[Railtraction]BR146-5

Zitat von tom87

Da wurde auch schon vor längerer Zeit bestätigt, dass da was kommen soll. Jetzt kommt erstmal anscheinend eine halbwes fahrbare 146.5

Ich kann mir i.M. nicht vorstellen, dass da etwas annaehernd gleichwertig Realistisches kommt. In den originalen vR BR 101, 145, 146, 152, 185.2, 189 waren meine PZB/LZB Module verbaut und die sind das Resultat jahrelanger Arbeit und tiefschuerfender Recherchen in den Ril Dokumenten gewesen. Eine PZB mit Ueberlagerungsfaehigkeit zu bauen ist eben etwas anderes als viele "if"-Zweige einzubauen und Laempchen an- und auszuschalten. Die PZB in den oben genannten Loks hatte eine Zustandsmaschine mit echter Parallelitaet fuer beliebig viele gleichzeitig laufende UF-Funktionen. Das Ergebnis war Realismus auch bei selten eintretenden Situationen. Aehnliches gilt fuer die LZB!

fuer ein Community-Repaint Projekt welches die vR Payware vorraussetzt, ist der Einbau aber sinnvoll und ein potentieller Gewinn fuer alle (inkl. vR)

StefanDD Haste schonmal 500 Zeilen If ElseIf gesehen? Sieht einfach aus alles ist. Kann dir auch mal Tage rauben.

Zitat von xtrame90

StefanDD Haste schonmal 500 Zeilen If ElseIf gesehen? Sieht einfach aus alles ist. Kann dir auch mal Tage rauben.

Genau mein Punkt: die PZB ist zu kompliziert um die moeglichen Situationen mit nur vielen Variablen und if-branches umzusetzen.

StefanDD Lots of TSC locos have correct PZB implementation. I don’t get why it’s “too complicated”.

Zitat von Kim_olesen1

StefanDD Lots of TSC locos have correct PZB implementation. I don’t get why it’s “too complicated”.

I didn't say it was "too complicated" (I did but that was in reference to only using many if-branches), but it is a complex enough that it is several thousand lines of code. I haven't really seen many (maybe I don't own them) other than the vR ones that correctly implement superposition of UF1000s, or the reactivation of all background UFs (after "freeing" yourself) on a new 1000Hz, or the conversion of UFs when a 500 UF gets restrictive, or the very basic fact that the PZB needs to run silently behind the LZB, registering all signals, processing all curves, to name only a few very common issues. Can you name one that is correct in your opinion? If I have it, I'll try it and let you know. SebastianO. has tested countless and can also comment.

The question is how much realism do you want? The PZB Implementation from StefanDD for example includes the 500hz restrictive short mode which i never see at any other rolling stock. But to be honest the most player´s of Train Simulator, don´t even know that there is a short version of the 500hz restrictive UF which only run over 200m and not 250m. The Railtraction implementation includes the overlap functionality after i contacted them. But there are sometimes problems with their implementation, the only one which will do the job correct is the script from Stefan.

StefanDD Ahhh i thought you meant that it was complex to drive with it. But you meant the complexity of the code. My bad.

Why you need a full working PZB with all thingys in it which moste users never heard off and also not seen or even not gonna experience , second TSC is even not able to run some decent amount of traffic on the lines without AI crashes.

When all that traffic and signals really need to work than all that advanced systems are nice.

Till today LZB is just some mimick of the real thing in all locos which are available , based on a couple of lua calls of incomming information.

Moste TSC users dont need it, and that small amount which want all that stuff everytime realistic go for Zusi 3.

Better spend that time on make parts from the locomotive correct( Frontlight switch as example which work in some even not correct ) , Also VR have thingys not correct, it is what it is and for moste players not an issue because they have no idea how it need to work.

The fun part is how some developers always need to talk from the highest tower how advanced and good they made something, but in the background have there things also not perfect.

Come on its just TSC which Mimick 80 percent of the locomotive with some lua.

Every developer have own focus how to deliver a product, some focus and spend more time in visuals and other on code to get the if else ifelse things on the right place instead of extra if, and spend less time in the textures or full cabin. Let them do how they want, and dont make something bad on a detail.

mikede Thanks so much for your contribution to this discussion! It really helps me to understand that all of this is pointless since it is a game (and not Zusi 3). BTW, in real life, LZB is also just a bunch of code (running on a microprocessor) responding to incoming information (telegrams).

mikede

Well, I disagree with that.

Because I don't think you speak for most, especially German TSC locomotive drivers.

I would hazard a guess that it's more important to them to have a PZB/LZB, even if it's only an indication, than a correctly animated light switch.

Anyone who wants to find out about the function of PZB knows its sources.

As far as ZuSi is concerned, yes, the reality of the signaling system and the train protection systems is more realistic, but the graphics are absolute garbage, far worse than here in the retro game TSC...

Even just this superimposed photo of the control panel, where the pointers are animated, and the horrible landscape, which is worse than MSTS back then.

