Page 2 of 2
| Failures and delays 06/08/2013 at 22:52 #48057 | |
GeoffM
6282 posts |
" said:" said:No, if you read my comment earlier I said that departing early is wrong.I think we may be talking at cross purposes here. I am referring to the following example sequence of events Now, whether that train should always and forever more depart at exactly the same time no matter how many times you reload the sim is the subjective part. In my opinion certain situations should be re-randomised; in others' opinions it should be identical. The compromise would appear to be to let the user decide which way they would like a saved game to continue, though it does need more thought than a bit of back-and-forth on the forum. SimSig Boss Last edited: 06/08/2013 at 22:53 by GeoffM Reason: Link Log in to reply |
| Failures and delays 07/08/2013 at 10:36 #48065 | |
Jan
889 posts |
" said:Now, whether that train should always and forever more depart at exactly the same time no matter how many times you reload the sim is the subjective part. In my opinion certain situations should be re-randomised; in others' opinions it should be identical. But even then there's a difference between the train departing on five different reloads at 0531 0534 0528 0531 0530 (which I wouldn't mind) and the current situation, where - assuming the early departure bug has been fixed - it would always depart at approximately 0520. Or alternatively, assuming I had saved at 0523, i.e. past its regular departure time, the train would always depart immediately upon reloading. What I want to say is, the fact that the trains has been delayed and the approximate new departure time that has been given are past events, so they shouldn't get re-randomised. The exact time the train would move again is an altogether different matter, as it is - relative to the saved simulation - something that happens in the future, so I wouldn't have any objections against that being randomised. 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 |
| Failures and delays 07/08/2013 at 16:25 #48076 | |
postal
5190 posts 
|
It is also affecting train divides. I had an instance during a TT test where a divide had been under way for almost 4 minutes and was completed at 13:20:35. I then needed to reload the 13:20 saved game to test something else. The divide did not then complete until 13:23:45 so it looks as if the whole divide "clock" was re-started when the save was loaded. I would certainly agree with the principle that things that have already taken place before a save cannot be re-randomised or reset. If things after the time of the save are re-randomised, I can't see how there can be any element of groundhog day here (and even if there were I don't have a problem with that). If I want a different situation I'll start a new game, not reload a save to try and dodge the consequences of a clanger I've dropped! “In life, there is always someone out there, who won’t like you, for whatever reason, don’t let the insecurities in their lives affect yours.” – Rashida Rowe Log in to reply |
| Failures and delays 07/08/2013 at 17:31 #48087 | |
|
GeoffM
6282 posts |
I'll look into the issues raised. Can we at least agree that: 1. If a train has reported a delay before a save with the expected departure time after the save, then reloading should retain that time? Note that delays are always rounded to the nearest 5 minutes so "Wrong food trolley, expected to depart about 05:30" can mean anything from 05:27:30 and 05:32:29. I would call this a "present" event (as it's still in progress) rather than a "past" event. 2. Trains not reporting a delay across a save will still randomise - IIRC there is a +/-15s variation on departure time so not everybody bells out at exactly their departure time. SimSig Boss Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Jan |
| Failures and delays 07/08/2013 at 17:59 #48092 | |
|
Stephen Fulcher
2025 posts |
That would seem to make sense.
Log in to reply |
| Failures and delays 07/08/2013 at 20:20 #48098 | |
|
postal
5190 posts
|
" said:I'll look into the issues raised.Maybe we are making things a bit more complicated than necessary. As I see it, there are 2 points of view which seem to have irreconcilable differences. One point of view is that reloading a saved game should put things back exactly as they were at the point of the save. The other is that this may bring on groundhog day so things should be re-randomised when the reload takes place. I would be quite happy to see Geoff's suggestion earlier in the thread ("Possibly an option upon loading a save that asks whether re-randomisation should occur would go some way towards this"  implemented as being the most sensible way to satisfy both points of view.
“In life, there is always someone out there, who won’t like you, for whatever reason, don’t let the insecurities in their lives affect yours.” – Rashida Rowe Log in to reply |
| Failures and delays 01/09/2013 at 19:56 #49084 | |
|
bri2808
162 posts |
Wish I had seen this before now... Currently have in the region of 30 trains sitting at Banbury waiting for a track circuit failure to clear. This was once again AFTER a save. Has the issue still not been resolved?? Log in to reply |
| Failures and delays 08/11/2013 at 10:31 #51010 | |
|
Jan
889 posts |
I'm happy to report that failures now clear themselves even after saving and reloading, and most of the incident report now gets reloaded as well. It seems like the topmost item of the incident report gets discarded upon reloading, which might or might not be intentional. That only leaves the matter of delayed trains to be sorted out. Edit: Custom settings for failures and delays reload properly as well. 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. Last edited: 08/11/2013 at 10:53 by Jan Log in to reply |