NSWGR Locomotive roster

Creating and Editing Rollingstock
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: NSWGR Locomotive roster Unread post

Yokay, here's the next one: the 93 Class 0-6-0. Available from 1876 onwards. Gruntier than the 17 Class, and a bit more expensive to buy and run. No green paint either. By the time these ones rocked up, NSWGR had decided to do freight choofers in plain black.*

NSWGR_93_Class_running.jpg

As before: is beta, needs more eye candy, will get stats tweaks. Zip attached. !*th_up*!

*Edit: Turns out this is not quite right. Black didn't come in until 1884, so the 93's would have been running around in green for several years. I should really give it a green skin too.
Attachments
NSWGR_93_Class_beta.zip
(806.99 KiB) Downloaded 209 times
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: NSWGR Locomotive roster Unread post

I now have everything necessary working on the new computer, so will get back into finishing this roster off. IIRC there was only the 79 Class to do which shouldn't take long. Then I can do some ore map testing sand get another beta out. !*th_up*!
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: NSWGR Locomotive roster Unread post

Ok, I'm back onto this. As usual, "shouldn't take long" meant I got distracted by everything else in life for several months. *!*!*!

I've been doing the vectors for the frame plates this morning, which is always complex but fun on these old beasties. Might even have the thing running soon.

Re stats: I've decided to tweak the up some more, making full use of actual acceleration rates regardless of the game's name for any rating. This will allow better targeting of locomotives for a given use. !*th_up*!
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: NSWGR Locomotive roster Unread post

I just finished another test play of the NSW map, and finally realised something. Back when I first tested higher poly loco models, RoR and I were noticing some hit to frame rate with the test model at the time (a double H1 Mikado). That had about 2,000 tris in it.

These NSWGR loco models are in the 1,500 to 1,700 range for tris, and the test play I just finished ended up with about 130 locos running. It was totally fine for frame rate, as far as I could tell, but I will load it again and do some very careful checking around known problem areas (water reflections, storms, rising moons, particularly when combined).

I think this is down to running on a new computer and monitor, due tor my old ones going kaput at the end of last year. The new box has a solid state hard drive (no point using anything else on a new box these days) and Windows 10 (ditto). The old box was a disc hard drive and Windows 7.

The graphics card is still the old one, transferred over from the previous computer, because it was still working fine and I wanted to save a few hundred bucks at the time. It's not a fancy card by modern standards, but in-game graphics seem to be totally smooth despite the extra load from locos, and the extra load from the new 2560x1440 monitor (old one was 1920x1200, and more pixels = more load). The game was also running my custom cargo cars, most of which are higher poly than the defaults.

Short version is that I suspect loco models up to around 2,000 tris won't be a problem as long as you have a modern medium range computer. :)

Edit: Oh, just thought of something else. The latest version of dgVoodoo includes an option for a 2GB card emulation, while the older version on the old box had a 1GB emulation as its highest setting. This may be relevant too (and probably is).
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: NSWGR Locomotive roster Unread post

I was doing some more testing, and wanted the 79 Class running in a hurry. Couldn't be bothered finishing it enough to export it all from Blender for a quick play, so took the 23 Class bits, renamed them to 79, and tweaked the stats to suit.

To make it look different I changed the skin's base layer from green to maroon, which is another of the traditional NSWGR loco colours. I don't know if they ever used maroon during the 19th century*, but it was used on express locos at times in the 20th. Anyway, it looks good on these old beasts.

Ersatz_79.jpg

I think some more skins will be in order. The other traditional colours were black, obviously, but a few special trains also got painted blue. This was used for royal trains, when various royals were trundling around the place, but it was also used for the Caves Express, which ran from Sydney up to Katoomba back in the 1930's.

*Edit: Turns out they didn't. 19th century locos were green before 1884, and black after that. Maroon wasn't used until 1933.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: NSWGR Locomotive roster Unread post

Been thinking about this roster. Turns out the 67 Class isn't much use. If you want express the 14 Class is better on the flat (the 67 isn't grunty enough for mountains) and if you want a cheap freight hauler the 17 Class or 93 Class is better. I'm having trouble thinking up a useful niche within the NSWGR roster for the 67 Class, which is funny in a way because they had that problem in real life.

It was copied from the LB&SCR "Terrier", which excelled at short pax consists over short distances. In RT3 you tend to just run max express consists, because load/unload time is such a high percentage of total turnaround time so you might as well make more per trip. In real life the NSWGR didn't really have a use for such a loco either. Distances were a bit too long and loads a bit too heavy, so it didn't work as well around Sydney as it did for the LB&SCR.

