Page 1 of 1

To path or not to path, that is the headache!

Unread postPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 11:09 am
by OldProf
I've been developing another switching scenario for the HSC route, this one featuring Michael's new cattle car (you can almost hear them mooing) and, as usual for me, a good deal of AI traffic. Yesterday, an AI train that had not posed any problems previously suddenly started creating "left the path" errors (or, as I like to call them, "Little Red Riding Hoods"). I had already assigned numerous "drive to" and "waypoint" instructions, including some through markers I had added myself where I thought this little engine that couldn't might get lost. Finally, I set up a fresh version of the scenario and removed all of this engine's instructions except for its destination marker.

At that point, the time for my daily Scotch-and-soda arrived, signalling as well the close of the railroading day. I'll let you know how this worked soon ... ... ...

Re: To path or not to path, that is the headache!

Unread postPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 2:41 pm
by Machinist
In Timetable is the AI Train allowed (checked) to reverse?

Re: To path or not to path, that is the headache!

Unread postPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 6:03 pm
by Chacal
Old Prof wrote:I've been developing another switching scenario for the HSC route, this one featuring Michael's new cattle car (you can almost hear them mooing)

Unrelated to your question, but this gives me an awesome idea: add his pickle cars to the consist, then have a steam loco crash into the consist and blow up, then SMOKED MEAT FOR EVERYONE!!!!

Old Prof wrote:At that point, the time for my daily Scotch-and-soda arrived

This gives me another awesome idea involving tank cars and reefers at a CO2 plant.

Re: To path or not to path, that is the headache!

Unread postPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 7:34 pm
by OldProf
Machinist wrote:In Timetable is the AI Train allowed (checked) to reverse?


I'm not sure what you mean by "(checked)", but yes, AI trains can certainly reverse. Even in RS, numerous scenarios included AI engines or trains that, in fact, did nothing except start at point A, drive forward to point B, and then reverse back to point A. Is this what you mean?

Re: To path or not to path, that is the headache!

Unread postPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 10:44 pm
by Machinist
Hi Tom,

I (would) meant that when "Allow Reversing" feature is green checked (in Timetable, pop up instructions' screen) any train is allowed not only to move forward but also backward, therefore there are new chances of AI Train run out of the path, or choose an alternative path (sometimes undesirable, especially when interacting with other trains) that may cause an unexpected problem. "Allow Reversing" is checked by default, and maybe unchecking it can be helpful to you. I already got to fix many complex AI traffic problems unchecking that instruction's option.

Re: To path or not to path, that is the headache!

Unread postPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 5:51 pm
by OldProf
Thanks for the explanation, Machinist! And for the idea ... I've never actually experimented with removing the check from that box. Doing so may just fix a problem I'm having in the scenario I'm currently working on ... but for the player train, not AI. The scenario begins with some switching in a small yard south of a wye. Once the player has sorted the yard, he is instructed to take a cut of cattle cars (try saying that 3 times, fast) up to the wye, using the western leg. He then drops the cut on an auxiliary track east of the wye and returns to the yard to make up another cut, which he hauls off toward the west. The Player Train (PT) should only use the western leg of the wye to access the yard, but in the Timetable Editor, its path includes the eastern leg as well and our old buddy, the dispatcher, sometimes (but not always) provides the wrong path. I think your suggestion may provide a way to always get the desired path by un-checking reversal on a marker located on the western leg of the wye. Pardon me if that doesn't quite make sense -- it's one of those "hadda-be-there" things.

Ah! back to the editor!