I agree that in the end a dynamic environment is needed to properly simulate racing, however a strictly static environment helps greatly in identifying core issues with the physics that would otherwise be masked. Sure, a fully dynamic simulation would help hide some of the most blatant flaws that came to light during the years of hotlapping and searching for every way to exploit the system, but hiding problems instead of fixing them is not the way to go, IMO.
Besides that, that the tyre simulation is "good enough" might be true for other sims (I doubt), but unfortunately not for LFS. It is very good indeed, but still lacking in core aspects such as tyre heating, temperature effects, pressure effects, longitudinal grip, flatspots, etc.
Another thing I'd put before the environment simulation is a proper damage model. The amount of abuse LFS' cars can take is phenomenal and leads to a lot of the far too risky and gung-ho driving behaviour we see in LFS.
Besides that, that the tyre simulation is "good enough" might be true for other sims (I doubt), but unfortunately not for LFS. It is very good indeed, but still lacking in core aspects such as tyre heating, temperature effects, pressure effects, longitudinal grip, flatspots, etc.
Another thing I'd put before the environment simulation is a proper damage model. The amount of abuse LFS' cars can take is phenomenal and leads to a lot of the far too risky and gung-ho driving behaviour we see in LFS.
http://www.lfs.net/?page=loginretreive
It comes up when you enter wrong login details. How I found out? I just tried.
Guess the whole figure-things-out-yourself stick isn't all that popular in today's internet society.
It comes up when you enter wrong login details. How I found out? I just tried.
Guess the whole figure-things-out-yourself stick isn't all that popular in today's internet society.
In your LFS directory. Are you sure you downloaded the full version and not just the patch?
Of course drifting (oversteering beyond the optimal slip angle) can be faster in certain situations, even on tarmac-only courses. It is faster in all situations where the inherent understeer / resistance to turn of the car would make you slow down otherwise. The prime example of this are hairpins, of which we have none in LFS.
There might be even situations (corner & track geometry) where due to the setup compromises a little bit of intentional oversteer helps get the car around the corner faster than you'd be able to without going beyond the optimal slip angle.
It might also be faster to stay on the throttle when you screw up a corner, keeping the turbo spinning instead of going off the throttle to correct the oversteer, which would give you more grip in the tyres but much less torque to use that grip, resulting in a net loss of speed.
Why you get rally into this discussion is beyond me, since the reason they drift long wide turns is a completely different one (the spinning wheels are needed to dig through the loose surface). On tarmac they generally don't drift unless one of the reasons mentioned above applies.
What you have to keep in mind is that a "drift" (not showdrift) can be faster in a certain frame of reference (usually a single turn). If the whole track is your reference frame (you're faster everywhere with a drift) then that simply means you have a crap setup, not that drifting is some magical way to make you faster.
Now even if the drift advantage is for only one corner, what you always have to think about is the whole race as your reference frame. Unless you're doing a two lap stint, drifting will never be faster over the course of a race - your tyres will be shot way before everyone else's. Depending on how long the race is it might be even faster over the long run to take that one corner slower than possible for the benefit of massively increasing tyre life.
Also don't forget that power oversteer in LFS is too efficient. The grip dropoff on longitudinal slip is not severe enough, making full throttle starts and also power oversteer work better than they should.
There might be even situations (corner & track geometry) where due to the setup compromises a little bit of intentional oversteer helps get the car around the corner faster than you'd be able to without going beyond the optimal slip angle.
It might also be faster to stay on the throttle when you screw up a corner, keeping the turbo spinning instead of going off the throttle to correct the oversteer, which would give you more grip in the tyres but much less torque to use that grip, resulting in a net loss of speed.
Why you get rally into this discussion is beyond me, since the reason they drift long wide turns is a completely different one (the spinning wheels are needed to dig through the loose surface). On tarmac they generally don't drift unless one of the reasons mentioned above applies.
What you have to keep in mind is that a "drift" (not showdrift) can be faster in a certain frame of reference (usually a single turn). If the whole track is your reference frame (you're faster everywhere with a drift) then that simply means you have a crap setup, not that drifting is some magical way to make you faster.
Now even if the drift advantage is for only one corner, what you always have to think about is the whole race as your reference frame. Unless you're doing a two lap stint, drifting will never be faster over the course of a race - your tyres will be shot way before everyone else's. Depending on how long the race is it might be even faster over the long run to take that one corner slower than possible for the benefit of massively increasing tyre life.
Also don't forget that power oversteer in LFS is too efficient. The grip dropoff on longitudinal slip is not severe enough, making full throttle starts and also power oversteer work better than they should.
