For the... ~7rh time, my idea of the central database:

The central database only gets things added to it and is merely a representation of all qualifications earned on servers running the system so that servers can daisy-chain freely without having to mess with others' databases. It bears no responsibility apart from storage. Each server admin running the system bears entire responsibility for his own database. There will never be need for non-automated intervention in the central database. Does that make more sense?

EDIT: My idea has evolved a bit over time and was only really where it is now when I wrote post #99 in this thread.

Last edited by axus, Thu 4 Jan 2007, 15:05.

Becky, what we're saying is that the only part of the system you would control is one that doesn't affect much and it would be completely useless for you to tamper with it. The remainder of the system is completely controlled by the owner of the server - hence the two DBs. Bans won't be an issue handled by the system at all - there's already the wrecker barricade which is well thought-out for that.

If you wanted to do this, you would run your current database alongside another that would just hold "qualifications" that each racer has and the qualifications required for each host running the system so people can easily check what hosts they can access. You have control over your own server and no-one can blame you for that. You would never have to touch the other database.

EDIT: I think Sam has a few different ideas for the system and he wants daisychaining to be independent of the central database but easily possible using the software.

But servers would only _add_ qualifications to the global database. No admin is to tamper with that database in any way. Servers also have their own one for their own points prior to awarding whatever qualifications and no-one else can access that in any way.

Servers handle their own database for points, there's no point in giving someone qualifications they don't deserve and even if that does happen, no server will daisy chain with them as an effect. Servers also handle their own bans.

Erm, excuse my usage of "more universal" - I meant widespead.

As for the bans system, I agree with it being up to the admins as Becky described. There's another system to deal with bans if they want to run it and that's the wrecker barricade. That's already completely unintrusive etc.

Quote from Linsen :

The downside would be that it might be quite frustrating finding the right license server for your status, but otherwise I like this idea and would be willing to accept mild irritations this might involve. And wouldn't that be possible with what Becky wants to make available?

I don't think it would be possible to make it more universal if Becky wants to limit what we can do to what she's currently said. As for the finding servers issue - this can be incorporated into the system. Upon obtaining a new qualification, you could get a message saying "Congratulations, you have just obtained your STCC Silver license. You have now also gained access to the following servers:...". And if you wanted a list of servers you can access, you could make an !access command. Its simple enough

Quote :

This doesn't sound too bad, but I'm not sure who would want to be the "governing body" and if server admins would really want to hand the right to decide on who to ban over to that governing body. And wouldn't it still be possible to ban server based AND system based. So a ban from a participating server would mean that you can still race on other participating servers?

Becky answered that in her last post, I guess - not much to worry about there.

If the system does become more universal, it should not be open-source as anyone can abuse it on their server and dish out excessive points. Also, it should become a set of qualifications - not just a points system.

"STCC Gold Graduate."
"LXCC LX4 Silver Graduate."
"ConeDodgers Single Seater Master."
"UKTC GTR Professional."
"FragMasters Master of Ovals."
"[some league] Season 1 Champion."
"[some server] FWD GTR Beginner."
etc.

This would require two databases for each server - one on their own server to manage the points required for each "qualification" and one to hold the qualifications obtained by each racer. (The second one is global.)

I hope that makes sense - this is what I've been trying to say all along. Servers can't abuse the system, drivers get qualifications based on the servers they go to. Other server can daisy-chain with whatever other servers they want - I could decide that I want STCC silver drivers only on the LXCC server. At the same for instance, SamH could decide he only wants FWD GTR Beginners and upwards for the UKTC GTR servers but the FWD GTR server could also require an STCC qualification... etc.

Bans should be handled by a "governing body", not just one person or a bunch of people that can make decisions on their own. The implications of a ban of this magnitude should be considered - bans should be reserved ONLY FOR OBVIOUS WRECKERS. No-one should be banned because his team-mate was misbehaving. No-one who goes emo and requests a ban should be granted the ban without reason so that they can't blame the system.

EDIT: If someone got farther than they should be on the system, THEN ITS THE SYSTEM'S FAULT. The system should be adjusted so that people go as far as they deserve. They should not be banned for this.

Last edited by axus, Thu 4 Jan 2007, 13:00.

Quote from Quint999 :

I cant see how this will benefit LFS in the long run unless the number of online racers grows dramatically.

I do agree that LFS is probably currently too small to support such a system.

How about LFS boxers?

(I'm actually serious.)

Quote from Dajmin :

Yay, I'm quite glad someone actually saw my wicked slogan

How about this for 5 minutes work?
I'd obviously have the website URL down the sleeve like the one in the OP, but that wasn't an option.

