No experience with FD specifically, but in general I believe those motion simulators are mostly bullshit and a complete waste of time and money. I guess I can see how multi-million $ simulators that are fully enclosed and move the whole apparatus may work somewhat convincingly, but these "cheap" ones do nothing but throw you around generating forces completely unrelated to what happens on the screen.
Just think about it, the main force used is gravity, since that is the only force you can use to exert a constant pull. To make use of gravity, you need to be tilted. The first obstacle is of course, that the maximum force that can be simulated would be 1G, but even that would be unrealistic, since the downward force (gravity) that you normally experience additionally to the longitudinal and lateral forces is "used up" by that point. Also it would require a tilt of 90° which is quite a bit more than realistically achievable, so the actual acceleration that can be simulated is even lower.
However, the much more serious problem are the forces generated by the tilting process itself. If you go from acceleration (tilted back) to sudden deceleration (tilted forward), the movement you experience in the transition can be the complete opposite of what you want. Obviously this can be minimized by designing the motion simulator to have it's main rotational axis "in" your head, so by tilting forward actually your body moves backwards below you while your head remains mostly stationary, but even then you still suffer from the rotational forces itself.
E: Basically what Niels said, that will teach me to leave the reply window open for so long
Since you haven't specified what settings you've tried, have you given the LFS Manual recommended setup a shot?
The FF strength in the Logitech profiler should be at least 100%, and you can try to put it higher (to 110-115%) because that will exaggerate small forces more. That said, I do know what you're talking about - as soon as the wheel is turned (= a constant FF pull from cornering is applied), the FF from rumble strips, etc. is completely drowned out. However, I'm not sure if this is really the fault of the wheel or of LFS' non-perfect FF implementation, that seems to greatly dampen some frequencies before they even get to the wheel.
The FF strength in the Logitech profiler should be at least 100%, and you can try to put it higher (to 110-115%) because that will exaggerate small forces more. That said, I do know what you're talking about - as soon as the wheel is turned (= a constant FF pull from cornering is applied), the FF from rumble strips, etc. is completely drowned out. However, I'm not sure if this is really the fault of the wheel or of LFS' non-perfect FF implementation, that seems to greatly dampen some frequencies before they even get to the wheel.
Indeed Sam, that just means the point at which the redline starts on the tachometer as well as where the rpm limiter kicks in has been lowered. Has nothing to do with the shift light, which is still created dynamically.
Unfortunately, new physics doesn't necessarily mean new/fixed tyre heating behaviour. It would be nice to have, but I wouldn't bet on it.
Regarding the wear-grip relation, judging from hearsay I thought that at least brand new tyres are often very grippy for the first few laps and then quickly degrade before plateauing at a slightly lower grip level, but I could be imagining things. It is, however, certain that the tyre wear/heat/grip correlation is a very complicated matter that is influenced by many factors, making a completely accurate simulation with just one base tyre model (that we have in LFS) nigh impossible.
Regarding the wear-grip relation, judging from hearsay I thought that at least brand new tyres are often very grippy for the first few laps and then quickly degrade before plateauing at a slightly lower grip level, but I could be imagining things. It is, however, certain that the tyre wear/heat/grip correlation is a very complicated matter that is influenced by many factors, making a completely accurate simulation with just one base tyre model (that we have in LFS) nigh impossible.
When you press the brake pedal, is the yellow/blue bar on the right s ... the axis assignment page in the options moving smoothly?
These bars display what is reported to LFS via DirectInput/DirectX. If the yellow/blue brake pedal bar is having the same 0-50-100 behaviour there then something outside of LFS is wrong (maybe a game profile gone bonkers?)
These bars display what is reported to LFS via DirectInput/DirectX. If the yellow/blue brake pedal bar is having the same 0-50-100 behaviour there then something outside of LFS is wrong (maybe a game profile gone bonkers?)
Sounds like either your router or your ISP prevents a direct connection to the FM servers. If you know the IP of the FM server you could try a "tracert <ip>" in the command line to see where it starts failing.
That you can see it on LFSW / LFS Remote is because you don't actually have a direct connection to the FM server, but only to LFSW which relays the data to you, sort of acting like a proxy. This is of course also the reason why there are no ping times displayed on the LFSW list, since it would display the ping of the LFSW server to the LFS server - not *your* ping.
That you can see it on LFSW / LFS Remote is because you don't actually have a direct connection to the FM server, but only to LFSW which relays the data to you, sort of acting like a proxy. This is of course also the reason why there are no ping times displayed on the LFSW list, since it would display the ping of the LFSW server to the LFS server - not *your* ping.
If you have a S2 license, please login with your licensed account to post here (username and WEBpassword work on the forum).
I have tested it in Y20 (just some version I had lying around), it is no different to how it works now.
I'm not sure what you're saying, the invert mouse function has always been like that. It's not supposed to just invert the Y-axis.
It provides two conceptually different movement methods. In normal mode, the landscape is static and you move the camera around - your mouse movement directs where the camera points. When inverted, the camera is static and you 'grab' the landscape and move it around, like in some RTS games.
I guess what you wanted to post is an improvement suggestion that gives you the additional possibility to just invert the Y-axis, but you made it sound like the existing functionality is broken or has been broken by Z25.
E: I checked an older version now, and actually the invert function has just been switched around. In older versions the inverted mode worked like the normal one I described and vice versa. However, it has never worked the way you describe.
