[A strange problem with TC's]

Hi to all my fellow enthusiasts

I hope someone will be able to explain why the following is happening.

I am in the process of creating a layout with a curved station, 4 main tracks with 3 side tracks , so far so good. Tracks 1 and 4 have platforms. Tracks 2 and 3 are for through trains.

So far I have only concentrated on tracks 1 and 3. Track 3 has no issues, however, track 1 is giving me distinct problems. Trains arrive on track 1 at 45kph. There are then 3 TC's that reduce the speed as the trains moves along the platform. The first of these reduces the speed to 30kph, the second to 20kph and the third to 10kph before coming to the station stop TC. For the whole of yesterday these worked perfectly. All 5 trains on this track did precisely what they were supposed to do. Today I turned on my computer, went into MBS and set the trains in motion. Not one train would recognise any of the TC's and would not even stop at the appropriate stop signal. This is not the first time I have experienced this with this layout. Previously I simply removed the TC's and reintroduced new ones making sure that any reference in my EV was also amended. I've also tried moving the TC's along the track to different positions, Sometimes this works other times it does not.

I am therefore at a bit of a loss to understand what is happening so if anyone else has experienced something like this and found the solution then I would love to hear the solution.

Out of curiosity I have created a simple layout with the curved track and don't seem able to duplicate this problem. My first thought was to assume that as the platforms were created with spline sections and were still showing category as  "railroad" this might be where the issue lay. I changed this to "3D model only" but this made no difference. If it didn't work all of the time I could understand this more that it would seem to be very intermittent.

All suggestions gratefully received.

Pete

 

[Frohe Weihnachten 2024]

Hi to all my fellow members and enthusiasts

I would simply like to take this opportunity to thank all those members who have so kindly lent assistance to me over the last 12 months and to wish you all a very merry Christmas and Happy and healthy 2025.

I raise a glass to you all.

Cheers

Pete

[A train routing issue]

3 hours ago, Phrontistes said:

Hi Pete

Your mistake is probably deactivating the route while it is still being used by the train you set it up for. If you then try to activate it again, it won't work because a vehicle, that train, is still on it.

Normally you should not deactivate routes. The program does this automatically when the train has reached the last waypoint of the route.

Kind regards

Phrontistes

Hi Phrotistes

Many thanks for getting back to me. Clearly my solution lies in a different mind set. Instead of simply trying to create a complete round trip it needs to be broken up into segments that allow other trains to use the same track once one has departed that section. In hindsight, and since you pointed this out it really is logical. Thanks for that.

Cheers

Pete

[A train routing issue]

Hi to all my fellow members

Thus far I have not used the "routing" system for trains. I found this less easy to understand than simply setting the route through my EV. However now in V9 this seems to be less straight forward and so I have begun to get to grips with routes proper.

I have set a route from the station as a round trip and there are complex cross over points to be negotiated. So far so good.

As a simple test I have a train in a station with a signal on stop. Once this is changed to green the train sets off and at the first TC is instructed to activate the route, all is well so far. at the next TC the train is told to deactivate the route, this too works fine. However at the next TC where it is told to activate the route once more I have an error message saying "blocked waiting for release". This I do not understand. 

Clearly I need to do something differently but I fail to see just what this should be.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Kind regards

Pete

[FPS rate]

8 hours ago, gmd said:

Definitely slower, and loading takes longer too, which isn't that important. 
My monster system that I occasionally use to test my software only runs at 6 fps, V8 at 12 fps. Admittedly, it's big, 60,000+ objects, 30+ moves. That's too slow.

I can't really judge what options Neo has, as I don't know enough about the graphics engine, but I suspect that he isn't finished using the new GPUs yet. I have no problem putting a 4090 in the computer if I know that it will be fully used, which I doubt at the moment. 
I hope for improvements in the next versions. That will certainly be the case by the time I have my software ready to use  , but that doesn't help you much. 

Optimizations or changes to basic functions are always a problem with such extensive programs, it needs to be carefully considered and isn't always possible. I'm sure Neo has already thought about it and is aware of the fact. 

Regards,
gmd

 

Hi gmd

Thanks for the reply, but as you rightly point out it doesn't really help my situation. I've gone through all of my Nvidia settings and nothing has changed so I'm just a bit puzzled. A recent layout that I posted, "Nikolaus II demo layout" which is around 1060KB ran at between 45fps and 120fps. That too is running much slower. Hopefully it will sort itself out in time.

Cheers

Pete

[FPS rate]

To all my fellow members

I have noted several posts over  recent weeks complaining about reduced fps when running V9.

At those times my fps was very good. With a layout of 5650kb I was running at 45 to 160fps.

