Trespassers

[DavidVI]

One thing I heard is that passengers can't walk up or down hills. So if you have a station on a gradient they will be floating on one end and burried the other.. This can be seen especially at Colchester on the GEML route. However that station is all wonky doo laa anyway.. with the platform being really low one end and extremely high the other!

Probably the same cause of the problem at Stratford on the bridge. .. but then I wonder why RSC release it having passengers on it at all if they are sticking out the bottom in the most obvious immersion breaking way.

[equiglobal]

Peter - it's not being glib at all - if after a succession of reports, nowt is done by RSC, what do you expect. And it might be worth adding that as everyone knows, RSC have a notoriously non existant support function & a non functional customer service dept. Many. many people have spent thousands on this hobby & all I'm suggesting (begging) is that RSC give support. They're moving at warp speed in releasing all this stuff which is brilliant, but it MUST be supported adequately.Trespassing, phantom humans magically evolving from deep in the cess or from under the platform edge is just NOT acceptable. I know you don't like me saying these things & I'll probably be duly moderated, but there are times when RSC HAVE to take notice of the very people who keep them in business. Happy Christmas !!

[jarmstro]

......................... This can be seen especially at Colchester on the GEML route. However that station is all wonky doo laa anyway.. with the platform being really low one end and extremely high the other!

Probably the same cause of the problem at Stratford on the bridge. .. but then I wonder why RSC release it having passengers on it at all if they are sticking out the bottom in the most obvious immersion breaking way.

Sloping Platforms. That's perhaps a much bigger issue. Sloping platforms are in fact illegal!!! RSC are clearly breaking the law!!!! Actually I think this is the root of the wayward passenger problem as well.... The track is laid on a slope through a station and the platforms slope to match. The scripting of the passengers cant cope because where they expect the platform to be when they move it ain't!! Track and platforms through a station should and must be level. Full Stop. (GEML is particularly bad in this respect.)

[theorganist]

Peter - it's not being glib at all - if after a succession of reports, nowt is done by RSC, what do you expect. And it might be worth adding that as everyone knows, RSC have a notoriously non existant support function & a non functional customer service dept. Many. many people have spent thousands on this hobby & all I'm suggesting (begging) is that RSC give support. They're moving at warp speed in releasing all this stuff which is brilliant, but it MUST be supported adequately.Trespassing, phantom humans magically evolving from deep in the cess or from under the platform edge is just NOT acceptable. I know you don't like me saying these things & I'll probably be duly moderated, but there are times when RSC HAVE to take notice of the very people who keep them in business. Happy Christmas !!

I agree its annoying although I have only noticed it on WSR! I was on WLOS and Woodhead yesterday evening and it did not occur once.

But....

Do we know if this has been widely reported to RSC?
How do we know they aren't looking at it?
I am not a computer programmer, for all I know this could be something which is going to take a long time to sort out!

It's all very well making sweeping statements but until there are some hard facts, it might take them a few weeks to sort out, maybe it is something they have difficulty replicating, I don't know. I imagine that if it is a big issue they will be getting loads of complaints!

The first thing to do is make sure RS Support know about it. I would love to know how many people complain about faults but haven't actually informed support!

I would personally give them at least a few weeks and then complain about inaction!

Peter

[Merlin75]

It was reported to them back when it was first noticed in TS2013 so about a year ago. They never replied to the FB posts that reported it. It has become a lot worse in TS2014 and quite rightly people who have spent a lot of money on this game want it fixed. But how long should they be given to fix something they have known about this for the past year and did nothing and it remains to be seen if they will do anything this time as they think there is nothing wrong with this traingame.

[moose4675]

Ive sent an email to them recently regarding passengers sunk to there waists on stations. Dunford bridge on Woodhead I find very problematic.
They replied quickly and believe it or not told me to clear the cache and verify the integrity of the files!!!!!
I have since sent them another email but have had no reply.

[theorganist]

Well if it has been that long that's different. I had never noticed it until last week so was not aware of it, it's strange how it is presumably not affecting everyone or to a lesser extent.

Peter

[Fodda]

It's all very well making sweeping statements but until there are some hard facts, it might take them a few weeks to sort out, maybe it is something they have difficulty replicating, I don't know. I imagine that if it is a big issue they will be getting loads of complaints!

The first thing to do is make sure RS Support know about it. I would love to know how many people complain about faults but haven't actually informed support!

I would personally give them at least a few weeks and then complain about inaction!

Peter

It's also all very well giving RSC the benefit of the doubt at every opportunity.

One cold hard fact is that the WCML-N buffers problem has been around since gawd knows when. At least three years I think... And have RSC done anything about the numerous complaints and emails sent them about it? NO! They ignore it completely and hope it'll go away on it's own. That and the godawful banking/double-heading problems that have been in TrainGame since the days or RailSimulator and only just getting ironed out show that they really don't care a hoot about the end-user. Oh yes, they update the game for free, but what have we got in the last few iterations... Eye candy and crashes. No underlying core updates. I'd pay for DX11 coded graphics and sounds... So getting a new GUI for free? YES! I'd expect those kinds of little patches for free.

