[Coonskin]

Scott:

Thanks for the explanation on the hyper-speed route work being done. Figured so, but wanted to make sure.

Trainz: Physics keep being mentioned. However, I understand that there is an "Advanced" (realistic) button that makes it much more challenging? OR, is that not very convincing, either? My deal-breaking points are the hassle factors involved in Trainz. (Online connections required, asset acquisition frustrations, backwards compatibility/etc.)

I hate to say it, but I really suspect that major advances within MSTS/ORTS/TSRE5 and such, is winding down.

As for me, I suspect I will always be involved in MSTS/ORTS it in some form, but the indications do look a bit foreboding in view of the community.

Fortunately, I do it as a hobby to cater to my tinkering tendency and it works admirably for such a use.

Andre

[James Ross]

scottb613, on 26 September 2019 - 05:24 AM, said:

Just curious - anyone on the ORTS dev team looking at splines ?

I'm going to start with some definitions so that we can understand each other better:

• A spline is a particular type of curve that can be generated by placing a number of points
  
• Lofting is when you stretch or repeat a model along an arbitrary line (straight or curved)

That said, in most cases in 3D games/editors the above two things will be used together and could be called by either name, or another name entirely.

They will often also feature some or all of the following functionality:

• Terrain following allowing the object to always be positioned on (or relative to) the ground
  
• Tessellation allowing the object to be repeated according to a pattern (one dimensionally like telegraph poles, or two dimensionally like grass/fields)

scottb613, on 26 September 2019 - 05:24 AM, said:

Now - last post I saw this mentioned went off on the more complicated track systems debate - but - this is strictly from a scenery perspective... I'd certainly try and create whatever model was needed for testing - I think I recall a spline modeling tutorial video somewhere (probably for Trainz)... Having splines available would certainly improve the quality of scenery available and increase the speed at which we could create it... Anyone who ever tried to create a fence line over undulating terrain could certainly attest to that... Splines are sorely needed in ORTS...

It is my view that both the new scenery and track file formats will need to support lofting with splines (or similar curves), with terrain following and tessellation.

A lot of scenery could be placed using curves offset from the track (e.g. track-side fences), but free-form curves like you describe in Trainz would also be available.

wacampbell, on 27 September 2019 - 05:35 AM, said:

And finally Open Rails (Runactivity.exe) would need to be modified to render the loft 'in game' - relatively speaking, the easy bit.

As an example, dynamic track is a lofted item in Open Rails today.

[atsf37l]

I watched a couple of the videos and when I saw him place a sidewalk I nearly swooned! In building Telluride on my RGS I first laid out the streets - no small task as the entire town is built on a multitude of slopes. Then it took me weeks to place the sidewalks in Telluride using RE! WEEKS! They are still far from perfect but they became one of the few places on the RGS route where I said, "Good enough!"

And he clicks and they are there, and aligned and angled and snap-connected. I'd have killed for that functionality.

But I still prefer the way OR duplicates the actions of the railroad and it's operational capabilities far better than other sims. Sure was a lot more work using RE. :bigboss:

[scottb613]

Hi Andre,

There's a more advanced physics mode to Trainz ? Hmm - didn't see it - I did poke around in the settings but I probably have less than an hour using it after purchase... Perhaps I should load it up again and take a second peek ? Those K&L guys make some exquisite steam locomotives...

Hi James,

Thanks for the details - at least we're now on the same page while discussing this... From an outsiders view - it seems we're short on programmers - so a project of this scope - requiring Goku coordination if TSRE is used - seems pretty unlikely at the moment... As stated - this feature could potentially save route builders a massive amounts of time - which might mean more and higher quality routes - which could attract more people - and so on and so on... I did submit a card on Trello for it - as a placeholder - so you might want to edit it to make it more clear...

Hi Herb,

LOL - yes - sidewalks TOO !