Recently I have been involved in creating two new layouts , both of which are only at the design stage but for a little relief I decided to go back to one of my old layouts in order to make some additional modifications. Imagine my surprise to find that the fps rate has dropped to 10 or 12fps.

I've checked all settings and they are just the same as they have always been. Has anyone else experienced this and if so what was your solution.

Kind regards

Pete

[Luxusyacht Nikolaus II]

Hi everyone

As mentioned by Sualokink, following the launch of his beautiful model, Nikolaus II together with all of the sibling models, I have been working an a demo layout that I hope provides both an insight into just some of the possibilities connected with these models as well as a little light entertainment.

This demo has now been completed and can be found under ID reference C546EE41-CEE0-458A-843D-8566D9979304.

I hope you enjoy this as much as I have in creating it. A pdf file is attached which I hope provides sufficient guidance.

Kind regards

Pete

Nikolaus II - Operational Tutorial final (English).pdf

[Neue Beta-Version V9]

1 hour ago, Phrontistes said:

This reduces the problem, but it will not completely disappear because the camera's movements add up during each tracking.

Well that's somewhat bitter sweet. At least it enables me to get the basic setting for the cameras sorted prior to Neo coming up with a permanent fix, so not all bad!!!

[Neue Beta-Version V9]

26 minutes ago, 220hotwheels said:

Brilliant, I'll give it a try now with one of the Nikolaus II siblings. If it works well then I can go ahead and complete the demo.

Pete

A perfect solution, many thanks. For the purpose of first run I simply deleted the tracking for each of the cameras as they were last used in that particular EV so I have noticed that there is still some movement during the trip. This I will now correct by removing the tracking at each stage as I switch from one camera to another. No great hassle. I can now concentrate on finishing the demo.

Many thanks 

Pete

[Neue Beta-Version V9]

13 minutes ago, Phrontistes said:

Why turn it off? I want to track. My workaround: save camera positions in an object variable and assign them to the cameras before tracking again. But I don't know if it's worth it if you can't program something like that easily. Neo will surely solve the problem.

If you still want to turn off tracking in the EM, then do this:

Brilliant, I'll give it a try now with one of the Nikolaus II siblings. If it works well then I can go ahead and complete the demo.

Pete

[Neue Beta-Version V9]

Just now, 220hotwheels said:

Hi Phrintistes

What do they say about great minds!!!!. I thought I had remembered there had been a comment about this but quite frankly the size of this post on V9 is getting somewhat large to keep going back over. 

I'm curious though, were you able to deactivate the tracking within the EV and if so can you let me know how please.

Cheers

Pete 

Ooops, sorry, about the misspelling, I was getting carried away and forgot to re read, it's an age thing!!!!

Pete

[Neue Beta-Version V9]

24 minutes ago, Phrontistes said:

That ist known too. I did report it here and here.

Hi Phrintistes

What do they say about great minds!!!!. I thought I had remembered there had been a comment about this but quite frankly the size of this post on V9 is getting somewhat large to keep going back over. 

I'm curious though, were you able to deactivate the tracking within the EV and if so can you let me know how please.

Cheers

Pete 

[Neue Beta-Version V9]

Hello@Neo

On the subject of cameras with gremlins. I know you are already aware of this phenomena and I'm sure you will find the right fix a.s.a.p.

One thought though which might in fact assist in this process, from one completely unfamiliar with the pros and cons of programming. I have noted hat only the cameras that are tracking an object are affected. When programming I have always used the tracking facility in the camera window, see attached screenshot. As an experiment I have ignored this and used the tracking facility in the EV, see attached screenshot. In doing so it was necessary to link the tracking cameras to the object in question. In an effort to provide some sort of controlled point for each of the tracking cameras I introduced a ball at the start point. After completing the round trip, which incidentally worked perfectly, the cameras continued their gremlin movement and I noticed that in the camera window said cameras were still set to track the object.

My suggestion therefore is to enquire if it would be possible, and practicable to introduce another option to the camera EV to remove the tracking. Having done this manually the cameras don't move anymore, the gremlins have been banished,

Kind regards
Pete

 

[Neue Beta-Version V9]

To all my fellow members

I continue to read with great interest all of the comments regarding the V9 BETA version. Some I find particularly informative, some I find puzzling and others almost leave me questioning my own ability. However, whilst I concur with many of the comments made I just wonder whether, some issues not all, are at times self inflicted. As a bit of a novice when it comes to technology, change takes me a while to come to terms with and I just wonder if this might be the case with other members. Human nature tends to make us complain first and then seek a solution, and make no mistake I readily fall into this category. For example as soon as V9 was available in the beta format I downloaded it and mistakenly opened a large layout from V8.5 only to find that the fps was rubbish. My first step was to post a comment in the hope that Neo would sort it out, which fortunately he did, but that was not the real issue. Had I opened V9 and imported the old V8.5 layout from within V9 then it would have had no real issue. I've tried this with another large layouts since so I know it works. Perhaps most of you already know this, if so then forgive my rambling. Another point, I am reconstructing a demo layout for Nikolaus II, as you may already know, and due to the improvements in V9 it means that there is a certain amount of work needed to make this transition. During this transitional work it has become clear that, in certain instances, copy and paste do not always work. By entering the required instruction completely in the EV for that error solves the problem. Here again many of you may already have known this.

To conclude my rambling I have to admit that there are some elements in V9 that do still need to be sorted out, that's why it is still in beta format. That the initial testers have not picked up on everything is understandable. If you give a problem to 10 people and ask for their feedback you only get 10 points of view, ask 10,000 and the scope of response will be much greater and more diverse which must surely help to bring about a more complete conclusion quicker. Perhaps financial constraints might have been a consideration in bringing forward the launch of the beta version sooner but, frankly, that would be understandable given the complexity of changes, but lets be honest the cost of MBS per annum is miniscule really compared to the amount of pleasure it provides. A meal in a pub would cost more and that's over and gone in a night.

Anyway, at this point I think I should go back into hibernation and simply say a huge thank you to Neo and his team for providing me with such a pleasant and time consuming pastime and to all my fellow members for giving me such entertainment as well as valuable knowledge that has allowed me to expand my limits within MBS.

Cheers

Pete

[Neue Beta-Version V9]

42 minutes ago, Goetz said:

It's a known issue, Pete, and it's being looked into.
Thanks for reporting it. 

Hi Goetz

Brilliant, It makes a pleasant change to hear that it's not something that I have done wrong or overlooked. I might just allow myself a brandy tonight to celebrate!!!!

Pete

[Neue Beta-Version V9]

Hi

The posts on here are getting ever larger and I frankly cannot remember if this topic has been answered earlier so here goes.

In V8.5 when a camera was set to track an object it did so time and again without jumping all over the place. In V9 this does not seem to happen. I can set 4 cameras out of 8 to follow an object, so far so good, but once the object has returned to it's original position, the layout saved and exported gremlins seem to get to work and shift them about, so the next time I go into the layout they have moved. The strange thing is that they move almost to the same 'out of position' each time.

Has anyone any thoughts on this please, perhaps, as happens so often, I'm overlooking the obvious.

Kind regards

Peter

[V9 issue with fps]

8 minutes ago, Herman said:

Hello 220hotwheels , Neo , of course I tested his layout also. 6C4E5920-123F-48C9-9395-911F49989FBC

Unfortunately, this layout is to big to swallow in V9 for my laptop. 
However,

• V8.5 in rest 70 FPS, when running 24 FPS. Not good , but on the edge of OK
• V9 in rest 24 FPS when running 4 FPS. And certainly to low. 

 laptop GPU NVIDIA Geforce GTX 3060 ,  screen 240 Hz gaming display.

Ok not the newest one, but not so old yet.

Kind regards, Herman

Hi Herman

As you say not great in the V9 version. On my computer in V9 the same layout runs at 28fps upwards depending upon the amount in view. The best I have got thus far with this "modified" version of Woodridge is around 85fps when running and 165fps when paused.

Kind regards

Pete

[V9 issue with fps]

45 minutes ago, Neo said:

Hi,

thank you for the layout, I have fixed the "unknown" objects and uploaded the layout to 6C4E5920-123F-48C9-9395-911F49989FBC

Unfortunately, I can not see any big difference between V8.5 and V9, both versions result in similar FPS.

Kind regards,

Neo

Hi Neo

Many thanks for that. I've used your uploaded version for Woodridge, saved it in V8.5 and tried running it The fps is fine and so I've imported that same version into V9 and it too now runs fine. I'm just a little baffled but wonder if the problem was to do with the Nikolaus II items which of course I introduced into that layout whilst they were in draft form. I've now removed them from the both the V8.5 version and V9 version of Woodridge but might consider adding this model to V9 at a later date.

Once again many thanks for your assistance with this, my apologies for taking up your time. Also many thanks for sorting out the water reflection issue.

Kind regards

Peter

[V9 issue with fps]

30 minutes ago, Neo said:

Hi Peter,

thanks for die ID, can you please upload the V8.5 layout as well, so that I can compare both versions directly?

Kind regards,

Neo

Hi Neo

There seems to be an "unknown" items in the V8.5 version that I cannot identify so therefore cannot complete the process to get the draft completed. Can I send you the *.mbp file via email?

Kind regards

Peter

[V9 issue with fps]

9 minutes ago, Neo said:

Where can I find the layout for testing? A drop from 40 FPS to 1 FPS is not normal.