And so, as can be seen in this thread, a lot of people who've spent a LOT of money are getting seriously peeved off at RSC. Myself very much included.

[Kromaatikse]

I've heard on the grapevine that RSC are definitely aware of the trespassing problem, but don't have a solution for it yet.

[gptech]

Be peeved with RSC if you want, but is there a need to take it out on each other?

[749006]

I've heard on the grapevine that RSC are definitely aware of the trespassing problem, but don't have a solution for it yet.

It would be helpful if RSC backdated the part of the game which controls the Passenger movements to an earlier version where they mostly stood around.
Then when a proven soloution to the problem was available they could release the updated files.

As a side - is there anyway for us, the players, switch the movements off so the passengers are there but static?

[AndyUK]

....Sloping Platforms. That's perhaps a much bigger issue. Sloping platforms are in fact illegal!!! RSC are clearly breaking the law!!!! ......Track and platforms through a station should and must be level. Full Stop. (GEML is particularly bad in this respect.)

Presumably a joke? To set the record straight whilst it may not be permitted to open a new platform which is on a gradient steeper than 'x' where 'x' may be zero but I don't have the exact figure to hand, that certainly wasn't the case in the past and Network Rail haven't been obliged to level all platforms retrospectively. There's therefore no reason to expect that the track through all platforms on the RSC GEML route to be level, unless someone can come up with a gradient profile that proves otherwise.

Andy L

[K2rover]

There was already a thread for this problem:

http://forums.uktrainsim.com/viewtopic. ... &sk=t&sd=a

I emailed so called 'support' and received diddly squat in reply. Seems like RSC are burying their heads in the sand!

[jarmstro]

....Sloping Platforms. That's perhaps a much bigger issue. Sloping platforms are in fact illegal!!! RSC are clearly breaking the law!!!! ......Track and platforms through a station should and must be level. Full Stop. (GEML is particularly bad in this respect.)

Presumably a joke? To set the record straight whilst it may not be permitted to open a new platform which is on a gradient steeper than 'x' where 'x' may be zero but I don't have the exact figure to hand, that certainly wasn't the case in the past and Network Rail haven't been obliged to level all platforms retrospectively. There's therefore no reason to expect that the track through all platforms on the RSC GEML route to be level, unless someone can come up with a gradient profile that proves otherwise.

Andy L

No, that is not correct. From the year dot it was unlawful for any platform to be built to anything other than level. There may have been some slight leniency of which I am unaware of but basically all platforms were built without any gradient to comply with the law. Tracks through stations should be level. If some one could give me an example of a UK real life sloping platform I will eat my hat!!!

John A

[FoggyMorning]

This information comes from the Railway Group Standards websites. Note that it has been superseded, but I would imagine the principles remain the same.

http://www.rgsonline.co.uk/Railway_Grou ... ss%202.pdf

2.2 Vertical track alignment through station platforms
2.2.1 Wherever possible, platforms shall be located on track with an average gradient
not steeper than 1 in 500. It is permissible for platforms to be located on track
with average gradients steeper that 1 in 500 provided trains are not planned to
terminate or reverse at the platform. Where platforms are located on gradients
steeper than 1 in 500, consideration shall be given to the need for additional
arrangements to ensure safety.
2.2.2 The gradient through the platform shall be constant unless the particular
geographical characteristics of the site and the characteristics of the railway
infrastructure at the proposed location of the platform do not provide a reasonable
opportunity for achieving this. Where the gradient is not constant, the average
gradient shall be measured over the length of any train likely to use the platform
in its planned stopping position.

3.1 Platform height
3.1.1 For new platforms and alterations (as defined) to existing platforms, the height at
the edge of the platform shall be 915 mm (within a tolerance of +0, -25 mm)
measured at right angles to the plane of the rails of the track adjacent to the
platform.
3.1.2 Where a new platform or an alteration to an existing platform abuts an existing
platform, any discrepancy in height and alignment of the platform shall be
gradually tapered into the existing platform. The transition gradient shall not
exceed 1 in 20.

This implies that where track adjacent to a platform is on a gradient, the platform itself shall also be on a grade in order to achieve a consistent height above rail as specified.

With regard to the issue at hand as relates to TrainSim; it is in my experience not something that is newly arisen with TS2014 (though there are new wrinkles; notably passengers repeatedly walking in circles on the spot) - I've experienced passengers levitating across the line at York on the "original" ECML route in various scenarios for as long as I've owned the game. I believe (though I can't now locate my original source for reference on this) that it's something to do with the way the game engine renders lofts, in particular in relation to areas where there is a lot of draw on system resources - my experience is certainly that it is something that is most likely to occur at major stations with their (generally) high related asset count. Curved stations also seem more prone to it (again, in my experience) - see the York example above; Brighton is another one that seems to be particularly likely to trigger this phenomenon.