Notice to all visitors and members of the Train-Sim.Com message forums: If you plan on using a signature banner in your posts, we would like to remind you that there is a maximum size for banners. That maximum is 450 pixels wide by 120 pixels high, and not to exceed 25k. Your compliance is appreciated. FORUM RULES Problems? There are two common reasons for problems with logging in and posting messages. The first is that you are running a firewall that prevents your messages from being sent to the server. The other is that you have cookies disabled; the DCForum software requires cookies to work properly.
Until now, I have never posted in the MSTS 2 forum, because I am not one to get too excited about upcoming computer games/sims, even ones as highly anticipated as MSTS 2. Anyway, here is what I was thinking: I wonder if MSTS 2 will simulate manned helper operation? That would not only be an interesting feature, but it would also add a new dimention to activity design.Jonathan Nikiforovs. Milepost 180, CP Belleville Sub.
By manned, I'm assuming that you are talking about the player driving the helper and coupling to an AI consist heading up a hill?That could indeed be interesting, but it has the potential to get boring pretty fast. I'm assuming the AI would still be controlling the train after you couple, and you would be giving additional throttle or brake on top of what the AI is doing. The interesting part would be trying to feather your throttle adjustments with the AI's. You would want to give enough to make it up the hill, but you don't want to push too hard or the AI would be wasting air trying to keep the train within the speed limit. Causing the AI to runaway on the other side of the hill would be a definite activity failure. The way I see it, this could very easily be an exercise in frustration if coded improperly. (much like fighting the AI fireman for steam) I don't have confidence that KUJU has the skills to accomplish this.So now the boring part. You made it to the top, then what? Do you cut off and head back down to wait for the next train? This would be mind numbingly dull. Each train could pose different problems to the push, but I don't know if you could get enough variation to keep it fun.I think the activity would need to consist of only one or two pushes to keep you sane.If your concept is different than what I described, ignore my ramblings. -Edit: This topic made me think of something I think would be nice to see in MSTS 2.If you couple to the rear of another locomotive or a loose consist with a loco at the head end, it would be nice if your cabview would become that of the lead loco.-Are ya' listening KUJU?--Jeff
It can also work the other way, with the helper bieng an AI locomotive. Manned helpers are still used today in mountainous terrain, and they are in fact capible of uncoupling themselves "on the fly". It could be interesting to drive a manned helper, but the game engine would have to simulate the consequences of applying too much or too little throttle.Jonathan Nikiforovs. Milepost 180, CP Belleville Sub.
>It can also work the other way, with the helper bieng an AI >locomotive. That's not really a lot different than what we have now. Granted, once you couple, the helper is under your control and not making it's own decisions. I think the concept of you driving the helper is more enticing.>Manned helpers are still used today in >mountainous terrain, and they are in fact capible of >uncoupling themselves "on the fly". Yes indeed. My brother does helper runs on coal trains through a canyon. He runs out of a town called "Helper" oddly enough. (Gee, I wonder how it got that name? )>It could be interesting >to drive a manned helper, but the game engine would have to >simulate the consequences of applying too much or too little >throttle. Which is why I stated that I'm not too confident KUJU could do it properly. Look at some of the relatively simple things that they messed up in MSTS. -Jeff
Okay, maybe comprehensive manned helper operation is too much to expect from Kuju, but they could at least add more comprehensive programming for AI trains, so they can do more than just go from point A to Point B. BTW, I just thought of something: Remember how AI trains in MSTS "cheat" on physics? I have begun to think that was a good idea, because just imagine how slow the sim would get if the AI trains had physics as comprehensive as the player train? Not only would the computer have to crunch more numbers for the physics themselves, but the AI scripts themselves would also have to be far more sophisticated. Just think of what that would do to your framerate!Jonathan Nikiforovs. Milepost 180, CP Belleville Sub.
>Okay, maybe comprehensive manned helper operation is too >much to expect from Kuju, but they could at least add more >comprehensive programming for AI trains, so they can do more >than just go from point A to Point B. Yes! I'd like to see some AI yard activity. Not while I'm in the yard of course, but if I'm passing by on the mainline.-Jeff
