Quote from johneysvk :

it's 12 GBP (not euro) potentially dropping to 9/6 depending on where you live.

You are right. Sorry, i referred to the first post in the thread which said:

"I'm debating whether to purchase an S2 license or an S3 license. I don't think S3 really offers anything good other than mods for 6 more euros. I'm not sure if mods work in the server if they do, that would be fantastic."

£6 is exactly €6.81. With such sums, it is necessary to be precise.

Quote from Iginla :

i'm with an unbiased opinion here, its not worth it and looking back, what a rip-off that S3 release was 8 years ago

I remind you that we are talking here about a difference of 6 euros between the S2 & the S3.

What do you get for 6 euros with contemporary games? Even on Raceroom, an old free game of comparable graphic quality, with 6 euros you will have to choose between a car and a track. And you will need to have a powerful computer with a good connection and dedicate 40 GB to Steam (with all the problems of using this ... stuff)

What quality games can you play today with a 10+ year old computer without Steam?

I understand that over time LFS has discouraged a lot of people. The world of simracing has also evolved a lot since the first release of LFS. I do not deny the various problems of LFS. But even in its current state, with the mod system which is an undeniable revolution, the S3 is an excellent choice.

I may be wrong, and thank you for correcting me, what is there comparable to LFS in terms of qualities, possibilities, ergonomics, freedom of creation and use for such a low price with a lifetime license? Even (and above all !) 8 years later?

I believe the LFS AI will remain a mystery. It is also good not to know everything to preserve the magic of illusion .

I tested the latest version of LFS on 5 computers with different configurations. I also have multiple LFS installations per computer. I play with some computers, on others the bots drives alone. The AI never makes the same times. AI never behaves the same way.

The AI improves its lap times during the race, as you say. But the AI also improves race after race, as long as the starting grid is not changed. At one point, there is a sort of state of grace. The AI looks almost human. And the next race is total chaos. It seems that there are several random factors in the behavior of the AI. Scawen did voodoo programming for us . It's awesome, I love it.

The AI is overall very good for a game of this generation, but too slow.

With faster motors, it's almost feeling like driving with psychopathic humans. Remains the anticipation of collisions, which is not at the top, but It stays funny.

First, i circumvented the problem of quantity of fuel by increasing the capacity of the tanks. It works up to 15 rounds. And finally I found a quick configuration that consumes little, so it works flawlessly.

Before, even if I allowed in-race refueling, the AI would run out of fuel and stop on the track. And sometimes not, with the same number of laps...

The AI is based (I think) on the normal consumption of the original engine and its fuel consumption depends on its driving (more or less aggressive). I rarely do races longer than 20 laps, so a tank capacity is more than enough.

Thanks for helping Gutholz

Quote from Racon :

Awesome, great to hear it works! But you should definitely publish your tweak mods so non-modders can try it out too.

I am not legitimate in this role. I suck at setup, engine creation, etc. So, I based myself on the work of the modders: Your work. Nobody is legitimate to appropriate it.

And it works in test mode. With the parameters of the original cars of the game, without the trajectories being recalculated as for the modded cars. But maybe it works too, because with some modified cars the AI performance is more player-like.

What i can say is the result is there: Better motorization for the cars driven by the AI compensates for the weakness of the AI and makes the gaming experience awesome !

Everyone should be able to try this. It's phenomenal . The game is really transformed, full of intensity.

I can tell you very simply what I did and the things that didn't work well. But what I did in minutes, you (the modders) can do like a pro. I don't have the time or the skills to do much better. And I think it's better to have something clean, well calibrated, common to all users. Otherwise, everyone will manage (like me) to tamper with something.

PS: thank you, I will try. So far, I have managed to improve the problem by increasing the capacity of the cars' fuel tanks. But that doesn't always work, depending on the track.

Hi Van Sterberkt ,

Thank you for your answer.
I will try to test this as soon as possible. A career mode is really what this game lacks, second only to a competitive AI.

