RSC 2-8-0 CONSOLIDATION

[mrennie]

I could always record myself and say "you dun' goofed!"

Something like that, yes

Seriously though, it would be great to have someone record a few quotes, and I could see where to fit them in. I could script it so that the same quote never gets spoken more than once per session (to avoid the "Foreman Dan Fernandez" effect).

[mrennie]

There are more things I could have done with more custom control variables, but I've actually hit the limit. It's impossible to add any more control variables to the engine blueprint, because the blueprint editor refuses to obey ... "insert first" does nothing unless I first delete something else. The XML file is 1,008KB and it already has difficulty loading (I sometimes have to try around 10 times before it succeeds in displaying the blueprint).

Still, there's room in the sound blueprints for some more sound bites.

[bpetit]

Hehe, Railworks is like that's enough scripting for you.

[mrennie]

Why dont you make another bin file just to make the scripts and add them in to the existing one via serz and xml?

The problem isn't in the size of the scripts (the only things that goes into the blueprint, and the resulting XML, is a reference to the LUA script, which gets compiled separately). The problem is the size, or number, of control variable fields in the engine XML. The only way to insert a new one now is to delete another one, to make room. I tried editing the XML directly but the next time I tried to load it into the blueprint editor, it crashed (probably for the same reason it wouldn't let me add the variable in the first place).

EDIT: Don't worry, I always make a back-up copy of files before editing them, just in case, so I can go back to the last working version if something crashes.

[evafan002]

Why dont you make another bin file just to make the scripts and add them in to the existing one via serz and xml?

The problem isn't in the size of the scripts (the only things that goes into the blueprint, and the resulting XML, is a reference to the LUA script, which gets compiled separately). The problem is the size, or number, of control variable fields in the engine XML. The only way to insert a new one now is to delete another one, to make room. I tried editing the XML directly but the next time I tried to load it into the blueprint editor, it crashed (probably for the same reason it wouldn't let me add the variable in the first place).

EDIT: Don't worry, I always make a back-up copy of files before editing them, just in case, so I can go back to the last working version if something crashes.

just how many variables are in the script anyway? 200? if its anywhere near that number then even if thats one variable for the on and off states of each control we are literally going to have to print the manual and keep it taped to our desktops

[mrennie]

just how many variables are in the script anyway? 200? if its anywhere near that number then even if thats one variable for the on and off states of each control we are literally going to have to print the manual and keep it taped to our desktops

Yep, I think it would be fair to put the "Advanced" tag on this one

Actually, it's not difficult to operate. There are 74 "control values" fields in the engine XML, but many of them are for gauges rather than controls, and several are necessary to allow the LUA script to control various animations in the model, which are automatic and don't requre the player to do anything.

For example, there are two control values called RegulatorClutch and ReverserClutch that the script uses to command the animations of the little "clutch" handles that the engineer would squeeze to allow the regulator and reverser to be moved. They are animated in the model, but the script associates those animations to the movement of the actual regulator and reverser levers, via my RegulatorClutch and ReverserClutch control variables, so that the little handle opens when the lever starts to move and closes when the lever stops. All the player has to do is move the levers.

I could give more examples, but the point is that the control values in the XML are needed for connecting animations (and other visual effects and sounds too, so that they are triggered at the right moments) to what the player is doing or, indeed, what the loco is doing (for example, opening the safety valves at the right time). So to get all the nifty animations and effects, I had to create many specialised control variables, but it doesn't mean the player has to learn 74 key commands. Actually, there are only about 67. OK, that's still a lot But many of them are to do things like opening doors and windows, and if you can't remember the kb command, you can still just go into cab view and use the mouse to open the doors and windows. In fact, everything except for the compressor drain ** and the classification lights can be controlled with the mouse. Those two exceptions are because the corresponding controls weren't in the cab.

Also, don't confuse variables in the script with control values in the XML. The XML control values can be accessed (by calling "GetControlValue" and "SetControlValue" functions) in the LUA script, but the LUA script also has a lot of its own internally declared variables that are used only by the script itself.

[CaseyRhodes]

mrennie: Have you scripted an actuation or "bail-off" feature for the independent brake valve? In the real world, when you make a reduction on the main brake pipe pressure, it engages the locomotive brake cylinders as well as on the cars, so independent brake valves have a bail-off feature so you can keep the engine brakes released when braking with the train to avoid undesirable slack action throughout the train.