Kind regards,

Neo

I hope this is the file you need 07721643-AFD8-4312-B3FE-B7180B517BD1

Kind regards

Peter

[V9 issue with fps]

3 minutes ago, Roter Brummer said:

Hello Peter,

your shadows are set higher in V9.

HG
Brummi

Hi Brummi

Yep I realise that but I've tried all sorts of different combinations including identical ones and it made no difference.

Pete

[V9 issue with fps]

14 minutes ago, Neo said:

Hi Peter,

please post a screenshot of your V8.5 and V9 graphics settings.

Kind regards,

Neo

Hi Neo

As requested I have attached screenshots of both graphic card settings. I have tried adjusting the settings in both from both "normal" and "Low" to both "Normal and Normal" to both "High and normal" but it made no difference at all. At the moment I am assuming that V9 will not cope well with the large file size 5600Mb in V8.5 to 5960MB in V9. The Nikolaus II demo layout that I am working on for Klaus, (Sualokink), is only 1000MB so has no fps issues.

Kind regards

Peter

[Neue Beta-Version V9]

37 minutes ago, 220hotwheels said:

Hello @Neo

Following on from my earlier comment concerning virtual track connection change after only one trip round said track. In order to set a benchmark, all of the Virtual track was set to "1". After just one trip around this track several sections had moved and at the connections showing an error, (red line instead of green) this had changed to 0.999 or 0.998. Having put it back  to 1 all was then OK, but why is this changing itself. The same thing is happening with the cameras. They can be set perfectly, the run is completed but when you try to do the same run next time some of the cameras have shifted.

I have a similar issue with portals. On the demo layout that I am modifying for Nikolaus II some of the portals work others do not. All worked fine in V8.5. I've made a test demo with two lengths of VT and 4 portals. A person passes through all of those without issue. Can you therefore suggest how I might regain the portal facility in this particular layout. At the moment a person walks up to the portal and simply stops. I have checked the connections and they seem to have connected properly but they are still showing the red line and not a green one

Kind regards

Peter

Hi Neo

A few more experiments later and I feel I can report with confidence that the issue IU faced regarding the portals was caused simply by the VT changing from "1" to anything between 0.991 and 0.999. By correcting each of the VT values back to "1" the issue was resolved. This does not however resolve the issue as to why this is happening in the first place.

Kind regards

Peter

[Neue Beta-Version V9]

Hello @Neo

Following on from my earlier comment concerning virtual track connection change after only one trip round said track. In order to set a benchmark, all of the Virtual track was set to "1". After just one trip around this track several sections had moved and at the connections showing an error, (red line instead of green) this had changed to 0.999 or 0.998. Having put it back  to 1 all was then OK, but why is this changing itself. The same thing is happening with the cameras. They can be set perfectly, the run is completed but when you try to do the same run next time some of the cameras have shifted.

I have a similar issue with portals. On the demo layout that I am modifying for Nikolaus II some of the portals work others do not. All worked fine in V8.5. I've made a test demo with two lengths of VT and 4 portals. A person passes through all of those without issue. Can you therefore suggest how I might regain the portal facility in this particular layout. At the moment a person walks up to the portal and simply stops. I have checked the connections and they seem to have connected properly but they are still showing the red line and not a green one

Kind regards

Peter

[V9 issue with fps]

1 hour ago, alexander42 said:

Hi Pete,

I have looked at your layout. First, let me say that this is really impressive! Though it doesn't really fit mit personal taste, I can very much appreciate the effort and care that must have gone into building it, especially all the details and complex traffic patterns.

The paused layout is running between 20 and 40 fps on my machine with shadows and special effects turned off. Keep in mind, that I have a quite old CPU (Ryzen 2700X) and only 16GB of RAM. But I think this is fine, since the overall system utlilization is at 30-40 percent max.

Unpausing the layout is where things started going south. I never saw more than 5 FPS. You have built an incredibliy complex event structure with dozens, if not hundreds of events, timers, delays and more, happening every second. Even then, my system utilization did not go up significantly. I can't tell for sure, but I beleive that the MBS engine is not designed to handle that amount of events.

Did this layout really run smoothly on your machine with MBS 8.5?

Cheers
Alex

Hi Alex

Thanks for taking the trouble to take a look at the problem and yes it ran perfectly in V8.5. At that time Nikolaus II was just in draft form but never the less it all ran perfectly. When the action was paused my fps was between 110 and 165fps but once in operation mode this dropped to 40 to 80fps. Everything ran smoothly, no funny judders.

I have several other large layouts still as work in progress and these all run very smoothly in V8.5. Hmmm there seems to be a common theme here!!!

Cheers 

Pete