I think the slow AI did not contribute to the success of your program. But thanks to the Mod system that's changing.

I really hope that your program will work with modified cars, it opens up huge prospects for the future.

Quote from M3THANOL :

I speak under correction but I remember racing on a server, I think it was AA Multiclass, about a year ago and the host/ admin had an AI included in the racing. The AI got better each race as it learnt the lines, not sure how that was done or if that is what the normal LFS AI's can do?

Hi M3THANOL ,

I can't answer the particular case you mention. It would seem (from my offline experience) that the game's normal AI is capable of improving, within limits. In my experience always, the AI seems to work better and seems faster with some modded cars. Like with your Ford Escort MK1 (off topic: Why did it disappear? It was my favorite car! )

I created a topic to find out how the AI works?
https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/2032378

I'm glad you're interested in AI. As I said above, I very easily made some very promising experiments from the original GTRs of the game.

I'm 99% satisfied with what I got! The AI is faster than me. Bots are pugnacious. A little too aggressive, but very pleasant. They make normal mistakes (like going off the track due to braking too late after an overly optimistic overtake).
The races are (finally!) exhilarating and lively. You have to hang on behind the AI, optimize your trajectories, get the most out of the car and take risks to overtake. It's very physical and very immersive.
I'm rediscovering the game. And I love it .

But I don't know how to do better. I'm sure a modder as talented as you could do something great just by modifying the characteristics of the originals cars in the game .
So we could have a version of a car to drive for the player and a boosted version of the same car for the AI, to compensate for its lack of performance. This is the idea I followed and it works.

My last problem is that the amount of fuel automatically assigned to the AI is not always adapted to the layout. The AI runs out of fuel on the last lap after a great race... it's frustrating

Quote from Gutholz :

That was a joke

You can only set AI strength yourself (amateur, pro, etc)
Plus the usual stuff that applies to humans too, like ballast/engine air restrictor, different cars etc.

Thank you for your reply .

I was gullible because I remember a long, long time ago it was said that the AI in LFS was able to learn while driving. There must be something left of it since the AI gradually improves its lap times within a certain limit, without reaching or exceeding the performance of the player (well at home, yet I am very far from world records).

I take advantage of your attention to ask you the question here. Is there a way (in the pits or via the mod system) for the AI to start the race with more fuel than is automatically allocated based on the number of laps set for the race? I've done supercharged versions of the GTRs and on some tracks the AI still runs out of fuel to finish the race.
Thanks!

Hi,

Sorry, I searched but couldn't find anything recent about it.

In another topic I read that: "The slow Ai represents the average lfs racer speed though, so it's accurate."

Since it doesn't work for me, I must be doing something wrong. Also I would like to know how it works?

How is the average player speed calculated?
On the best laps? On all laps?
Should we qualify before the race?
Do you have to finish the race for the lap times to be taken as a reference?
If the player is pushed off the track and completes the race, does this poor lap time reduce the player's stats for level calculation?
Do we need to have online statistics for this to work?

If anyone knows, or if there is a tutorial on the latest version of AI, thank you very much for helping me.

Hi, This program looks great.
Is it still relevant? Is there a new version compatible with the mod system?
Thanks.

Quote from MousemanLV :

The slow Ai represents the average lfs racer speed though, so it's accurate.

I don't know how the AI calibrates itself. But it's not "accurate" enough. I'm not an exceptional driver (I never train, I only race with AI, I use a setup very close to the default setup) and before modifying the AI cars, I drove 2 seconds faster in the race. In two or three laps, I was in first position, starting last out of thirty-two...

I had an S2 a long time ago. I used it very little. Since I replay I bought an S3. And that has absolutely nothing to do with it.

With the S3 you have Rockingham, which is one of my favorite tracks (and on which in GTR with adapted tires I no longer notice any noticeable bugs).
But above all, with the S3 and its mod system, you have complete freedom. As with the old generation games, but with added practicality and quality.

