Page 3 of 3
| Simulation speculation - Derby Meet 27/07/2019 30/07/2019 at 08:30 #119740 | |
metcontrol
227 posts 
|
I find large sims with ARS a "different" challenge. You go from a system where "nothing moves without me setting a route" to the more or less opposite "everything moves until you stop it from moving." You are managing the ARS system rather than signalling each individual train. Personally I have worked similar systems (not ARS but timetable operated) and find the ARS sims an alternative challenge. Yes you will probably encounter more down-time where you need to do very little except watch what is happening. But spotting when things are about to go wrong and avoiding the system piling everything into an area where you're not moving is an alternative "challenge." Each to their own I say - we do have a very varied selection of sims catering for a wide area of tastes. Log in to reply The following user said thank you: VInce |
| Simulation speculation - Derby Meet 27/07/2019 30/07/2019 at 11:30 #119745 | |
Splodge
716 posts
|
I realise they weren't used at the meet, but was there any gen released regarding Warrington and Preston PSB sims?
There's the right way, the wrong way and the railway. Log in to reply |
| Simulation speculation - Derby Meet 27/07/2019 30/07/2019 at 12:03 #119747 | |
headshot119
4869 posts |
Splodge in post 119745 said:I realise they weren't used at the meet, but was there any gen released regarding Warrington and Preston PSB sims?In short no. "Passengers for New Lane, should be seated in the rear coach of the train " - Opinions are my own and not those of my employer Log in to reply The following users said thank you: Splodge, Trainfan344 |
| Simulation speculation - Derby Meet 27/07/2019 31/07/2019 at 06:32 #119759 | |
jem771
102 posts
|
Not sure if its possible but to cater for all, couldn't these mammoth sims be broken up (a bit like Rugby SCC) Then they can be chained for multi-player if need be but are a lot more manageable in smaller sections?
Jezz Log in to reply The following users said thank you: TUT, VInce |
| Simulation speculation - Derby Meet 27/07/2019 31/07/2019 at 12:12 #119762 | |
SamTDS
153 posts |
jem771 in post 119759 said:Not sure if its possible but to cater for all, couldn't these mammoth sims be broken up (a bit like Rugby SCC) Then they can be chained for multi-player if need be but are a lot more manageable in smaller sections?Moderator note - The views expressed in this post are not made by a member of the SimSig team. READ THE NOTE FIRST Good idea, unfortunately one of the main reasons for them being combined is one of the bugs that were on the old versions of the individual sims, notably Brighton P2. Making it easier and more time effective to have them combined and wipe out the bugs in one go on a single sim than updating multiple sims. NOTE: This is my interpretation of a disscussion i had on the day about the bug in the current brighton which affects only 2 of the trains in the whole TT provided. I am not directly part of the teams, Geof is very right where they do go through all bug reports they get, I have been able to see this myself. SamTDS - STDS | My comments are my opinions and interpretations and do not reflect on the wonderfull SimSig team. I am in no way part of the team. Last edited: 01/08/2019 at 10:30 by headshot119 Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Simulation speculation - Derby Meet 27/07/2019 31/07/2019 at 16:10 #119768 | |
Edgemaster
332 posts |
SamTDS in post 119762 said:Good idea, unfortunately one of the main reasons for them being combined is one of the bugs that were on the old versions of the individual sims, notably Brighton P2. Making it easier and more time effective to have them combined and wipe out the bugs in one go on a single sim than updating multiple sims.Erm, what? Log in to reply |
| Simulation speculation - Derby Meet 27/07/2019 31/07/2019 at 16:54 #119772 | |
|
Danny252
1461 posts |
That statement gave me the impression that the Simsig team is happy to admit that they'd rather build a new sim replacing an old one, rather than fixing the bugs in those sims which are already released. It certainly doesn't give me much confidence that most bug reports will be acted upon!