That's awesome. If you made those with a longer sleeve, I'd do a Steeve Jobs, buy 9000 of those and throw them away after use each day.

To be safe, I'd go XL despite normally wearing L... thing is, there's noticable difference between the definitions for sizes from brand to brand. It'd be nice if you gave us some dimensions, like shoulder width, sleeve lenght, height etc. so we can have a relative idea.

I voted for the white baseball shirt with blue sleeves but I'd like to see more coloured clothes.

Quote from Becky Rose :

It needs to be understood that it isn't compulsory Sam . Only those servers which want to offer it would be involved.

Which is what I've been trying to say from the beginning - server involvement is not compulsory... but the idea is so brilliant that it would absorb almost the entire LFS community. If there are enough servers taking part, I don't see this as a bad thing because there will be a place for everyone. I think that the whole "power" problem only becomes an issue when you:
1) Charge for your service (ring a bell? *cough*Race2Play*cough*).
2) Don't cater for everyone's racing interests but suck up the whole community.
3) Limit access unfairly (ie. unnecessary bans) with no appeals procedure.

Ie. no-one's LFS license should de-value. Nor should it become become useless online if they don't pay money.

I'm talking larger than a system with 5 tiered servers and some licenses named after arbitrary precious metals here (). I'm talking about an online career level of sim-racing, 50 servers or more. Each driver having an online profile with his prefered form of racing (ie. front wheel drive race cars, open wheelers, high performance road cars, endurance racing, you name it)... his racing qualifications earned on the system... his pace and consistency.

Obviously, everyone will have to start low as per real life racing - ie. the current STCC cars, but as they move up in the system they don't necessarily have to go from the TBO class to LX4, they can go to the XF GTR and UF GTR. This depends entirely on the qualifications required by a particular server, which will depend on the server admin and not on you, Becky and Sam. Maybe some servers will opt for accepting all drivers and putting them straight in XFR and UFR... it happens in real life but on the other hand no-one jumps straight in a FZR in real life. This takes some responsibility off your shoulders. It also doesn't have mess with the current STCC system because "qualifications" don't necessarily have to be related. Each server, or set of servers, can add its own qualifications to the system.

After a month or two, everyone will hit their "current tallent wall". They'll have to progress driving-wise, to proceed to other racing unless they're amazingly good and climb straight to the top (no problem there either). Eventually, when they're good enough, they'll be racing in the cars they want to drive with quality racers of their own pace. To me, the prospect is just so mouth-watering and brings a tear to my eye when thinking about what sim-racing can become.

Hell, you could even incorporate organised racing into the system. Leagues could demand certain qualifications to allow participation, and the qualifications that come with winning in such racing will also shine against your name. On top of that (and this is where the whole online profile containing more than just "qualifications" comes in), teamed leagues can have a team manager and the team manager can look for drivers which they wish to recruit for participation in some league based on this online profile. You could search through the database for drivers that like... LXs. Find a fast driver who's interested, and recruit him...

You get the whole idea... it would be HUGE and an amazing achievement for sim-racing, I think. Obviously, I've not covered everything that you can do here, but I think it can take LFS racing to a career level almost identical to real life... yet unpaid for. And one day when LFS is good enough, even that can happen - sponsors, TV broadcasts, entry costs. That should never be the goal from now - but if things swing in that direction one day, why not?

Hopefully I've made a bit of sense and your imagination can fill the gaps.

I'm hardly throwing rotten eggs at you here, Becky. Honestly, its not a matter of me disliking the STCC servers at all, I get great connection to them even from South Africa, and near the front, its great racing. I think if the STCC license system was extended to other servers or STCC started doing other cars in future too, it would be completely awesome. So all in all, a huge thumbs up so far , but I think its time to go bigger - include a few more classes of racing, even if under different titles (ie. the single seaters can't go under STCC because they're not touring cars)! Obviously, you need more servers then so that's why I suggested making the STCC license semi-public so that other server admins can help out...

EDIT: Anyway, that was just a thought... if not access to the database, perhaps make the software public and other servers can do a similar thing for themselves. It would be a bit frustrating if every other server you go on has its own database so you have to get a license for there too though.

@Jakg - things can change over time.

Another big thing is the combination of lateral and longitudinal forces. Ie, if your slip ratio is 0.4 and your slip angle is 20deg, the lateral force isn't the same with slip ratio of 0 and slip angle of 20deg. This is something you can't tweak in ISI sims either (to my knowledge). Its important for how snappy the rear is for instance, with oversteer. Most ISI sims tend to do a pretty piss poor job of it, I find, with the whole grip, grip, grip... no grip at all. There's no progression, its way too snappy. LFS is pretty good there, I think.