E2: I'm not sure anymore, maybe it was always switched around and I'm just imagining things.
It provides two conceptually different movement methods. In normal mode, the landscape is static and you move the camera around - your mouse movement directs where the camera points. When inverted, the camera is static and you 'grab' the landscape and move it around, like in some RTS games.
I guess what you wanted to post is an improvement suggestion that gives you the additional possibility to just invert the Y-axis, but you made it sound like the existing functionality is broken or has been broken by Z25.
E: I checked an older version now, and actually the invert function has just been switched around. In older versions the inverted mode worked like the normal one I described and vice versa. However, it has never worked the way you describe.
E2: I'm not sure anymore, maybe it was always switched around and I'm just imagining things.
Last edited by AndroidXP, .
Works fine here, no matter whether LFS is in single or triple screen mode.
That's the ABS indicator. If a certain wheel is about to lock up and ABS prevents that, the wheel flashes orange in the F9 view.
Unlocks refill every Friday, in case you didn't know. You are in no danger of them running out permanently.
It would be highly ironic if they did that, considering how LFS finally gets it first real track and then it would already be out of date when Scavier release it
Or they would have to hold back the release and do it all over Anyway, I think they should make a city circuit. But only if they leave the speed bumps in.
1. Wrong forum 
2. This is a feature/optimization for better performance
Seriously, why do you care? You already have made the rest of the car magically invisible (probably to get more fps) and you're seriously concerned about these mysterious floating wheels not showing the spokes from the inside?
2. This is a feature/optimization for better performance
Seriously, why do you care? You already have made the rest of the car magically invisible (probably to get more fps) and you're seriously concerned about these mysterious floating wheels not showing the spokes from the inside?
1) There is a tool to save & ... e the desktop icon layout
2) Switching around prior to a gaming session really shouldn't be too much work
Also I didn't call you any more lazy than you did call the devs lazy with your "nice try, though" comment in the other thread
That brings up the age-old issue of "what does the real race driver actually know?" again, though. Now obviously I don't know your sources, but ideally they should have a very extensive sim background coupled with the track experience. A racedriver who has no experience with sims whatsoever has a very hard time actually judging the accuracy of a sim since he has no reference of what to expect or what is possible and how to relate to what happens on the screen to real world behaviour. Someone like that might be baffled just by having a car behave not completely arcadish, even if the physics were deeply flawed.
That said, I now watched the LFS segment and those ratings do seem kinda pulled out of thin air. Since they didn't use custom setups, the FBM should behave quite close to the real thing (it's mainly user setups that remove the front ARB for much better handling that 'ruin' the realism). I think they were simply bored by the sounds which makes the ride much less 'exciting' and that somehow influenced the physics score, or they had a crash physics explosion or something similar non-related cause a negative impact. About the gauges jumping around... no comment.
That said, I now watched the LFS segment and those ratings do seem kinda pulled out of thin air. Since they didn't use custom setups, the FBM should behave quite close to the real thing (it's mainly user setups that remove the front ARB for much better handling that 'ruin' the realism). I think they were simply bored by the sounds which makes the ride much less 'exciting' and that somehow influenced the physics score, or they had a crash physics explosion or something similar non-related cause a negative impact. About the gauges jumping around... no comment.
This is not a problem with LFS, but the way the Windows desktop / DirectX / GFX drivers work and interact.
There is theoretically a possibility to create and render to multiple Direct3D devices (monitors) but it would require a major rewrite of the graphics engine, and that's far too much effort for something that already works if the user isn't too lazy to switch desktop modes.
There is theoretically a possibility to create and render to multiple Direct3D devices (monitors) but it would require a major rewrite of the graphics engine, and that's far too much effort for something that already works if the user isn't too lazy to switch desktop modes.
Hehe, silly me, guess SoftTripleHead wasn't meant for that :doh:
But we also know that the load sensitivity of the tyres is likely flawed and that the FBM currently doesn't simulate the monoshock front suspension correctly (it's approximated with the strong front ARB, but the setup doesn't restrict you from removing that).
Just throwing that in here, I haven't actually watched the videos or anything
Just throwing that in here, I haven't actually watched the videos or anything
Go to windowed mode, make the window a bit smaller (half your monitor's height) and stretch it across the two monitors. LFS should then go in its 3-monitor-display mode and you should be able to click & reset the options again.
E: Besides that, can't you simply set SoftTH to two-monitor mode? The new multi-monitor support in LFS allows you to have one monitor as the centre view and one to look to the side without having to trick it by using three-monitor mode.
E: Besides that, can't you simply set SoftTH to two-monitor mode? The new multi-monitor support in LFS allows you to have one monitor as the centre view and one to look to the side without having to trick it by using three-monitor mode.
If you buy S2 (or S1) the RB4 is close enough...
Nope, tyre wear cannot be read by InSim applications, and even if it could I think a quick look at the F9 view is enough to figure out whether the tyres need to be changed soon.
Since the wear doesn't affect grip with the current modelling, it's purely a choice of how far you can go before they blow out, which is only a concern on really long races. With the cars you have available, the tyres should last considerably longer than one fuel tank anyway, though granted I have not too much experience with the FBM in that regard.
Since the wear doesn't affect grip with the current modelling, it's purely a choice of how far you can go before they blow out, which is only a concern on really long races. With the cars you have available, the tyres should last considerably longer than one fuel tank anyway, though granted I have not too much experience with the FBM in that regard.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG