Page 1 of 1
| points set against 06/07/2020 at 10:38 #129120 | |
slatteryc
254 posts |
didn't happen with a sim version < 5 but now as I send trains toward bolton from Salford, trains seem to get a points set against error ( P5 at Bolton ? ) and there is nothing there I can change. Save file attached .. anyone any ideas ? 2N28 is the example in the attached but I have had to remove a few from the sim Post has attachments. Log in to view them. Log in to reply |
| points set against 06/07/2020 at 11:33 #129122 | |
Hap
1037 posts |
Do you have a snap shot from about 1600? Is this overall save from Pre-V5? i.e did you start the game before loader 5 was released? How to report an issue: www.SimSig.co.uk/Wiki/Show?page=usertrack:reportanissue Last edited: 06/07/2020 at 11:34 by Hap Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| points set against 06/07/2020 at 18:09 #129151 | |
|
slatteryc
254 posts |
yes it was started before v5 upgrade
Post has attachments. Log in to view them. Log in to reply |
| points set against 06/07/2020 at 18:17 #129152 | |
GeoffM
6376 posts |
The trackwork around Salford changed significantly to accommodate the reversible signalling and Ordsall Chord upgrades. As such, the save cannot be used. Basically, trains are on tracks that don't exist anymore.
SimSig Boss Log in to reply |
| points set against 06/07/2020 at 18:19 #129153 | |
|
Hap
1037 posts |
As advised when loading the save after you updated to V5, (as with any other save after a loader update) the TT may not be compatible. I've ran the same TT on the latest loader and haven't had the issue.
How to report an issue: www.SimSig.co.uk/Wiki/Show?page=usertrack:reportanissue Log in to reply |
| points set against 06/07/2020 at 18:41 #129160 | |
|
slatteryc
254 posts |
thats quite disappointing. You should have a big warning button on the upgrade or a choice to rollback to V4 .. As for the "as advised" comment thats been warned about for years with no real issues
Log in to reply The following user said thank you: UKTrainMan |
| points set against 06/07/2020 at 19:06 #129164 | |
|
GeoffM
6376 posts |
slatteryc in post 129160 said:You should have a big warning button on the upgradeYou did get a warning, which you clicked to acknowledge. It was also stated in the article to which a link was provided in our V5 announcement. SimSig Boss Log in to reply The following users said thank you: Hap, jc92 |
| points set against 06/07/2020 at 19:10 #129165 | |
jc92
3685 posts |
slatteryc in post 129160 said:As for the "as advised" comment thats been warned about for years with no real issuesIf I gave you a revolver with 1 bullet in and advised you not to put it to your head and pull the trigger the first 5 times it clicks and then its goes off on the 6th pull, did I not give enough warning? While it might have not caused previous issues for you, there is always a risk involved when doing so which is why its always advised and I can't say fair to assume that because its worked previously, it'll work again just fine. "We don't stop camborne wednesdays" Log in to reply |
| points set against 06/07/2020 at 20:15 #129171 | |
|
slatteryc
254 posts |
Oh for sure but a blanket "suck it up and drive on... your problem mate" is, as I said, disappointing. My saves up till now after many many "check for upgrade/execute" had not been invalidated ; cry wolf at the very least. In most recent upgrades, I've ended up pressing the upgrade button to stop the nag And Geoff as for warnings, I clicked a lot of things trying to get it working due the scale issues I had - was it one of the hidden bits ? I've been here since paged sims and I'm no newcomer to upgrading sims; this particular upgrade seems badly thought out and poorly executed, and to me at least, of no benefit. My original question has been answered, not as I'd hoped, but at least answered, so thanks at least for that. Log in to reply |
| points set against 06/07/2020 at 20:41 #129181 | |
|
Stephen Fulcher
2078 posts |
There have been numerous cases over the years where updates to simulations that fix bugs that have been reported or features requested on these forums have caused save games not to work thereafter. It is not uncommon amongst games, I have had the same occur with Prison Architect and Factorio as well. Log in to reply The following user said thank you: TUT |
| points set against 13/07/2020 at 10:09 #129537 | |
|
clive
2789 posts |