[mrennie]

mrennie: Have you scripted an actuation or "bail-off" feature for the independent brake valve? In the real world, when you make a reduction on the main brake pipe pressure, it engages the locomotive brake cylinders as well as on the cars, so independent brake valves have a bail-off feature so you can keep the engine brakes released when braking with the train to avoid undesirable slack action throughout the train.

I looked into that some time ago, but unfortunately it's part of the games internal coding and there's nothing I could do about it. In fact, I couldn't even simulate all of the positions for the train brake either, having to settle for just four (release, hold/running, apply and emergency), because that's all the game will allow.

[bpetit]

I was thinking this might fit on the upcoming Marias Pass. Let's just say GN bought a couple of 2-8-0 AT&N locomotives sometime before the AT&N merged Frisco. What do you think mrennie?

[BNSFdude]

I was thinking this might fit on the upcoming Marias Pass. Let's just say GN bought a couple of 2-8-0 AT&N locomotives sometime before the AT&N merged Frisco. What do you think mrennie?

He's making the GN P-2 Class for that specific route. (I'm working on getting you some plans mrennie!)

[mrennie]

I was thinking this might fit on the upcoming Marias Pass. Let's just say GN bought a couple of 2-8-0 AT&N locomotives sometime before the AT&N merged Frisco. What do you think mrennie?

He's making the GN P-2 Class for that specific route. (I'm working on getting you some plans mrennie!)

I'm ready when you are! The Connie's ready for beta testing, but i'm waiting for Matt to tell me when they're ready and able to distribute it via Steam. Meanwhile I'm using the time to write more scenarios and experiment a bit with different textures here and there. Plus I polished the sounds even more.

it looks like the MP route won't be set in the steam era, so any steam scenarios for it will either have to use artistic license and ignore the modern infrastructure, or be a case of a restored loco running on modern lines, in which case anything goes, even the AT&N Consolidation. Hauling what though? Maybe the Consolidation taking the lead in a lash-up with a modern diesel providing the power for air-conditioned cars? As I say, artistic license. I'm looking forward to seeing if anyone uses my loco to make scenarios for the Steam Workshop. At first, i thought that was a nutty idea, but in retrospect I think it was marvellous. There's a pool of talent out there (and people with enough patience to write and test scenarios ... it's very time-consuming).

[BNSFdude]

I'm ready when you are! The Connie's ready for beta testing, but i'm waiting for Matt to tell me when they're ready and able to distribute it via Steam. Meanwhile I'm using the time to write more scenarios and experiment a bit with different textures here and there. Plus I polished the sounds even more.

it looks like the MP route won't be set in the steam era, so any steam scenarios for it will either have to use artistic license and ignore the modern infrastructure, or be a case of a restored loco running on modern lines, in which case anything goes, even the AT&N Consolidation. Hauling what though? Maybe the Consolidation taking the lead in a lash-up with a modern diesel providing the power for air-conditioned cars? As I say, artistic license. I'm looking forward to seeing if anyone uses my loco to make scenarios for the Steam Workshop. At first, i thought that was a nutty idea, but in retrospect I think it was marvellous. There's a pool of talent out there (and people with enough patience to write and test scenarios ... it's very time-consuming).

I'd have to say making scenarios with the P-2 will be Challenging. If you plan on making a passenger train (Heavyweights), it won't but otherwise, it may be difficult.
http://www.gnrhs.org/75th_anniversary.htm

[mrennie]

I'd have to say making scenarios with the P-2 will be Challenging. If you plan on making a passenger train (Heavyweights), it won't but otherwise, it may be difficult.
http://www.gnrhs.org/75th_anniversary.htm

That's a brilliant idea! I should do the passenger cars to go with it, to make a more attractive and complete package. I'll (we'll?) have to search out some detailed plans for those too.

[johnmckenzie]

Sounds absolutely wonderful!

[BNSFdude]

I'd have to say making scenarios with the P-2 will be Challenging. If you plan on making a passenger train (Heavyweights), it won't but otherwise, it may be difficult.
http://www.gnrhs.org/75th_anniversary.htm

That's a brilliant idea! I should do the passenger cars to go with it, to make a more attractive and complete package. I'll (we'll?) have to search out some detailed plans for those too.

GNRHS. I'll give them another call and just send me a complete list of what the 1920/30s Empire Builder wouldve had for cars, pictures of interiors, and what not if possible. I know they have it all.