Or you just use the Live Alert feature of LFSW.
Okay, that already sound much more sensible. From my best guess it could be either of those (in no particular order)
- Faulty graphics card
- Overheating graphics card
- Overheating CPU*
- Faulty memory
- Faulty or too low powered PSU*
* I think these are most likely
I'd first check the case for dust and if all the fans are seated correctly and working, then if everything looks OK install some sort of tool that shows you the CPU, GFX card, etc. temperature (there are plenty out there, some freeware/shareware product ought to do it). The best would be if it has a temperature logging function because in non 3D mode it's likely that it's not overheating at all. So fire up the game and when you feel it's shortly before breakdown Alt-Tab out of it and see what the temperature readings look like. Be advised that temperature readings can rise and fall very quickly when you enter/exit a game, that's why the logging would be advisable. If they are above 70°C for the CPU or above 90°C for the GFX card then you're in trouble and need new/better coolers. Below that should be fine, or at least not causing the sudden shutdowns.
That said, overheating of the GFX card normally results in plenty of artefacts before the system shuts down completely, whereas CPU overheating can cause everything to break down relatively quickly, so IMHO if it's overheating, then it's more likely the CPU than the GFX card.
The next most likely thing is that the PSU is faulty or simply not able to provide enough power to the system. Unfortunately I can't give more specific details on how much power you need or how to resolve this (other than trial and error with a better PSU), as I don't know what PSU you currently have nor what your CPU & GFX card combo actually need.
- Faulty graphics card
- Overheating graphics card
- Overheating CPU*
- Faulty memory
- Faulty or too low powered PSU*
* I think these are most likely
I'd first check the case for dust and if all the fans are seated correctly and working, then if everything looks OK install some sort of tool that shows you the CPU, GFX card, etc. temperature (there are plenty out there, some freeware/shareware product ought to do it). The best would be if it has a temperature logging function because in non 3D mode it's likely that it's not overheating at all. So fire up the game and when you feel it's shortly before breakdown Alt-Tab out of it and see what the temperature readings look like. Be advised that temperature readings can rise and fall very quickly when you enter/exit a game, that's why the logging would be advisable. If they are above 70°C for the CPU or above 90°C for the GFX card then you're in trouble and need new/better coolers. Below that should be fine, or at least not causing the sudden shutdowns.
That said, overheating of the GFX card normally results in plenty of artefacts before the system shuts down completely, whereas CPU overheating can cause everything to break down relatively quickly, so IMHO if it's overheating, then it's more likely the CPU than the GFX card.
The next most likely thing is that the PSU is faulty or simply not able to provide enough power to the system. Unfortunately I can't give more specific details on how much power you need or how to resolve this (other than trial and error with a better PSU), as I don't know what PSU you currently have nor what your CPU & GFX card combo actually need.
I was the first one to get the Jagged Alliance 2 sources running on Visual Studio 2005, and also fixed a few bugs.
Yeah...
Yeah...
Wait, so you actually took the advice someone gave you on the internet? Impossible.
Well, if that's the truth then congrats to you, though I don't understand why I should be proud of you doing what you should've been doing from the beginning, not after countless failed threads and even Victor getting mad at you.
Regarding C++, I doubt you'll find much more help than the existing CInsim library. In C++ you either do it yourself or you find some libs somewhere on the internet that do the stuff for you if you can't do it. You definitely won't find anything that manages the InSim interface (apart from whatever CInsim does, I haven't looked at it), your best bet is looking for libs covering common things like networking, etc.
Well, if that's the truth then congrats to you, though I don't understand why I should be proud of you doing what you should've been doing from the beginning, not after countless failed threads and even Victor getting mad at you.
Regarding C++, I doubt you'll find much more help than the existing CInsim library. In C++ you either do it yourself or you find some libs somewhere on the internet that do the stuff for you if you can't do it. You definitely won't find anything that manages the InSim interface (apart from whatever CInsim does, I haven't looked at it), your best bet is looking for libs covering common things like networking, etc.
One word of advice, C# is ridiculously easy compared to C++. If you can't even code C#, you will fail horribly at C++. No offence, but personally I doubt you'd even manage to get the development environment to run, yet compile.
You sure it's the acceleration and not just simply a few seconds after being placed on the grid? Because I have no idea what the acceleration could possibly do to your system to make it crash. The only thing that happens is that sound is played and force feedback commands are generated, though both also happen before hitting the throttle.
You could try installing the latest drivers for your soundcard respectively the onboard sound if you don't have a soundcard, and if you have a steering wheel also the latest wheel drivers.
