A Co-Host feature / Client Functionality

A lot of clients also don't realise the the information they can glean for the TD pop-ups eg:
a) whether a train exists (TT shows 'no history' or 'on time/early/late)';
b) when divides/joins are complete (the displayed TT updates);
c) TDs are shown when a train gives TRTS;
d) lost TDs can be found by waiting for the driver to call if held at a signal (I believe this is a real life requirement too;
e) whether a train has actually departed (TT will show next location);

I use all of these 'tips' to help the host by reducing their workload

In a similar vein, could it be possible for clients to view the F2 list, even with no functionality? It would remove the requests for "What is the status of X?" questions.

... such as a "mouse-over" which could display headcode, speed, direction and current activity too..."

a player of SimSig is not a trained signalman and neither is he/she part of a railway system with written timetables, documents, telephones, faxes and bell codes available to them

Headcodes dropping off the sim, as they so frequently do, is a hindrance to running the game and simply causes problems

many AB boxes do now have a separate train describer unit so don't quite lose track of which train is which

It would be wrong to add a second host to deal with these questions. That will just introduce confusion and blur lines of responsibility. Likewise, for giving clients the ability to reverse trains. That would diminish the role of the host and cause chaos, with clients able to reverse trains at will and without warning to the host or to other clients. I believe that one host only should have control over changes to the timetable. This works well and provides the host with a role while the clients signal the trains. So, all the F2 and F4 features should remain with a single host.

A lot of signal boxes will not have the ability to display train descriptions for things like shunt movements, so by not displaying a train headcode on any sim that includes this kind of box, then the developer is creating a true to life representation of any such location.

I maybe wrong here but I believe that in a real box the signaller has full control over his panel including the ability to instruct trains to do whatever he wants them to do (obviously in consultation with colleagues) but never the less the final instruction will come from the panel signaller not the manager.

DriverCurran, while I appreciate that you might want to strive for absolute realism, a player of SimSig is not a trained signalman and neither is he/she part of a railway system with written timetables, documents, telephones, faxes and bell codes available to them.

Likewise, for giving clients the ability to reverse trains. That would diminish the role of the host and cause chaos, with clients able to reverse trains at will and without warning to the host or to other clients. I believe that one host only should have control over changes to the timetable. This works well and provides the host with a role while the clients signal the trains. So, all the F2 and F4 features should remain with a single host.

, if there was a new signaller joining MP for the first few times, we could assign a co-host to respond to signaller's requests while we supervise and teach new signallers the ins and outs of railway signalling.

but then you would have arguments on who would be co-host

afro09 wrote: Likewise, for giving clients the ability to reverse trains. That would diminish the role of the host and cause chaos, with clients able to reverse trains at will and without warning to the host or to other clients. I believe that one host only should have control over changes to the timetable. This works well and provides the host with a role while the clients signal the trains. So, all the F2 and F4 features should remain with a single host.

Peter Bennet said:

I maybe wrong here but I believe that in a real box the signaller has full control over his panel including the ability to instruct trains to do whatever he wants them to do (obviously in consultation with colleagues) but never the less the final instruction will come from the panel signaller not the manager.

Peter, as far as I am aware from irish signalling protocall at CTC, all signalling decisions are made as a joint decision between the panel signaller and the control regulator, with the signaller giving the train drivers the instructions of running non-stop, turning back etc. The regulator will only speak with the driver in cases of an emergency such as a train being involved in a fatality or a train failing. So in my view clients being the signallers and host being the regulator, giving clients access to the F2 menu would make sim more realistic. But this of course would require clients to discuss and obtain permission for what they want to do with/from the host. One thing I would say is clients should not be given the option to remove or alter train lenghts.

Callum,

when you are quoting a quote you should quote the whole quote as if not you may be accusing somebody of saying something they didn't actually say. Note the way Peter has re-quoted above.

Also, sticky notes do more than they do in real life or shouldn't I be mis-using them to show TDs?