[Csantucci]

There is in fact an uncovered, rare theoretical case that could lead to the poking bushes; covering the case would lead a significantly higher computing time with the present algorithm, and I think it isn't worth the case. Therefore, after having a positive (I hope) feedback from copperpen too, I have the intention to commit the patch.

Before that I would like to shortly discuss with James (and not only with him) the addition of a selectable option in the menu as he recommended.
Given the fact that I think that it is anyhow useful to have the additional line in the route's .trk file as it is in my actual patch, in order to enable the function only for the routes needing it, we would have following cases:
1) existing routes with trees on tracks: these routes haven't the additional line, so anyhow players have to add it, if they don't want to have such trees;
2) new routes developed by non-OR aware route builders, or by route builders not interested in OR compatibility, and having trees on tracks: again, these routes are delivered without the additional line, so users need to add it personally;
3) new routes developed by OR-aware route builders: it is expected that they perform a check on OR compatibility, and resize or move the forests if necessary, without using the additional line.

So there shouldn't be cases where the player gets a .trk file with the additional line, and therefore has to remove the line to run faster.

Therefore I wonder if a further selectable option in the menu is needed.
By the way editing an MSTS text file is something OR players already often do in many cases for .eng files; I wouldn't expect that editing a .trk file that way is beyond the capabilities of the average MSTS player.

[copperpen]

Carlo

I have not run all of the Dorset route with your new patch, but the parts I have run are vastly improved, including a stubborn tree at Clapham that sprouted through the elevated track. We could go on fine tuning but overall I think this version is OK. There were a number of trees that were quite close to the tracks, hanging over the fence or draped over platforms. These seem to have mostly gone now with this new patch that finally removed those two at Worting I have also run some of the TEH2 without the scenery enhancements and so far have only located one slightly overhanging tree, probably because there is nowhere else for it to go, and one smallish bush under a bridge. I have been using x3360. for me, this patch is now fit for purpose.


I don't know if it is something you have done, or something James has done, but the sim now runs almost perfectly smooth, even when the loader kicks in. The only small jerk I get now is when there is a very small increase in Frame Time, and so far I cannot see any reason for that increase.

[Csantucci]

Nice Mervyn, that's really good news! Thank you to you, and also to burgerbern, for your excellent support and for your time and patience.
After getting a reply from James about the additional menu option, I'll upload the patch.

[James Ross]

Csantucci, on 10 December 2015 - 11:37 AM, said:

So there shouldn't be cases where the player gets a .trk file with the additional line, and therefore has to remove the line to run faster.

Therefore I wonder if a further selectable option in the menu is needed.

There is another case which I would like to think will be more common in the future: existing routes being officially updated or community patched to work better in OR. In this case, I worry that if any of those updating the route know of this TRK option they'll use it in preference to repositioning (potentially many) forests - it certainly seems to be the "easy way out" for them.

So I would suggest that we name the item to make clear that this is not what we intend, e.g. ORTSUserPreferenceForestClearDistance, and we can reserve the right to add an option to ignore/override routes in the future if people abuse the TRK option.

Csantucci, on 10 December 2015 - 11:37 AM, said:

By the way editing an MSTS text file is something OR players already often do in many cases for .eng files; I wouldn't expect that editing a .trk file that way is beyond the capabilities of the average MSTS player.

It would be interesting to find out (though I'm not sure how!) but I still believe most (like 75% or more) people will not consider or be willing to edit files. Those of us who frequent the MSTS and OR forums are the ones way more likely to do so.

[dcarleton]

James Ross, on 10 December 2015 - 01:51 PM, said:

It would be interesting to find out (though I'm not sure how!) but I still believe most (like 75% or more) people will not consider or be willing to edit files. Those of us who frequent the MSTS and OR forums are the ones way more likely to do so.

Perhaps the same users who can't be bothered to edit MSTS text files are also not put off by having trees in the middle of their tracks? The detail oriented people who would rather avoid the trees are (by personality type) more likely to be comfortable with adding one line to their .trk files.

[R H Steele]

I got the impression that knowing how to edit files was almost a prerequisite in virtual train simulators. I am continually surprised when someone does not know how - or does not want to learn how - to edit files.

[Csantucci]

Patch committed in x.3368. Pls. note that the .trk parameter has been renamed ORTSUserPreferenceForestClearDistance (clear distance in meters), e.g. ORTSUserPreferenceForestClearDistance (2) .

[JohnnyS]

dcarleton, on 10 December 2015 - 01:39 PM, said:

Perhaps the same users who can't be bothered to edit MSTS text files are also not put off by having trees in the middle of their tracks? The detail oriented people who would rather avoid the trees are (by personality type) more likely to be comfortable with adding one line to their .trk files.

R H Steele, on 10 December 2015 - 04:13 PM, said:

I got the impression that knowing how to edit files was almost a prerequisite in virtual train simulators. I am continually surprised when someone does not know how - or does not want to learn how - to edit files.

Some Devils advocacy. There will be some people who are little bit self righteous and perhaps a bit lazy, They won't edit files because they think everything should be "just so" out of the box, they expect everything to be done for them. On the other hand, there will be others who just do not have the confidence to edit files and maybe find it a little difficult to understand the instructions, not everyone is a power user and they may be very worried about making catastrophic mistakes.

It's a broad church our little community.

[burgerbern]

can confirm that with the committed version in X3368 all is well, i ran the full length of TEHII and other than the slight overhang of one huge tree and the bushes under the bridge there were no other trees in the way all the way from one end to the other, i went into the RE and moved the bushes to one side (badly i might add as i lost the green box amongst all the others when i had to change position on the tiny RE screen and left one bush on the line, but that will only be a prob in MSTS and i no longer run MSTS) good work, many thanks, wont have to send a cutting crew out in front of the service train any more, :sign_thanks:

[elvasleis]

Hi,
I had a tree in the middle of the track in a Spanish Route.
I applied the change in the .trk file and all good now.
Thanks gents for the fix.

Regards Geoff.