Atomic Systems

michaelhendle wrote:Hi
As I said in another post about a commercial routes,it seems a shame the Commercial Developers don't listen to what we say about what we the customers wan't instead going ahead and doing what they think we want,this is aimed at the route makers really.
A MML main line set in the 1980's would be far more interesting to me than a 2015 MML version.

The same goes for Just Trains a 1960\70's version of the West Somerset be more interesting than a third version of the preserved route, and a 1960's Midland Great Northern version of the North Norfolk Railway would have been more interesting than the current one.

Mike

Don't they? A lot of users seem to prefer more modern routes which is exactly what DTG are churning out. Do you honestly think if modern London to location somewhere 50-100 miles out of London didn't sell well DTG would have produced London-Brighton, London - Ipswich, London - Peterborough, London - Faversham and London - other bits of London?

Also, if you want a 1980s route I'd be ready to expect a bigger cost. Look at the Creative Rail ECML, £40 a part, I'd expect DTG to have to up their prices for period routes, the cost of research alone would be shooting up.

Looking forward to this

Shorter routes usually mean higher detail, which is a definite want from me.

I have to agree with Dave unfortunately. All indications from my time of selling add-ons is that present day representations far outsell older periods. Combine that with the need for more research on older add-ons and it's a bit of a no brainer if you're literally in it just for the money. Which any sane large-scale business like Dovetail is.

To be honest too, a 50 mile route after the Riviera Line, South London Network and Liverpool - Manchester is not bad going at all, all three of those being shorter.

It would be nice if the London to Bedford route share some common tiles around London so it could connect to the South London route - which it's self is connected to L2B and you have Bedford to Brighton.

749006 wrote:It would be nice if the London to Bedford route share some common tiles around London so it could connect to the South London route - which it's self is connected to L2B and you have Bedford to Brighton.

This is probably the only way I would buy this. a merged Brighton - London Network - Bedford would be an epic route. Although would it be pushing the limits of the engine?

Dave4468 wrote:

749006 wrote:It would be nice if the London to Bedford route share some common tiles around London so it could connect to the South London route - which it's self is connected to L2B and you have Bedford to Brighton.

This is probably the only way I would buy this. a merged Brighton - London Network - Bedford would be an epic route. Although would it be pushing the limits of the engine?

Maybe. However I don't expect it will be much longer, if not shorter, than the scope covered by merging WCML North and WCML Over Shap.

johnrossetti wrote:My biggest wish is that new routes, where feesable - are joined to exisiting routes

Then we get to trying to work out which is an extension to an existing route, and which is merging routes 'just because they have a rail link'. Merged routes make little sense to many if there's no prototypical traffic across the length (or a big chunk of it) of both the combined routes.

gptech wrote:

johnrossetti wrote:My biggest wish is that new routes, where feesable - are joined to exisiting routes

Then we get to trying to work out which is an extension to an existing route, and which is merging routes 'just because they have a rail link'. Merged routes make little sense to many if there's no prototypical traffic across the length (or a big chunk of it) of both the combined routes.

In this instance there clearly would be a benefit.

phat2003uk wrote:I have to agree with Dave unfortunately. All indications from my time of selling add-ons is that present day representations far outsell older periods. Combine that with the need for more research on older add-ons and it's a bit of a no brainer if you're literally in it just for the money. Which any sane large-scale business like Dovetail is.

To be honest too, a 50 mile route after the Riviera Line, South London Network and Liverpool - Manchester is not bad going at all, all three of those being shorter.

Indeed, but that people liked all 3 of those. And as you say, they are shorter. I'm looking forward too it, but then I like Modern Image. Its good for scenarios (with thanks to Real Time Trains, etc).

I'm sure someone would be able to merge the BML/SLL to this new route. But then we'd need someone to model Blackfriars, etc.

dcfcfan wrote:....or even Sheffield for Mr Fletcher!

I'll drink to that......

Richard[/quote]

+1

Andy

You know what, I am just glad that someone (and obviously Dovetail in this instance) is still "churning" out the routes.

Yes it would be nice to have as great a range of routes for the 1980's, 1970's, 1960's, 1950's etc. but let's be honest there would not be sufficient demand across all eras and I think it makes more sense to have a "network" (even if existing in separate routes)that at least more or less matches in time. As much as I love WCMLoS I would have preferred a time match with WCML North (or rather, the other way round) - then what do you do with WLoS..?

My preferred time frame would probably be BR Blue at the latest across all routes, but I am happy to have what is provided.

In addition, DTG do have a commercial need to keep other parts of the globe in new track...overall we should just be happy they are sat in the UK and not somewhere else!

Rod

Wonder what Mystic Meg thinks?

Regards,

Len

A MML release without St Pancras would, imo, be laughed off the digital shelves.
My expectation is that the London-Faversham model of St Pancras will be recycled, which seems reasonable as it's not a bad portrayal. The Thameslink low-level platforms could be modelled without too much difficulty. I doubt there will be anything further east. Unfortunately this leaves the route unsatisfying on all levels. A lot of EM services do not call at Bedford so the scope for different scenarios is limited. At the same time, not including even the low-level St Pancras platforms would mean any Thameslink scenario must end at Kentish Town, which is even worse! Unless reality is to be ignored and we have 319s / 377s going into the terminus.

I'll say it again - a more logical route to depict would be Leicester-St Pancras with the widened lines to Moorgate, set after the opening of HS1 but before the Farringdon rebuilding. But I guess we should be grateful for another route that I'm sure will yield some enjoyment whatever section is modelled.

passedcleaner wrote:A MML release without St Pancras would, imo, be laughed off the digital shelves.
My expectation is that the London-Faversham model of St Pancras will be recycled, which seems reasonable as it's not a bad portrayal. The Thameslink low-level platforms could be modelled without too much difficulty. I doubt there will be anything further east. Unfortunately this leaves the route unsatisfying on all levels. A lot of EM services do not call at Bedford so the scope for different scenarios is limited. At the same time, not including even the low-level St Pancras platforms would mean any Thameslink scenario must end at Kentish Town, which is even worse! Unless reality is to be ignored and we have 319s / 377s going into the terminus.

I'll say it again - a more logical route to depict would be Leicester-St Pancras with the widened lines to Moorgate, set after the opening of HS1 but before the Farringdon rebuilding. But I guess we should be grateful for another route that I'm sure will yield some enjoyment whatever section is modelled.

Or every Thamelink Scenaio would have to be set when there is work on the core, or flooding at Farringdon

How about the major Thameslink project when the central section was closed, especially for a long set of weekends when they all went in/out of St Pancras Int, and every weekday night for that matter