For example, the main problem of LFS is indeed its too slow AI. With the S3 and its mod system, you can in a few clicks create modified cars (in mod test) that correspond exactly to your level for training.
Since discovering this, I've been racing exhilaratingly against an AI that's competitive and aggressive, but also makes mistakes. It's wonderful and very realistic. For that alone, the S3 is worth it.

Last edited by Avraham Vandezwin, Sat 21 Jan 2023, 09:39. Reason : spelling mistake

For those interested, it works!

I managed to improve AI times by around 6-7%, or 4–6 seconds per lap, on medium tracks like the historic RO course or SO town.

My empirical hunch was that the AI drove the original in-game cars better than the modded ones. And that seems to be true. It only took me a few minutes to create supercharged, stable versions of the original GTRs that don't run out of fuel in the last 3 laps of the race. The gaming experience is completely revolutionized.

Before, I started in thirty-second position. And in 3 laps maximum, I was in first position. My only chance of having an interesting race was to get knocked off the track at least three times. It's fun, but not all the races... Even though I love this game, I would have moved on (that's why I hadn't played LFS for almost 10 years before taking my steering wheel out of the closet).

Now I live in paradise . I have to fight 20 laps with Ai to gain 4 places. In one session, I have already improved my times by a few tenths on my favorite traks. I discover the pleasure of starting from my last position without having to systematically start from the bottom of the ranking so as not to get too bored.

I didn't speed up the AI further because what I got is my current level (I'm playing H-gearbox with clutch using default setup except gearbox). But it is entirely possible to make the AI work even faster with this method.

I can't believe I've been waiting for this for 10 years when it was so easy to drastically improve the AI almost without doing anything! And what works offline can work on servers. Can you imagine the change it would bring if the starting grids were completed with truly competitive AIs? Of course, this solution is not perfect. But while waiting for better...

The bad news is that I did it in a hurry, in a way that prohibits me from publishing it, and I don't have the time or the skills to do better.

Also, I thought that the modder(s) who would bring an official, clean, and common version of a competitive AI would be welcomed as heroes by those who play or train with the AI.

If the modders don't, everyone will polish their stuff in their corner in their own way by all possible and imaginable means. And it's not good for the game or for modders. Let's not forget that the mod system has opened Pandora's box...

Quote from V_Ro :

I think it's a very good idea to improve the AI of LFS, in my opinion it's the only thing missing to give it an outstanding grade.

You are right. But improving AI is not a priority for developers. This is also not a core community request. So we have to fend for ourselves. The question is how?

For my part, I got around the problem by equipping the AI with more powerful cars than the one I drive. LFS AI is not inherently bad. LFS AI is just too slow. With faster cars, after a few races it's already much better.

This is why making specific cars for the AI seems to me to be a (good?) way to have a satisfying offline more experience.
My problem is that I'm not good enough with mechanics to come up with something balanced to improve the AI other than in a straight line...

Quote from kostix :

I would add that I relate to Avraham's racing against AI. I, for one, actually like to just drive: that is, take a car which is nice to drive, take a track with lots of different turns and as small as possible number of long boring straights, and put the car through the track, trying to go as fast as I can while actually staying on track

So yes, I can thus also say that I drive for sensation, not performance: Avraham put it wery well.

Hi Kostix,
I am also not a native speaker. I pity our poor English-speaking friends who have to decipher my gibberish. I hope at least that our strange way of expressing ourselves amuses them and has for them something more exotic than annoying.

You have expressed your point of view very clearly. I did nothing but contextualize it. The problem you raised is not new. One could almost speak of the "Kostix point" in reference to the "Godwin point". This is a sticking point; an unsurpassable conceptual impasse in the world of automotive simulation.

