Putting Kuju file on a Diet

[smarty2]

I have no issue with editing workshop scenarios with RWTools? Have done so on several occasions with stock I haven't got.

[xguerra]

A prominent issue is that it's different for every individual.

In my case, the problem only occurs with routes that call on loads of different provider/product combinations, the most sticky ones are foreign routes like Madrid - Valencia or Ligne Du Nord. But with any densely populated route that calls on only a few provider/products then things run smoothly. It becomes real puzzling when someone with an almost identical setup can run all these things just fine.

It becomes hard for RSC to sort this when everyone has the same outcome but with different sources. The quickest way to sort this would be for RSC to come back and say "Right this is the fool-proof computer setup if you want to run complex content".

EDIT:

Having said that, have swapped out the Kuju folder for a clean one and it works great now, so I'm going to write myself a .bat that will swap it out a little quicker.

[smarty2]

Yes but my Kuju folder was a slimmed down version in any case, just one of those things. As for RSC, they do not recommend lots of 3rd party assets/routes simply because of this issue, particularly if they are not part of their partner program.

[jimmyshand]

I'm not sure if this question has already been asked but is there now a risk of the 'RSC' folder becoming too big for the sim to handle?

Every new release by the big guys now goes into the RSC folder and has done for some time. This folder must soon be catching up with the Kuju for size, if not already?

[gptech]

Not exactly jimmy, the problem isn't the single Kuju folder but the combination of provider/product folders----Kuju\RailSimulator.
Carry this on to the RSC provider folder and you have the assets we use spread over many product folders---RSC\Class86, RSC\Class87 kind of arrangement. This means that when the game loads a provider/product set from there the total number of assets referenced/size of blueprints.pak is much smaller and manageable.

[lenfish]

Not exactly jimmy, the problem isn't the single Kuju folder but the combination of provider/product folders----Kuju\RailSimulator.
Carry this on to the RSC provider folder and you have the assets we use spread over many product folders---RSC\Class86, RSC\Class87 kind of arrangement. This means that when the game loads a provider/product set from there the total number of assets referenced/size of blueprints.pak is much smaller and manageable.

Yes, my RSC folder is currently 15.1 GB (much larger than when my Kuju folder starts to cause problems) and so far hasn't caused any trouble , which seems to bear out the above.

Regards,

Len

[jimmyshand]

Not exactly jimmy, the problem isn't the single Kuju folder but the combination of provider/product folders----Kuju\RailSimulator.
Carry this on to the RSC provider folder and you have the assets we use spread over many product folders---RSC\Class86, RSC\Class87 kind of arrangement. This means that when the game loads a provider/product set from there the total number of assets referenced/size of blueprints.pak is much smaller and manageable.

I see, makes sense. Such a shame about the Kuju problem because it puts me off installing many of the excellent freeware packs etc. I hope it's something that can somehow be addressed.

[gptech]

Such a shame about the Kuju problem because it puts me off installing many of the excellent freeware packs etc. I hope it's something that can somehow be addressed.

It's a flaw that's only come to light long after we've all installed loads of reskins unfortunately, re-writing things so assets have a 'lighter' folder structure (UKDiesel\Class47, UKDiesel\Class37 as extreme examples) would instantly break every scenario. However, this doesn't preclude you from just installing the reskins you want as the UKTS freepacks now allow you to extract them to an alternative location and you can just 'cherry pick' those you really want and copy/paste them into your games folders. This wouldn't stop the Kuju\RailSimulator folder getting 'bloated' but does slow the process down a bit. We also have to consider whether 6 basically identical reskins but of specific locos is what we want; do we need a nameplate on something that's just passing as AI?
I don't want to get too specific as those reskins in the UKTS packs can be described as works of art, and I appreciate how long it takes but is a 'generic' skin of a class 37 in BR Orange good enough for general use and if a scenario recreates the day when BR Orange liveried Class 37 37890 "The Orangery" hauled the 10:30 to London then a specific skin could be justified---if you see what I mean?

[Mufaldinho]

It's a flaw that's only come to light long after we've all installed loads of reskins unfortunately, re-writing things so assets have a 'lighter' folder structure (UKDiesel\Class47, UKDiesel\Class37 as extreme examples) would instantly break every scenario. However, this doesn't preclude you from just installing the reskins you want as the UKTS freepacks now allow you to extract them to an alternative location and you can just 'cherry pick' those you really want and copy/paste them into your games folders. This wouldn't stop the Kuju\RailSimulator folder getting 'bloated' but does slow the process down a bit. We also have to consider whether 6 basically identical reskins but of specific locos is what we want; do we need a nameplate on something that's just passing as AI?
I don't want to get too specific as those reskins in the UKTS packs can be described as works of art, and I appreciate how long it takes but is a 'generic' skin of a class 37 in BR Orange good enough for general use and if a scenario recreates the day when BR Orange liveried Class 37 37890 "The Orangery" hauled the 10:30 to London then a specific skin could be justified---if you see what I mean?