In addition, as StefanDD said, we are here at TSC, not at ZuSi, nobody is forcing you to buy the product, I myself am looking forward to the 5th series of the 146 with a further development of the functional possibilities.

Well you are not completely disagree   ChicagoExpress as i can see on your answer.
Mostly people will choose TSC for the visuals, and this is also the biggest part from the market, DTG doesnt drive on the advanced safety system fanatics(they are a smaller part from the total) otherwise they did it all different or they didnt exist anymore, Why so many people buy TSC addons which are not correct, because they dont know or they care about annother part, and the smaller part from this buy it and hope the freeware devs implement the amazing signals from schuster/ team which make things miles better, or completely rebuild large parts.

External developers provide the more advanced experiences or visual or internal with code work and they pleasing the people like you and me. ofcourse , the fanatics are there, you are right but im sure its not the biggest part.

As far as i know in the 10 + years Railtraction never promised advanced full complete systems where everything work exact on every point like the real train, the focus lay between, more than DTG offer and for the more fanatics extra things for a relative fair price. if the LZB from RT respond good im sure i will have a nice loco in my collection.

StefanDD my point is a little you make some impression here as developer that other developers dont programming correct (im sorry if i understand you wrong ), and that you are the only one which deliver the perfect safety systems(there are also things to discover or to add )no worry i like your work on the safety system, and i think they are good. but the PZB from RT is not that bad as some which make this impression. i get the same experience and expectable situations which is see in Zusi 3 or yours , atleast in my experience and driving time. and i really dont care how they program it.
If i need to care about my part (texturing / Unreal engine ) than i get a hard time in TSW.
little earlier you came by with your idee to mod the 185.2 with some sort of impression that this is better than a 146.5 . im sorry to say, what i see in the cabin visuals looks more appealing and sharper in the br146.5 than 185.2. and ofcourse the RT cab is more close to the real 146.5.
but no problem everybody is allowed to wish what they want, if that make them happy than fine, and im sure all this different views make things better. lucky we dont have to eat outside one box and we have freedom to choose our own wishes. I like to see multiple developers make there own trains, even if it is not perfect it deliver for sure other experiences , because every developer have own style of creating modelling etc which work also refreshing. If there was only one external developer i for sure put TSC / Railworks back in the box long ago and never open again. This remind me about something more offtopic, flightsimulator when i bought in the past 3 times te same airport from different developers, it work just refreshing.

mikede I initially responded to a post about the depth of system modelling, not to texturing in UE. In that area to which I believe I can speak, creating the sensation and immersion of system depth, I AM critical of most other 3rd party vendors. I still don't understand why you felt compelled to try and morph that part of the discussion into something about TS vs Zusi, Cab modelling etc. When I say something about scripting or about other people's scripts, that does not mean I am ignorant of all the other hard work it takes to make a full loco. I don't get your point or the purpose of your postings.

mikede

Just run without pzb if you can’t work out how to operate it. Or you can run the early Kujo locos and just not buy this one. For me it’s essential.

You can run a crazy amount of KI traffic, if you actually make your scenarios correct. Or at least, i can.

Kim , where did you ever read ?? that i prefer Kuju trains or minimalistics or that there is no need for a proper PZB or LZB ? just tell me where i wrote that ? i only told: large part from the TSC market doesnt require full fletch systems, and i even didnt sayd what i prefer!.to make it clear i prefer proper systems, i like it and enjoy what people make. i respect that allot. Im more than 15+ years in the Game industry active now days, teach kids/ young adults Unity and Unreal Engine. i know how this markets work.

Zitat von mikede

only told: large part from the TSC market doesnt require full fletch systems

Do you have a source for your statement about what the majority of the TSC market wants / doesn't want or is that just your own opinion?

No worry, i have it all ,NDA's are boss in our world.

mikede

So no source and just your statement, because now you're drifting into the ridiculous,

because you realize you're pretty much alone on the platform with your opinion.

You don't need to buy the locomotive and can stay with ZuSi.

Maybe you can write to the manufacturers and ask them to make the light switches more realistic......

Just for the record, there has just been an issue with the SBB (Swiss Federal Railways):

They have complained that the trains of one manufacturer are too realistic.....

I think the DB (Deutsche Bahn) will keep its finger on the pulse when it comes to the representation,

especially of safety systems such as PZB, LZB, ETCS and co.

They don't want that any more than they want you to be able to practise on the TSC how to set a train in motion.

Ist zwar schön das man viel machen kann, nur passt es nicht in das Thema.

Also beim Thema bleiben.

We took extra time for the safety systems, I decided to delay the release to get more testing time, I rebuilded moste of the LZB system, it became much better and we are currently busy with our test team to get some harmony between , afb , lzb etc. Also under my testing time I find daily some small bugs. Give us a little bit more time, I’m sorry we didn’t meet the expected release time. we do our best, if you have some wishes for the locomotive feel free to send me emails on our official channels .