What is virtual driving realism? Which side of the fence are we on? Is it realistic to be able to tweak the setups almost without limits to the point of making the behavior of the cars almost identical, whether they are real racing cars or vulgar pans with wheels? That's the question.

I am like you. I like LFS because it's the game that gives me the best driving experience. Becoming virtual mechanics world champion never appealed to my ego. I play to relax. And as I speak, I'm much more relaxed when playing alone against the AI.

We are not alone in this case. When I look at the server traffic, I hope for the developers that we are the submerged part of the iceberg. Which should be a question for a multiplayer game .

Last edited by Avraham Vandezwin, Mon 16 Jan 2023, 11:31. Reason : a misinterpretation in the translation

Quote from Racon :

If it's GTRs, you could give the AI standard cars and you could drive one with reduced tyre width - that'd put the difference in the corners where the AI are weak, rather than the straights where AI are equal.

Hi Racon,
Thank you for your reply. I will try to work on the tires. This will reduce my performance, like driving a car that is less efficient than the AI (as I often do, especially with your PIRAN FIREFLYs which I really like ).

What I'm trying to do is make the AI faster with optimized versions of FXR, FZR and XRR. I would like to speed them up by about 5 seconds per turn. An idea ?

I ride in a homemade cockpit with a real fov in front of a 75-inch 32/9 widescreen placed just behind the steering wheel. It's better with fast cars. Below a certain speed, I feel like I'm at a standstill. I love driving the FZR. I've done versions of FZR that are a little slower than the AI before, but even starting from the bottom of the grid with the default setup, I go up them too fast.

Hi everyone, I guess I'm not the only one who thought about it, but I couldn't find anything specific about it.

Everyone agrees, LFS AI is too slow. So why not create more competitive AI cars with GTRs?

We already have with the modders (thanks to them) cars that are faster than the original GTRs (FXO TIME ATTACK, for example). But the AI can't drive them well. So I did a test.

I created more powerful versions of the original game's GTRs for the AI and drove an unmodified car. The races are a little more chaotic, but more attractive. The AI is faster and therefore more competitive.

I only changed the engine power. The AI is more aggressive in a straight line but still just as slow in curves, braking and cornering. And on the 18th lap, the AI feels an irrepressible urge to return to the pits. I'm too bad with setup (and don't have enough time for it) to do this well.

So, I was wondering if someone who knows what to do (i.e., not me) could be able to modify all the parameters of the cars in the game (e.g., GTRs) to create more powerful, but well-balanced models so to make AI more efficient? And possibly equip these new cars with a world champion setup.

I know it's not very realistic to race against twice as powerful cars to compensate for weak AI. And that it's not possible to get something completely satisfying that way. But the race against the AI would be more interesting (while waiting for the new tire physics, which will reset the counters to zero).

Please tell me if what I'm saying is completely stupid .

Quote from w126 :

I don't think preaching is necessary, because the need for limited setups was recognized by LFS devs a long time ago.
https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/1316543#post1316543

Rarely does the preacher address his sermons to God himself...

Thanks for that update. Don't see any irony in my words (I have too much gratitude for the devs who gave us this wonderful game and kept it alive in adversity for so many years for our greatest pleasure) but this post is already more than 13 years old. And the problem remains. So I'm happy to enjoy the game as it is.

It's just a shame that people (not me, fixed settings wouldn't be enough to get me back online) would rather play against the AI than play online because of an overly permissive setup that degrades the gaming experience. I think racing with limited setups would bring a new dynamic. And now with modding, it seems possible to test it without modifying the historical game. There would thus be new racing references that would leave some room for new racers currently crushed by the weight of history. That's just my opinion .

Last edited by Avraham Vandezwin, Mon 9 Jan 2023, 10:03. Reason : one word too many, sorry for the other mistakes that I don't see.