Last edited: 31/07/2019 at 16:55 by Danny252 Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Simulation speculation - Derby Meet 27/07/2019 31/07/2019 at 17:00 #119773 | |
GeoffM
6376 posts
|
Danny252 in post 119772 said:That statement gave me the impression that the Simsig team is happy to admit that they'd rather build a new sim replacing an old one, rather than fixing the bugs in those sims which are already released. It certainly doesn't give me much confidence that most bug reports will be acted upon!I echo Edgemaster's comment. This is not a reflection of reality. SimSig Boss Log in to reply |
| Simulation speculation - Derby Meet 27/07/2019 31/07/2019 at 17:05 #119774 | |
|
GeoffM
6376 posts
|
jem771 in post 119759 said:Not sure if its possible but to cater for all, couldn't these mammoth sims be broken up (a bit like Rugby SCC) Then they can be chained for multi-player if need be but are a lot more manageable in smaller sections?It involves more work as each simulation overlaps the next, plus chaining data is not trivial in some cases. SimSig Boss Log in to reply |
| Simulation speculation - Derby Meet 27/07/2019 31/07/2019 at 18:05 #119775 | |
|
SamTDS
153 posts |
GeoffM in post 119773 said:Danny252 in post 119772 said:I do apoligise for it, especially how percived. I have added a note to be read first stating I am not a part of it and it was my perception of a discussion i had on the day.That statement gave me the impression that the Simsig team is happy to admit that they'd rather build a new sim replacing an old one, rather than fixing the bugs in those sims which are already released. It certainly doesn't give me much confidence that most bug reports will be acted upon!I echo Edgemaster's comment. This is not a reflection of reality. SamTDS - STDS | My comments are my opinions and interpretations and do not reflect on the wonderfull SimSig team. I am in no way part of the team. Log in to reply |
| Simulation speculation - Derby Meet 27/07/2019 31/07/2019 at 19:02 #119776 | |
|
Stephen Fulcher
2078 posts |
To take a recent example, Staffordshire, there really is no comparison between it and the ten-year old free Stafford sim. For a start, it contains a far larger area and is a completely different era. The level of detail is also far higher as the information available today is much more substantial than was the case when the original sim was written, and a lot more features are available to developers these days. To say that bugs are not fixed is a gross distortion of the truth. The vast majority of released sims, and certainly the pay ware ones, are fixed quickly when anything but the most trivial bug is reported, and the trivial ones are always fixed too. I remember when Cardiff was released an update was provided that same day when an issue was reported on the forum, which is better than you would get from Microsoft or Apple. Although of the same area, the new sims released are completely new from a blank sheet up, there is no commonality with the older sims at all, therefore it is not a case of taking an old sim and simply adding a bit on the end. Log in to reply |
| Simulation speculation - Derby Meet 27/07/2019 31/07/2019 at 21:40 #119779 | |
|
JeroenS
4 posts |
I've been wondering about asking for another feature that might make big sims a bit easier to run, although they would require ARS to be present. A sim like London Bridge is effectively cut in two parts, the Southern and Southeastern side. Thameslink crosses over and there are some potential diversions, but for the most part they are quite separated. Either of them could make for an interesting sim, while the combined sim is big for single player, especially with failures and delays turned on. You could turn ARS on for the other areas, but it won't be good at handling delays and especially failures. To help players like myself who enjoy playing with the challenge of some failures, but want to (sometimes) control a smaller part of the sim, would it be possible to disable delays and failures on a per-panel basis? That way, a player could leave the Southern side of London Bridge in ARS and focus on the Southeastern side, or in the case of Three Bridges, focus on East Croydon while not worrying about what happens in Brighton. I realise that with ARS being what it is, these areas would still occasionally require some attention, but it would make them easier to run. I also realise the data probably isn't there for all sims and that it's easier to ask for than to implement it, but it might help when there's time for it Log in to reply |
| Simulation speculation - Derby Meet 27/07/2019 31/07/2019 at 21:44 #119780 | |
Steamer
3984 posts |
One option for you (if you don't mind "cheating" ) is to use the F11 incident control panel to instantly fix any failures that occur on ARS-supervised panels.