Regards,
Scott

[Goku]

wacampbell, on 27 September 2019 - 05:35 AM, said:

DTG Train Simulator ( Railworks ) uses a XML text file called a blueprint to describe each scenery object. Its like our .SD file. A loft blueprint contains entries where you can specify several mesh shapes ( like our .s files ).

- starting mesh ( appears at the start of the loft )
- ending mesh
- repeating mesh ( ie telephone poles that get placed along the length - you specify the spacing )
- loft mesh ( joined end to end to fill the spaces between the repeating mesh - eg the telephone wire )

Not every loft uses every type of geometry. Most lofts just use the loft mesh, eg a track berm.

I made something like that in TSRE to place tracks, wires, fences etc. in my project, so it is not a rocket science. But it was never finished to use by others due to my health issues. And also it doesn't work in OR.

https://i.imgur.com/ypvCSrn.png

[SP 0-6-0]

Goku, Such a future for working with catenary and power lines would be a God send. If this could be worked on slowly as your health and time would allow, I think myself and many others would be most grateful. Wiring electrified routes or just putting up lots of power lines in heavy industrial areas is a time consuming, burdensome job at present.

I'm adding wires along the entire length of the Milwaukee Road routes because Jerry omitted a lot of wires and poles on the Milw road routes. But damn, I'm nearly going mad trying to get these wires to go up and connect end on end.

I so wish there was a Dynamic Track approach that could be setup in say an .SD or XML file of some sort. Only thing is, it would have to be backward compatible with the old MSTS RE.

See at the 1:55 mark My link To be able to click and drag wires and poles and have them be perfectly connected is the stuff of dreams for wiring a route.

Robert

[conductorchris]

Goku, I wish you the best. Sorry to hear of your health issues.
Christopher

[scottb613]

Hi Folks,

Yep - Goku - sorry about your health issues - hang in there buddy...

Thanks for taking the time to respond...
:)

Wow - those towers look great and what a massive time saver if ever implemented [sigh]...

Yeah - as Goku mentioned - it works in TSRE but not in ORTS - he can't make some of these changes by himself - we would need a corresponding developer from the ORTS team be willing and able to pick up the torch at the same time to work with him - and therein lies the rub...

I had spoken with Goku previously on irregular shaped forest regions - think of the time we could save if we had freeform polygon forest regions that allowed for mixed vegetation - define a standardized forest - pick some points on the route - set the density - bam - done - the whole darn forest is spawned in one fell swoop... At the time he mentioned it was easy on his side but it couldn't be done without some corresponding changes to ORTS...

As with anything ORTS - anything that can shave a substantial amount of time off the typical multiyear route development process - is a very worthwhile endeavor...

Regards,
Scott

[PerryPlatypus]

These two things alone (spline objects and irregular-shaped, multi-vegetation forests), would be MASSIVE helps in route building. I can picture the hundreds and hundreds of hours I could've saved on Mullan and other routes with those functions.

To be clear, I do hope that either Goku and/or ORTS team can move forward on these without feeling like the implementation needs to be twisted and manipulated to become backwards compatible with MSTS or the MSTS RE.

[scottb613]

PerryPlatypus, on 13 November 2019 - 11:03 AM, said:

These two things alone (spline objects and irregular-shaped, multi-vegetation forests), would be MASSIVE helps in route building. I can picture the hundreds and hundreds of hours I could've saved on Mullan and other routes with those functions.

To be clear, I do hope that either Goku and/or ORTS team can move forward on these without feeling like the implementation needs to be twisted and manipulated to become backwards compatible with MSTS or the MSTS RE.

:I-Agree:

Hi Folks,

LOL - yeah - I had spoken with Chris on the irregular forest regions regarding his FOUR year epic journey on his current B&O marvel - he echoed the same sentiments - the Forest Regions are currently black holes at absorbing a route developers time...

Making a route take less time to develop - means more routes of a higher quality seen through to completion - means more people join the fold as their topic of interest may be satisfied - means we get more talent in our pool - which benefits everyone here...

Regards,
Scott