Point taken, with regards to time.

I agree with a lot of the speed-based stuff too. Maybe take average lap and consistency of each racer and give the points based on those two for each race? Ie. you can't have your silver license immediately after finishing one race at that pace, but do 10 races at that pace and you've got it. Drop back a few notches, below the ballpark for your license for a number of races and you could even go backwards on your license. Obviously, points should be easier gained than lost.

Quote from Cue-Ball :

To get the next license up you would have to get faster, not just finish races. This would also allow people to race cars other than the road cars since you might hold a Silver license in the XRT/FXO/RB4 group, but a Bronze license in the GTR group. Of course, since the STCC doesn't use the GTR or open-wheel cars this extra benefit of such a system might not be of much use to them, but I think it would make for very compelling racing and an even playing field while still making use of tiered servers, new track/car combos, etc.

If you really wanted to go all out, you could allow some kind of public access ot the STCC database (on request from the server admin, not just completely public) and allow other severs to keep track of the licenses that racers have. Obviously, only certain servers would contribute to your license but maybe other servers could join the STCC effort in terms of contributing to the points if proper arrangements are made between the server admins and SamH, Becky & Co. I find it really frustrating that STCC is only made up of cars I don't really like and it seems to be sucking up almost the entire LFS community at the moment.

Good. Now what about making licenses more difficult to acquire?

Another way you could make the system time based is to say "You have to get your Bronze license in 3 days. Silver in 5. Gold in 7", or something like that. That would imply keeping track of how many points each racer has scored in the past x days though, and dropping the oldest day each time.

I'd suggest some kind of gentle points deduction over time though - but not beyond the already obtained license so if you've already got your silver or whatever, you can't drop below the minimum points for silver. This means that its more difficult to acquire a license because if you only earn x points per day and you drop more than that, you will not be able to acquire the license. Right now, any fool can obtain a license given time. And I don't know if this is already in place but the points awarded should be sensetive to the number of people on the server. If its just 3 guys lapping, its not too difficult to score huge points.

Happy new year to all! Enjoy the year ahead!

Quote from Smurfen :

uf1 - westhill

No, no, no, you don't want people to fall asleep either.

I would like to hereby note that the McKowen family (including cmckowen) doesn't do the whole "on time" thing. They were meant to be here to pick me up at 8pm. It is now 9.20pm and I just recieved an SMS from Charles saying "we're on our way!"

Quote from Bob Smith :

Booze not a problem:

So you're taking it easy tonight?

What sound card are you running, biggie? The RAC sounds very different on my computer - I hear a bit more of a rumble. Also what is your sound lag set to?

Quote from DaveWS :

Ok, but I remember Tristan talking about the steering torque reducing a lot when he turned the wheel too much for the corner in his F3 car. And that this doesn't really happen in LFS.

Surely, assuming Tristan is correct, this would mean the lateral force DOES actually does drop off after the peak?

Force feedback is a complicated matter - the reason for force feedback is because the force centeroid (ie. if you were to take all the tiny forces created by each tiny bit of tyre and combine them into a pair of perpendicular forces applied at one point, this point would be the force centeroid) is not in the same place as the point where the steering axis meets the ground. Therefore, the lateral and longitudinal forces create a torque around the steering axis. What you feel is this torque. You should know how torque works, so I won't explain it. Basically, the FF can be affected by both the location of the force centeroid and the lateral and longitudinal forces. Therefore, the problem may be the force centeroid movement simulation, not the forces.

Quote from Cue-Ball :

I agree with Axus. In the real world lateral grip doesn't fall off after the peak, it just levels out. Your curve looks like you drew how you think it should look instead of how science tells us it should look.

Actually, it does fall off rather steeply after some insane slip angle (ie. 50 or more degrees). Before that its basically flat. Todd explained lateral behaviour beautifully in a post in the GTR2 forum at one point (and hopefully he won't bite my head off for pasting a link as he felt he gave out a bit too much there ):

http://forum.rscnet.org/showpo ... 3228551&postcount=120

I've seen proof of the accuracy of the current lateral curve. Your one is shockingly far off and what ISI sims have been doing for years. Its just plain wrong. As for longitudinal curves, I don't know much, but I'm not really convinced by LFS' current behaviour. I however voted for the LFS curves, because LFS' lateral behaviour superiority is what gives it the edge physics-wise over other sims currently.

(Yeah, I know I've said a lot as if it were fact - that's because I've seen proof [which I can't share]).

Quote from tristancliffe :

I'd be very very careful about saying things like that Anton, as it can become 'the truth', and then people will whine if it doesn't happen.

True. Sorry. Edited accordingly.