Random things you could also try:
- Reinstall DirectX
- Reinstall the graphics card drivers
Most important is that you verify what actually causes the crash, because acceleration causing it is really really weird.
You could try installing the latest drivers for your soundcard respectively the onboard sound if you don't have a soundcard, and if you have a steering wheel also the latest wheel drivers.
Random things you could also try:
- Reinstall DirectX
- Reinstall the graphics card drivers
Most important is that you verify what actually causes the crash, because acceleration causing it is really really weird.
This is for the dedicated host (LFS servers) only, not for normal LFS clients.
I dunno how he did it, but it seems the OP turns out to be right.
You first need to turn on the ignition (flip switch on the left side (by clicking it with your mouse)), then hit the starter switch nearby. IIRC the backspace key was the shortcut for the starter motor if you can't seem to make it work on the dash.
And what could that top speed info possibly be needed for? If you want to know the top speeds then take Bob's VHPA - it will tell you with reasonable accuracy how fast you could (but never will) go in the car of your choice.
I feel really weird defending the ISI engine here, but if the data is input correctly, it can very well handle the suspension movement like that. The real problem it has is that the replay system or maybe the exterior graphics in general do not show what actually happens in the physics engine. The result is unconvincing visuals, but the physics behind aren't actually wrong.
What they did in the nKP video it seems was to go offroad using the highest ride height with a rather soft suspension setup to make it look far more spectacular than what it really is, compared to today's simulation standards.
What they did in the nKP video it seems was to go offroad using the highest ride height with a rather soft suspension setup to make it look far more spectacular than what it really is, compared to today's simulation standards.
Maybe that's why his avatar is crying :detective
Can anybody explain to me what I did wrong? 
The problem is that you can't seem to be able to write down coherent sentences. Your last post contains no concrete example or information in regard to what horrible thing Victor did to make you so upset and start this thread. Actually it looks like a passive aggressive flame of which nobody understands where it comes from and what it is directed at. I hate to say it, but (in his clearest moments) lerts made more sense than you do now.
Last edited by AndroidXP, .
Huh? Of course we know how the LFS longitudinal grip curve looks like:
The actual drop-off might be even flatter as the load spike from sudden acceleration is not removed. The line should *probably* be going slowly but constantly down after the initial dropoff, instead of levelling out and providing constant grip no matter how much the rubber slips. The only question is from where this comes - if it is a inherent property of the rubber itself or a side effect of heating or whatever.
The actual drop-off might be even flatter as the load spike from sudden acceleration is not removed. The line should *probably* be going slowly but constantly down after the initial dropoff, instead of levelling out and providing constant grip no matter how much the rubber slips. The only question is from where this comes - if it is a inherent property of the rubber itself or a side effect of heating or whatever.
Greenseed I have no friggin' clue what you're on about. Maybe it's the language barrier but you make no sense. What is your point? Right now it looks like all you try is being a troll yourself...
Huh? I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about? The only time I remember Victor not being the calm self and actually using big bold letters in this forum when a certain guy who has no idea about programming (and no incentive to improve despite all the help he got here) continued to post thread after thread basically asking the forum members to solve the simplest of problems for him.
Other than that I don't see anything directly coming from the devs that would be detrimental to the forum's atmosphere. This place being less friendly than before is mainly due to two things:
1) More and more people find and join LFS, and with more and more people the forum's stupid quotient rises dramatically. The relative anonymity is much higher than when it was a tightly knit community, and the bigger masses also attract trolls and other unwanted elements.
2) LFS development (news, test patches, etc.) is currently so slow that the people are starting to get bored and spend more and more time on the forums, bringing their frustration with them.
Other than that I don't see anything directly coming from the devs that would be detrimental to the forum's atmosphere. This place being less friendly than before is mainly due to two things:
1) More and more people find and join LFS, and with more and more people the forum's stupid quotient rises dramatically. The relative anonymity is much higher than when it was a tightly knit community, and the bigger masses also attract trolls and other unwanted elements.
2) LFS development (news, test patches, etc.) is currently so slow that the people are starting to get bored and spend more and more time on the forums, bringing their frustration with them.
Actually, now that I've tried it I'm pretty sure the OP has used km/h, because there's no way he's at 60mph / 100km/h in 4 seconds. For me it takes a bit over 7 seconds, which sounds much more realistic.
Either let the free market regulate itself or bail them out in return for a significant share. Throwing money at them so they're able to continue their mismanagement just because bailing out failed companies is the latest fad would be the worst course of action. Crash, burn & rebuild, or save and get rid of whomever/whatever caused the failure. Each has its pros and cons.
If they lose their brakes then they're screwed anyway, handbrake or not.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG