DTG producing the South London network

[Electricfox]

After all why would you rebuild it all again?

Er, this isn't an RSC/DTG reboot, remember that this is a 3rd party route which was made as a personal project by gyprc here on the forums. If anyone is going to say that DTG are "going back to basics" again to do another London based route, then remember that this actually isn't a DTG route.

Despite the problems people have of this being another London route, I'm very keen to get this when it comes out. My favorite city in Europe is London (yes, even over Dublin ), so any new content that will build on the collection of capitol routes I'll be quite interested in (especially when it's done to gyprc's standard).

But maybe gyprc is at liberty to tell us where this route covers? I don't see why DTG would have an issue with giving out that info, unless they've been building on it themselves and he doesn't actually know?

Kev

My thoughts exactly.. Yes its being released by a DTG its not produced by them. Its produced by someone who has spent a lot of time and effort on producing this addon, and I have to say the quality looks brilliant. So don't shoot it down too quickly. Yes its not going to be everyones cup of tea but I'm sure it appeals to many, me Included and thats because I work on the Brighton Mainline.

Ah, well that changes matters. gybrc has an eye for detail, so this should be very good indeed. A pity that it's set in the modern day as opposed to the slamdoor era, but at least we know it'll be very detailed and well made.

[Bradforth]

gptech,
If DTG don't get there act together then a lot of people will be sat idle, sorry TS 2014 in my opinion was much better, I've had so many problems with TS 2015 I have uninstalled it from my desktop PC I have had so many crashes I thought it was going to damage my PC. I have just got a second installation on my laptop to try out any further updates before reinstalling on my desktop as my main install when DTG get it right.

Regards,
Pete.

[Merlin75]

I'm buying this just because of who made it and the screen shots look amazing despite the fact it's another London bus route . Plus I'm hoping he'll release his version of the GEML next.

[gptech]

Pete, you're missing my point: it's no good putting everybody to work on core issues when a number of those people don't have the skills to do that job.
You're having major stability issues; if that was core programming related we all would so there's a distinct possibility that the root cause is specific to your hardware and/or configuration. It might help you to start a new thread and see what the membership can suggest.

[david1]

This route seems very strange for both DTG and Railworks, I say this because we had a similar route in MSTS days which was a very big route in terms of mileage, as we are lead to believe RW does not support very long routes that are built up like we have in the UK and also DTG are renown for doing shorter routes, if this is the case they if we are getting a network of routes then either each driveable segment is going to be very small just a few miles in each direction of London, i.e East Croydon to Cricklewood as we no know London Bridge is modelled or if we are going to get a good run then only the most powerful top end computers are going to be able to run it. I am going to wait and see how this pans out before deciding whether or not to buy this as i am not into very short drives unless very well modelled or if very demanding on resources will pass and see how it performs for others, in principle it sounds like a good route though.

[gptech]

Doesn't support long routes?..........
we'd all best delete WCML-N then.

[Irishrailguy]

This route seems very strange for both DTG and Railworks, I say this because we had a similar route in MSTS days which was a very big route in terms of mileage, as we are lead to believe RW does not support very long routes that are built up like we have in the UK and also DTG are renown for doing shorter routes

Have you read any of the other posts on this thread? It's been confirmed that this isn't a DTG route, it's gyprc's project that was previewed on these forums a while back, so therefore there's no reason to assume it'll be a 'snippet' of a larger network. However I'd still like to hear from gyprc himself as to what this 'network' covers...

Kev

[rfletcher72]

Doesn't support long routes?..........
we'd all best delete WCML-N then.

Indeed, look at the length of some of the US routes.

I think it is more to do with the total track mileage a route has as opposed to it's length from A to B. A case in point is Woodhead, relatively short from east to west, but if you were to lay each piece of track the route contains end to end, it would be a different story. Woodhead has, erm, quite a sizeable Tracks.bin file. I think it is this notion that is being confused with a route's length.

Regards,

[Bradforth]

gptech wrote

Pete, you're missing my point: it's no good putting everybody to work on core issues when a number of those people don't have the skills to do that job.
You're having major stability issues; if that was core programming related we all would so there's a distinct possibility that the root cause is specific to your hardware and/or configuration. It might help you to start a new thread and see what the membership can suggest.

Hi again,
I think your name is Gary, my main point is that my TS 2014 installation is running great, very little or no stuttering on most routes even the heavy ones, visually I am also very satisfied no system crashes so I suppose I am biased towards TS 2014, this installation is always offline.
My TS 2015 installation is a copy of my TS 2014 installation updated to TS 2015 so in my mind everything should work ok because its basically TS2014 updated to TS 2015
But visually I don't think it is as good, perhaps I did exaggerate with the number of system crashes, but I have still had quite a few, I also suffer from levitating passengers on platforms none of these I have experienced with TS 2014.
So you can appreciate why I am reluctant to change when I have a good working setup, I sincerely hope that DTG does get all the faults put right for all members because reading through the threads there seems to be quite a few that are not happy with TS 2015. The biggest loses in all this will be us because at the end of the day it still gives us a lot of pleasure.
I think I will wait until DTG issue new updates to see how it performs.
I am convinced that my hardware/configurations are fine otherwise I would have the same issues with TS 2014.

Just out of interest J.T. emailed me stating that the new routes that they are working on will work on 2014 or 2015, why can't DTG do the same
Any comments positive or negative would be most welcome.
I suppose at the end of the day I'm an old fashioned guy that thinks when you buy something it should work.

Regards,
Pete.

[Irishrailguy]

I also suffer from levitating passengers on platforms none of these I have experienced with TS 2014.
So you can appreciate why I am reluctant to change when I have a good working setup, I sincerely hope that DTG does get all the faults put right for all members because reading through the threads there seems to be quite a few that are not happy with TS 2015. The biggest loses in all this will be us because at the end of the day it still gives us a lot of pleasure.

I don't see why you're posting that here to be honest. This thread is about a route, not core game issues. You appear to be saying that you're not satisfied with DTG producing new content like this when there are many problems with the core software. A lot of people seem to make this complaint about DTG, but the problem with this is that core game issues have nothing to do with route development. There's a team that's focused on content creation, and then there's the programmers. The programmers aren't taking any time away from the core game code because the route development team are making a route, the two are mutually exclusive.

If you have problems with the game and how it runs (I've no issues with how it performs at the moment) then I suggest you start a thread on the matter, but I think we should keep this thread on the matter of the new route.

Kev

[david1]

I think it is more to do with the total track mileage a route has as opposed to it's length from A to B. A case in point is Woodhead, relatively short from east to west, but if you were to lay each piece of track the route contains end to end, it would be a different story. Woodhead has, erm, quite a sizeable Tracks.bin file. I think it is this notion that is being confused with a route's length.

That is my concern about track miles not length WCML(N) is only 102 miles one of the longest end to end routes in the UK, but south London Network if it was to comprise of say 8, 25 mile sections then you are looking at 200 miles baring in mind that around London you are looking a mainly 4 tracks and WCML is only 2 so routes mileage is around 4 times as much track are modest PC`s going to cope or will we have to wait for the `Unreal Engine`

[37114]

Now don't quote me on this but I believe the sim starts to break when the tracks.bin file gets to around 10mb. At a rough guess if you include all the lines covered by WCMLN that would equate to 300 track miles. Based on the rough assumption that the subsidiary lines add around 50 to the core 104. The file size for that is 6.5mb so i think we've plenty in store for good coverage of South London whomever it's been built by. Looking forward to it even though I'd prefer a Midlands based network. Maybe I'll do that myself though once we have the new game engine.

[Bradforth]

Hi,
Apologies to all forum members for digressing from the subject title, of course I wish new routes to be developed, but I also wish that the core engine would play these routes to their best advantage.
I will now leave it at that.
Regards.
Pete.

[gptech]

Now don't quote me on this but I believe the sim starts to break when the tracks.bin file gets to around 10mb.

Sorry...couldn't resist quoting you

To be serious though, it's possible to crash the game--or any game--by overloading the PC it's running on, as ALL PCs have finite resources. A 5 mile stretch of track with an inordinate number of scenic assets around the track could cause problems for example.
With a commuter network such as South London the sheer number of signals, and the associated scripting and pathing options, could be more of a problem than just the amount of track, and this would/could push the tracks.bin file size up.
Has anybody noted any change in the performance of their machine around the *busier* parts of what we already have in the London area? If there's a noticeable improvement that could indicate a more efficient core routine which may alleviate such problems---if it's got worse then we're all up that mucky creek though...

[Leadcatcher]

gptech,
If DTG don't get there act together then a lot of people will be sat idle, sorry TS 2014 in my opinion was much better, I've had so many problems with TS 2015 I have uninstalled it from my desktop PC I have had so many crashes I thought it was going to damage my PC. I have just got a second installation on my laptop to try out any further updates before reinstalling on my desktop as my main install when DTG get it right.

Regards,
Pete.

Wow - sorry to hear you are having so many problems - I have actually experienced no problems with crashes or performance problems - Lucky I guess, in fact have messed around a bit with Nvidia inspector and have actually improved my overall graphics - So I am about the same as or a little better off than I was with 2014 - that being said, back to the topic-

Would love if the route would extend down to Dover Priory - Living in TX - not sure of all the lines, but my son is going to school in Canterbury and I have taking the train a few times from Deal - to Dover then up to Canterbury - would like to be able to replicate that in TS