Totally agree with this. Back when I was a keen FS2004 player I used to make AI traffic as simple as possible. Just the generic liveries and some special ones (like some Pokemon planes). If I had gone out searching every single plane at, for instance, American Airlines, I would have ended burning up my PC haha.

I'm thinking about uninstalling TS2013 and reinstalling everything, minding more about what I'm going to use and what I'm not going to use.

[levisham]

I have two Kuju folders. I use the basic Kuju folder when I am creating a scenario and transfer assets that I need into it as and when, and then delete them from the folder when I've finished. When I'm playing the game I rename my Kuju_full to Kuju and the other to Kuju_base. This way I can avoid the SBHH's and not lose any of the numerous variations of different locos and stock. It works for me,

Regards, John.

[Iluka]

Hi All

If you follow this excellent Tutorial by Bob Latimer (Link below) all your problems will be solved :-

http://railworksamerica.com/index.php/l ... -in-ts2013

Regards

Mike

[jimmyshand]

We also have to consider whether 6 basically identical reskins but of specific locos is what we want; do we need a nameplate on something that's just passing as AI?
I don't want to get too specific as those reskins in the UKTS packs can be described as works of art, and I appreciate how long it takes but is a 'generic' skin of a class 37 in BR Orange good enough for general use and if a scenario recreates the day when BR Orange liveried Class 37 37890 "The Orangery" hauled the 10:30 to London then a specific skin could be justified---if you see what I mean?

I would agree with you there. I'm someone who drives the sim almost exclusively from the cab and so the loco I'm driving could be covered in tartan paint for all I care! The rest of the trains in the game are, as you say, just passing AI and never get a close up inspection. For me specific liveries, names and numbers not important and I'm quite happy with the notion of a generic BR blue 37 with auto numbering for example. I'm more into accuracy of cab, sounds, physics and the driving experience.

However, we are all different and I quite understand that some people are really into accuracy in terms of liveries, numbering and name plates etc.

I think the matter becomes a problem when a scenario writer uses specific 'named' loco's as AI stock in scenarios. This forces the user to have to install multiple reskins just to get a single scenario to run, or to spend time in RW tools swapping out tons of stuff!

Of course it is at the discretion of the scenario writer to use whatever stock they choose and we should never criticise their work, but it would make life a lot easier if only the player train was 'named' and the AI services left generic. Kind of a half-way house between the default 'Workshop' stuff and the far more customised and varied community scenarios.

A difficult nut to crack, accuracy of scenario vs complication and user-friendliness. There is no obvious right or wrong way to go on this one but the Kuju folder issue does have a significant bearing on it.

[tagsdm]

Hello All,

It's just that there doesn't seem to be consistency on this issue. I have a fairly small KUJU folder at 4-5Gb and I run WLoS with no problems to date. The only route I can't seem to get to work is (unfortunately) Esthwaite Branch. I can look at the route in the World Editor, but can't create or make changes to a scenario without SBHH. The stock free roam gives me too many missing assets, if I try to make changes, I get SBHH. Really frustrating.

tagsdm

[Carinthia]

It's just that there doesn't seem to be consistency on this issue. I have a fairly small KUJU folder at 4-5Gb and I run WLoS with no problems to date. The only route I can't seem to get to work is (unfortunately) Esthwaite Branch. I can look at the route in the World Editor, but can't create or make changes to a scenario without SBHH. The stock free roam gives me too many missing assets, if I try to make changes, I get SBHH. Really frustrating.

It seems inconsistent as other factors can come into play.

"SBHH" errors generally indicate that the game has run out of available memory to complete its task and that can be for all sorts of reasons. Sometimes that means that the total number of files it is looking at is too many - this isn't necessarily those in the Kuju directory but often it will be. But other factors can cause it too, especially whilst editing. For example the London to Brighton route is known to regularly cause problems whilst editing scenarios in certain geographical areas.

Problems editing scenarios on London to Bright routes and others too can often be avoided by disabling the Scenery directory of the route concerned, which substantially reduces the number of files loaded whilst you are doing your editing. That's the first thing I would suggest trying on the Esthwaite route (although I have no personal experience with it).

John

[tagsdm]

Thanks for the insight, John, I'll give it a try. The route is certainly worth every effort.

tagsdm