I suppose it could be kept, just for a cheap unit that can intermittently haul a few cars of high value cargo on flat terrain over shortish distances, but that's a very limited loco to have. Or it could just be a shunter for fun, since that's more or less what they ended up doing IRL. Or I could make it minimally different in terms of stats from another suburban unit, just so people can have fun playing with an extra loco and convincing themselves they're being awesomely strategic about it. Not sure yet. Open to any suggestions. :)
User avatar
RulerofRails
CEO
Posts: 2061
Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2013 1:26 am

Re: NSWGR Locomotive roster Unread post

Any loco can be fun. :-)

I wouldn't be worried about a few locos not really being "strategically useful." This is realistic as you said. Also, in the game we are a bit limited when the mechanics simplifying some things compared to real life.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: NSWGR Locomotive roster Unread post

I'm half tempted to do all the NSWGR locos of the period just for fun. :lol:
Hey, that's only another 5 million classes. How hard can it be? *!*!*!

Edit: It did occur to me that there is an argument for tank locos even in RT3. IRL they are used because they are easier to deal with in yards and stations (and on turntables) due to the lack of a tender. This doesn't really apply in RT3, but tank locos are still more compact overall. The lack of a tender means the total train length will be shorter, which means traffic in congested areas will clear more quickly. Depending on the consist at the time the difference in overall length might only be 5-10%, but it's still an improvement and it will help traffic flow to some extent.

This could be another consideration for balancing stats, if anyone can figure out how to quantify it. :-)
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: NSWGR Locomotive roster Unread post

Been thinking about textures. The game brings in the B skin at pretty close range. You have to be zoomed right in on a loco before the A skin will be used. The vast majority of the time you never see it, even if you are doing train rides for fun.

This doesn't matter a lot of the time (the usual DDS is still perfectly adequate) but it's a bit of a problem for some liveries because the DDS compression relies on 4x4 blocks of pixels, so some details can turn to mud pretty quickly. I'm thinking mainly of lining here, which has to be chunkier than IRL to more or less keep its act together with DDS.

What I might try is using TGA for the B skin, and possibly for the C as well. TGA uses all available pixels individually, so will hold better detail at 512x512 and 256x256. The drawback is that TGA uses 4 times the VRAM for the same image dimensions, so a 512x512 TGA uses the same VRAM as a 1024x1024 DDS. I don't think this will be a noticeable issue though. Some of WP&P's old custom locos used TGA even for the A skin, and they never seem to cause issues.

Once things get down to the D skin there would be little point in using TGA, as the detail isn't there anyway, so it's probably best to revert to DDS for D, E and F.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: NSWGR Locomotive roster Unread post

Woohoo! I got the 14 Class to only make smoke where it is supposed to. ::!**!

Turns out that what it needed was to have all the files renamed from 14_ClassL_etc to 14ClassL_etc, and from 14_ClassT_etc to 14ClassT_etc. For some reason (and I have no idea why, other than it's RT3 so...) this keeps the game engine happy and there is no longer any smoking volcano between loco and tender.

14_Class_fixed.jpg

Since that worked to fix the 14 Class, I'm thinking I should probably rename the others to match this format, even though they don't seem to have any bugs at the moment. This is reminding me of the weird random bug I had when using a # prefix on custom Ammunition cars. If it happens with one, it is probably not a good idea to do it with any. Just in case.

Edit: I think this is another manifestation of the underscore bug that Jim found when doing custom logo names. It doesn't seem to work quite the same way on this loco though. In this case it seems to be the first underscore that is problematic, and 14_ClassL_body.3dp is probably being interpreted by the game engine as somehow indicating a C level skin or mesh. Although overall the loco still works perfectly apart from the huge volcano up its backside and the A level skin and mesh work as they should.

Which is all very weird, but that's RT3 for you. *!*!*!
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: NSWGR Locomotive roster Unread post

I've been thinking I'm in the mood to do a bit more loco modelling, and sorting out the rest of this roster is probably a good starting point. So, things to do...

1/ Convert all of them to the naming format mentioned in the previous post (eliminates one known bug).
2/ Check the existing locos for detailing, and tweak them up a bit if they could do with it.
3/ Make a green skin for the 93 Class (that's what all NSWGR locos carried pre-1884).
4/ Finish the 79 Class, and get that running.
5/ Add the 9 Class. I already have it mostly sorted, and the game doesn't currently have any examples of the Crewe type, so this would be a good extra unit to have.

That would give a pretty comprehensive roster, and one that is adaptable to other mid-to-late 19th century scenarios too.
Then, I was thinking about tank locos vs tender locos. In this bunch of choofers, tanks are the 8 Class 2-2-2WT, 6N Class 4-4-0T, and the 67 Class 0-6-0T. Ideally, these would all be limited to suburban and/or short haul usage. That could be done with trickery on territories and engine types, but I want to see how effectively it can be done using only engine stats.