slatteryc in post 129171 said:Oh for sure but a blanket "suck it up and drive on... your problem mate" is, as I said, disappointing. My saves up till now after many many "check for upgrade/execute" had not been invalidated ; cry wolf at the very least. In most recent upgrades, I've ended up pressing the upgrade button to stop the nagThe problem is that a sim change can range from trivial to complex and how this affects saved games can vary so much it's not possible to easily distinguish or mechanically determine whether there will be a problem. For example, at one end of the scale we have an object being moved a bit on the screen or a spelling mistake in a piece of text being fixed. That information isn't in the saved game at all, so old saves will work fine with the updated sim. Now suppose the joint between adjacent track circuits is in the wrong place. To fix it means increasing the length of one and decreasing the length of the other. That also won't appear in the save *unless* a train is sitting on one or both of those track circuits. In that case there might be a problem with that train, though the train movement logic *should* resolve it fairly quickly. Now suppose a track circuit has to be split into two or even just renamed. If it's on a piece of unused track, fine. But the names are used in the saves (take a look) and so if there's a route set over that track circuit or a train on it things will get confused. The route might untangle itself (I'd have to check the sectional release code to be sure) but you could easily end up with a train with a hole in it (the save records all the track circuits that each train is on, in order), which might do odd things to it. And then we get bigger changes. Adding a new era often requires hidden changes (such as what we call developers call "monorail tracks"  to sew up the hems where the new era and old era separate from each other. These can, again, affect routes or trains near that boundary.Or someone hits an edge case to do with unusual locking, or an AHB next to a complex junction (carefully does not look at Kiln Lane AHB on the Cambridge sim), which doesn't do the right thing in one situation. Fixing that may result in major changes to the internal logic. If the new logic has a rule that variables X and Y can't both equal 3 at the same time, but the old logic didn't, a saved game could put the sim in a state where the logic can't recover. Let me give a concrete example. When I wrote WembleySub it was necessary to have two copies of the layout at Watford High Street, one with controlled signals and the junction to Croxley and the other with automatic signals and no branch junction. That meant each track circuit was in there twice with, IIRC, a suffix in the name. Then I made a change to the core code that allowed different eras to have different types of signals on the same track circuit. This meant that there was no need for the two copies; I could just lock the junction points normal and not display them on the screen. That simplified the sim logic somewhat but meant that the whole layout in that area works differently internally, *even though there is no visible change and it behaves the same as far as the user is concerned*. If you use an old save with the new version, trains that were in the WHS area might misbehave and you could end up with very odd behaviour if you are using the non-Croxley layout and the points happened to be in the wrong position. But a saved game full of trains down at the Willedsen and Camden end and others sitting at Watford Junction waiting to go will behave just fine in respect of this (I forget what other changes had to be made). So, I'm afraid, while the warning often looks like crying wolf, there's no way to be sure and all we can say is "caveat ludius". Log in to reply The following users said thank you: Meld, WesternChampion, y10g9 |
| points set against 13/07/2020 at 12:43 #129544 | |
postal
5264 posts 
|
That leads on to the problem I have with the current update process. Because there is no warning about what is to be updated when the "Check for Updates" button is pressed, there is always the danger that the session you are about to resume will have to be aborted. The only option if you wish to caveat ludius is not to click on the "Check for Updates" button if you have a saved session which you may wish to resume at some stage in the future. It would give the user a bit more control if there was a message after the "Check for Updates" button was clicked to say that sims X/Y/Z, TTs X/Y/Z or loader are about to be updated and the option to proceed or revert. “In life, there is always someone out there, who won’t like you, for whatever reason, don’t let the insecurities in their lives affect yours.” – Rashida Rowe Last edited: 13/07/2020 at 12:43 by postal Reason: None given Log in to reply The following user said thank you: UKTrainMan |