"Don't stress/ relax/ let life roll off your backs./ Except for death and paying taxes/ everything in life.../ is only for now." (Avenue Q) Last edited: 31/07/2019 at 21:44 by Steamer Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Simulation speculation - Derby Meet 27/07/2019 31/07/2019 at 21:57 #119781 | |
|
Jan
906 posts |
GeoffM in post 119774 said:jem771 in post 119759 said:Not sure if its possible but to cater for all, couldn't these mammoth sims be broken up (a bit like Rugby SCC) Then they can be chained for multi-player if need be but are a lot more manageable in smaller sections?It involves more work as each simulation overlaps the next, plus chaining data is not trivial in some cases. Also in case you don't actually mind the larger sim size, chained sims are somewhat more cumbersome to deal with than a single unified sim from a player perspective, too (each sim has to be scrolled separately, saving is a bit more effort because it needs to be done separately in each sim, you need to set up the chain in the first place, you need to deal with separate timetables, train lists, phone windows, etc.) Having said that, I do concede that on the other hand smaller sims at least give you the option to chain them back together into a larger area (provided compatible timetables are available, though) or not depending on taste, whereas as an user you can't really split a large sim into smaller bits. Two million people attempt to use Birmingham's magnificent rail network every year, with just over a million of them managing to get further than Smethwick. Log in to reply |
| Simulation speculation - Derby Meet 27/07/2019 01/08/2019 at 09:22 #119783 | |
|
Danny252
1461 posts |
GeoffM in post 119773 said:Danny252 in post 119772 said:I'm now rather confused about the whole conversation! Is SamTDS in disagreement with the rest of the Simsig "team", or is he not even part of it? Similarly, where does Edgemaster fit in?That statement gave me the impression that the Simsig team is happy to admit that they'd rather build a new sim replacing an old one, rather than fixing the bugs in those sims which are already released. It certainly doesn't give me much confidence that most bug reports will be acted upon!I echo Edgemaster's comment. This is not a reflection of reality. These days, I have no idea who speaks on behalf of Simsig (well, I'm fairly certain that Geoff and Clive do...!). It seems that half of the forum members are part of the Simsig "team" (going by the number of names I see associated with developing sims, writing official timetables, or submitting Mantis reports), but there's no clear indication of who's who. Last edited: 01/08/2019 at 09:25 by Danny252 Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| Simulation speculation - Derby Meet 27/07/2019 01/08/2019 at 10:15 #119784 | |
|
norman B
111 posts |
Echoing the previous post. I have used SimSig for a number of years but still do not know who is in what position or who does what! Can we have a brief whos who of eg bossman,assistants,main developmers and the main TT writers? Log in to reply |
| Simulation speculation - Derby Meet 27/07/2019 01/08/2019 at 10:26 #119785 | |
|
headshot119
4869 posts |
Danny252 in post 119783 said:GeoffM in post 119773 said:SamTDS has amended his original post. But to be clear he was not speaking in anyway on behalf of SimSig (Given that he is not a Tester or Developer), what was said originally in no way reflects how SimSig operates, or the decision process which lead to Three Bridges being combined into one sim.Danny252 in post 119772 said:I'm now rather confused about the whole conversation! Is SamTDS in disagreement with the rest of the Simsig "team", or is he not even part of it? Similarly, where does Edgemaster fit in?That statement gave me the impression that the Simsig team is happy to admit that they'd rather build a new sim replacing an old one, rather than fixing the bugs in those sims which are already released. It certainly doesn't give me much confidence that most bug reports will be acted upon!I echo Edgemaster's comment. This is not a reflection of reality. If you are ever in doubt about whether a user is an administrator, developer, or tester you can click on there forum profile where it will tell you. Thread locked to prevent further confusion. "Passengers for New Lane, should be seated in the rear coach of the train " - Opinions are my own and not those of my employer Last edited: 01/08/2019 at 10:28 by headshot119 Reason: None given Log in to reply |