Logically, the only way of doing this is by using a significantly higher fuel cost (to limit economic range) combined with a higher acceleration rating than you would usually expect (due to the way the game handles acceleration ratings). This should still be economical for trains that spend a comparatively large amount of their time at stations.

Lowish pulling power, but fairly high free weight, is also a possibility providing all your suburban/short hauls are on fairly flat terrain, which they are in the NSW scenario. That would stop you wanting to run tanks on routes that required climbing significant grades to get out of town.
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: NSWGR Locomotive roster Unread post

Got the 93 Class roughed out in green livery, and green really suits it. !*th_up*!

93_green_livery.jpg
User avatar
Gumboots
CEO
Posts: 4813
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:32 am
Location: Australia

Re: NSWGR Locomotive roster Unread post

Decided to add a couple more to this roster, mainly just because I could, but also because it sort of makes historical and technical sense for this scenario (and obviously they are potentially also useful for other scenarios).

The 23 Class, which I made previously, actually came in two orders: 9 units in 1865 (with 69 inch driving wheels) and another 4 units in 1869 (with 66.5 inch driving wheels). The second order was changed slightly (smaller wheels) because the first batch were found to be a bit short of grunt on some of the NSWGR's harder grades. It's not worth having two slightly different versions of the 23 Class in the game, but fortunately there is another class that will do the job nicely. :D
Original_10.jpg

This is the 10 Class, introduced in 1870, and exhibited in Sydney at the Intercolonial Exhibition of General Industries and Arts. This class was notable for being the first main line locomotives built in Australia. They were a 2-4-0, like the 23 Class, and had 66 driving wheels (fractionally smaller than the second batch of 23's). They also had more heating area than the 23's, which generally increases efficiency, and were recorded as using less coal over the run to Goulburn, while being able to easily keep the same times. So, the 10 Class would make a nice addition to the scenario. It's roughed out already.
Basics_10.jpg

I'll set it up so it has slightly lower top speed than the 23 on flat ground, but is a bit better up grades, and a bit cheaper to run. Purchase price will be slightly higher. Maintenance and reliability will be the same.
The other addition is going to be the 20N class, a Kitson 0-6-0 saddle tank that operated on the northern section around Newcastle. This locomotive still exists as a museum exhibit, and was even in service until 1967. Since it has managed to survive for 150 years, it seems a bit disrespectful to ignore it.

Another of the same class (but built in 1878) also survives. Back in the day, they used to look like this:
Original_20N.jpg

This class is already roughed out in Blender too:
Basics_20N.jpg

As an example of a UK/Euro/World saddle tank, which is something the game doesn't have yet, it should be a nice addition. They were common units worldwide, so I think we should have one. I'll set up the stats so that it makes a good replacement for short haul freight, to take over from the 6N Class in the 1870's.

It will have a similar purchase price but significantly higher fuel cost than the 17 and 93 classes (the other freight units) but much better acceleration, with a high free weight value but a fairly low pulling power (good around Sydney and Newcastle, but no good for the scenario's longer runs). !*th_up*!
This will give 12 classes for the NSW scenario, all of which should have a fairly useful niche, and with a new class coming in every few years just for fun and interest. I'll probably fudge a few of the introduction years for more even spacing. The game doesn't let you have a new loco until halfway through the introduction year anyway.

Code: Select all

 Class      Type        Introduced      Fudged      Gap
 -------------------------------------------------------
 1 Class    0-4-2       1855            1855        N/A
 8 Class    2-2-2WT     1858            1858        3       (Makes sense for Sydney pax traffic)
 9 Class    2-2-2       1861            1861        3       (No need earlier + may work for N pax)

6N Class    4-4-0T      1863            1863        2       (NSWGR 1863: unsure if should fudge it)
                                                            (Would be good to have earlier, but can last until 1872)

14 Class    2-2-2       1865            1865        2       (Keep the 14, 17 & 23 classes as they were)
17 Class    0-6-0       1865            1865
23 Class    2-4-0       1865            1865

10 Class    2-4-0       1870            1869        4       (NSWGR 1870, but fudge to match 2nd 23 order)
                                                            Maintenance/reliability should be equal to 23 Class.
                                                            Higher purchase price, cheaper on fuel, a bit less top speed, a bit more grunt.

48 Class    0-6-0ST     1872            1871        2       (NSWGR 1872, but Kitson from 1870)
67 Class    0-6-0T      1875            1874        3       (NSWGR 1875, but LB&SCR from 1872)

79 Class    4-4-0       1877            1876        2       (Fudge 79 & 93 classes, to give 3 solid years of use)
93 Class    0-6-0       1877            1876
I'm also contemplating a general price increase for all of these locomotives, to make it a bit more difficult to spam a stack of them in the NSW scenario. A purchase price increase of 10-20%, and possibly the same on running costs, may be better.
Post Reply