Quote from yaper :

Hi

I would also like to have possibility to compete in the races where you have limited possibility of setting up the car. For example change only: tyre pressure, brake balance, wings, fuel load. Not that I do not like to tune the car, but LFS setups are allowing sometimes unrealistic values causing cars to be faster but for the prize of not behave like a real car.
Recently I also drive with AI, because on servers people are using very weird sets which are exploiting the physics of LFS. I can download unrealistic setup to compete with others but I do not like to do that.

Thanks for your support. This is not the first time I have mentioned this problem and I feel like I am preaching alone in the zwin for the black-headed gulls and gabians.

Last edited by Avraham Vandezwin, Sun 8 Jan 2023, 10:41. Reason : spelling mistake

I add one last thing without trying to argue but to be completely clear and come back to Kostix's point, because it seems important to me.

When you say

Quote from johneysvk :

I've driven some very fast sets, and while a good set can help you shave off a couple of tenths, it's ultimately about being to able drive well, fixed setup or not.

you are both right and wrong. You only gain a few tenths compared to an already modified setup. The gap is much bigger between a very fast set and the default sets. And it is this discrepancy that Kostix is talking about. This is where it would be interesting to have WRs with the default sets.

Certainly, it is very easy to obtain optimized and much faster settings. I have tried many. But (and maybe that's just my feeling) every second gained came at the expense of ride feel. Quick Setups feel like pushing a sewing machine on rails.

There's something frustrating about losing a second on a lap against a 12-year-old mouse player. But it's even more frustrating to try its set and find that it is not controllable at the wheel, that it is not even a car anymore. What is the miracle behind this?

LFS is an excellent game. Its physics are (already, in its current form) one of the best in the world. But LFS is a computer program. And for my part, I have the impression that competitiveness is paid for with the pleasure of driving.

People who play "casually" don't care about gaining 2 seconds per turn. They want to enjoy driving. And it's a shame to use optimized settings that make driving less pleasant and less realistic to be competitive online.

Quote from johneysvk :

P.S.: Please don't take this the wrong way, but it's hard to take feedback about online racing from someone with 0km raced on LFSW (or maybe this is not your first account and i'm jumping to conclusions? )

This is not my first LFS account. I know LFS since its first version. I had an S2 in another life but was not active on this forum. I decided to buy (a full) S3 recently. I haven't played online since for a bunch of off-topic reasons.

I'm not sure it's necessary to address the issue of limited or fixed configurations in such a drastic way. Let modders be free to limit configurations as they see fit and we'll see what happens. It's not about revolutionizing LFS (I know I'm touching something ideological here) but about offering an additional possibility that seems to interest some runners and modders. So the line will draw itself.

It is quite realistic for competition cars to have advanced settings. Seems less realistic to me for more mundane cars. In real life, it is possible to adjust the tire pressure of a Fiat Panda very precisely, but (it seems to me) the adjustment of the gearbox cannot be done as finely as with LFS. That's all .

It can be (also) fun to tame a car with its flaws and see what can be done with it. Players (like me) who prefer sensations to performance could (perhaps) be tempted again by this kind of online racing.

I have already practiced configuration sharing. Sorry for the metaphor but I can't find any others, I feel like I'm putting on someone else's still hot panties. I am not a fan. The idea of having common base presets for shocks, gearbox, clutch etc. to adapt the car to the layout pleases me more.

Ever since I started playing again, I've been racing against the AI. Even though modding allowed me to significantly increase the level of the AI, I don't need to modify the base configurations much to win. And I like to drive the car.

All players are different. Fixed or limited configurations could be a way to bring them together online more often and would put everyone on an equal footing at the starting line. I say nothing more than that .

Last edited by Avraham Vandezwin, Fri 6 Jan 2023, 12:24. Reason : Bad translation

Quote from gu3st :

There's good reason why many of the most popular iRacing series are fixed setup. The sense of equality as everyone's using the same setup and a reduced barrier to entry as you don't need to find (read: pay for) a setup to participate.

