are always all sorts of expectations floating around, but there is also your self for which you are the most like person to care for it, so do it.

Second, there is always some cross-fertilisation between your fields of interest, no matter how far or near they may appear. You can try to increase it, or make it more obvious to yourself, but it will be there anyway. If you finish a small route first and get some routine while you do it, maybe the big one looks more uniform (in the positive way).

Regarding waiting for payware, I would not do it. If you know some payware will cover some part of your project, then it is clever not to put your main focus there, just because it is always clever to avoid duplication of any work. But certainly, this GARL project does not cover the whole of your route. (I have no idea.) Anyway, as long as your find something worth in your rendering of your part of the network, just keep your stride and don't worry about others. Then, people who want to run the WCML to Glasgow will find a "fair enough" rendering of Glasgow in your freeware while those who want to see every bit in place will buy the payware.

Also, just because it is payware does not mean that people will find nothing to complain about. So if you link the fate of your route to this piece of payware, you might get some heat from people who think that for $$$ they would have expected to get XYZ.

I would also get worried about the prolongation of the payware-with-freeware debate, if just recently, Matt said that maybe he could consider making an exception of the "only standalone freeware" rule for community CDs requiring the IOW. Now, you would certainly benefit of such a distribution as one consolidated pack, i.e., with all the freeware items in one package. But if you need some more payware, then Matt may not want to do the CD trick. And no one knows whether anything reaches the popularity of IOW, which was the one and only at its time. And many don't own it (like myself).

Regarding the OLE, I would also put the project on hold. My own position is that the whole OLE business is not mature in RW to this date. Certainly, having LODs is a good idea. And certainly, a country-specific system is also a good idea. The fact that no one has done it for the UK might be cause by the importance of Diesel in the UK? And the total absence of UK electrics, of course. (Or did I miss something?)

Once the alternative is available and you want to swap assets, let me know if I can help. I am always looking for new reasons not to finish other things.

Whether you want to release your route in its current shape for early adopters is another question that only you can answer. My idea would be that if there is a subsection that is enjoyable and if the framerate with the installed OLE is ok, and if this subsection is self-contained enough to run some scenario on it, then packaging the whole stuff now would gain you the experience of doing it. I mean, finding all the pieces and finding out what works for you but not for another one must be a chore by its own. I can only frown thinking about it.

In general, now that more and more routes become available, it becomes more and more obvious that we need either of the two:
1) A central download station (or 3 or 5 of them, if each is big), where it is easy to download all the assets you need without messing around for more than one evening (approximately).
2) A liberal attitude of the creators of objects, which permits their easy distribution in various collections, with routes or without.

Clearly, for option 2 you will easily redownload something which you already have. But then again, it will just overwrite the existing file. If you are lucky, it is not an older version than what you had before. But chances are it is a newer version, or just the same, which I would rate as the most likely variant. Anyway, it sound a bit more attractive to me than to go raiding half a dozen website in 3 languages to tick off things on a very long list. Just my own attitude.

[almark]

Personally,if i were in your position Keith,i would release it as an early beta,and give clear precautions etc warnings etc,download at your own rist etc etc.

See if you can find a few people to send it to,to test it,then if that's succesful i would beg you to release it! Such a fantastic route,it's almost not fair making us wait any longer I wouldn't care if it only went from Carlisle Citadal to Kingmoor,i'd still download it!

It all depends on how long you think the finished product is away,if its still years off then why not release it as 0.01 or something


Anyway,your route,your call mate.

Cheers,
Mark

[Ghostcav]

Just release it fella. You can't please everyone all the time. With W&B I knew that the asset list was going to be big, but I was not going to waste all the great stuff that people on here have done. Sure you will get the odd angry post regarding assets, your thread will get taken over by a few that will object. At the end of the day you have most probably spent hours of your life creating the route, if people can't spend a lot shorter than that getting assets then nevermind.

[keithmross]

Thank you to everyone that's taken the time to post.
I'll give it plenty of thought and keep you posted.
In the meantime, all the best for 2010.


Click the image to zoom in

[EWS37410]

Regards freeware assets this is certainly an issue that needs to be thrashed out. My firm belief is if they are uploaded for general use, then the licence should effectively be that as for MSTS - they can be included in a route distribution providing it is not for profit. Obviously up to the route creator to ensure no payware inadvertently included in the rwp but any good builder keeps track of who's assets they are using. The only downside is an increased file size with assets which the user may already have in their central Railworks repository, or of obsoleting a newer version.

What Railworks needs is a central, checking "smart" file library like the DLS.

As regards losing the way, the following is just an example of the projects I've looked at starting and laid aside over the last few weeks/months:
Adirondack Line - TS2006
Two German routes - RW.
Potash Line - RW.
Inverness to Aviemore - RW.
Crouch Valley - TS2010.
Ally Pally/Northern Heights - RW
Nicky Line - RW.

Completely unfocused and lacking in direction, so don't despair Keith, you're not alone.

And now just finished extracting terrain/maps for the Yellowstone Park Railroad in TS2010 - wonder how far that will get! Though it's more of a test to see if I can get Surveyor in TS2010 working on the lappy as Crouch Valley slowed to a crawl, possibly as a result of too many 5m grids. So the YPR will test if 10m grid functions okay, or if Auran really stuffed the optimisation this time round.

I for one would love to see the Nicky Line in RW!

[Traveller54]

Any progress please?
(btw, around Warrington, is the Liverpool Lime Street / Birchwood/ Manchester Piccadilly line included??)
MTIA.

[msey0002]

http://forums.uktrainsim.com/viewtopic. ... 04&t=96067