You are right. A fixed (or limited) configuration is a good way to restore some level playing field for new racers.
Many people new to LFS do the same thing as Kostix; They watch the WRs to assess their level. Either the WRs seem suspect to them because the cars there behave in a strange way and very different from their experience. Either they tell themselves that they will take too long to become competitive. Result, even if they appreciate LFS, they will look elsewhere.

You can enjoy driving and have a competitive spirit without having the soul of a mechanic.

The question of setup is regularly raised. It resurfaces today in the reflection on the modding system (see ivancsx's post in this topic)

https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/2028923#post2028923

Since the beginning of LFS, setup management has been a problem.

Everyone understands the importance of having a setup adapted to the race conditions. It is normal that the most experienced drivers appreciate the management of the setup in LFS.

But the almost infinite possibilities of settings offered by LFS are not realistic. Especially for touring cars. And most of the hot laps are not realistic at all. In the real world, no pilot with all his head would drive like that, taking so many risks.

I think a lot more people would come to race on the servers if some of them (not all of them of course) offered single or limited setup cars. Why not have two categories of online racing?

I think this is a real topic that deserves to be thought about.

I just wanted to say a big thank you for these two cars (200&240). I really enjoy driving them . I hope that we will soon have a finalized version with beautiful skins.

Quote from Aleksandr_124rus :

Yes, you're right, there is no document on paper. It was a verbal agreement, as Gorbachev and his European colleagues said. That is, Nato understood that Russia was against expansion. And that's what I was talking about...
...And Russia still remembers that when you are authoritarian, if you increasing its military capabilities, and has aggressive rhetoric, then they are afraid of you, then they start listening to you. This is a very clear psychological concept.

No matter how many centuries have passed, even in the modern geopolitical world, everything is decided by force.

I don't know what verbal agreement you are referring to with the Europeans. I know there were discussions in early 1990 between United States Secretary of State James Baker and Mikhail Gorbachev. These discussions are recorded in this document:

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/document/16116-document-05-memorandum-conversation-between

It was still only a question here of the status of reunified Germany at the time of the Soviet Union and the inclusion of the GDR within NATO. At that time, before the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the question of an expansion of NATO further east did not arise. The collapse of the Soviet Union created a vacuum and big instability. NATO came to fill this void, and to accompany (in its own way...) the emancipation of the peoples. There was never any question of humiliating Russia.

People of my generation saw the fall of the Berlin Wall as a hope. They wanted to believe that Russia would be a new country that would emancipate itself from authoritarianism. It is clear that every step towards a normalization of East-West relations today comes at a high price.

It will not be taken out of my head that Russia had its agenda. That European leaders have fallen into the trap set for them. The force of which you speak is not simply for internal use. The force of which you speak is now working openly for a new global balance of which current events and their consequences are only the premises...

Quote from Aleksandr_124rus :

But instead, from the West there was only a violation of the agreements that led to what we have today. If simplify it a lot, that's how Putin appeared...

...Namely, the expansion of the NATO bloc. Which was expanded in violation of the agreements between the West and the Soviet Union.

I always read your articles with pleasure. I find them clear, precise and well documented. Also, I am surprised that a person as intelligent and rigorous as you, repeatedly relays these elements of propaganda.

All specialists in international agreements affirm it: there was never a formal agreement guaranteeing the USSR that NATO would not expand (neither at the signing of the Warsaw Pact, nor at the time of its dissolution, nor at any other time in history with Russia and in any agreement). It is a proven historical fact.

The West has its faults and there are many. NATO enlargement is perhaps the main cause of the war in Ukraine, as you claim. But this (opportunistic) extension was not done in violation of an agreement. The West is not guilty of this original fault which would have led to the advent of Putin (and which would authorize Putin to violate all the agreements signed regarding Ukraine). Do your own research on this and you will find that I am telling the truth.

For the rest I agree with you. It is absolutely foolish to blame the Russian people as a whole for Putin's actions.