Quote from KiDCoDEa :

The part that's really empirical and can't be communicated via sentence, even if by wild chance you dunno the meaning of words, which btw, rarely helps in forums. Quite common though, so i guess a group dynamic is about to begin.

lol! the fact that it's observation based doesn't mean you can't talk about what you're observing!

Function: adjective
1 : originating in or based on observation or experience <empirical data>
2 : relying on experience or observation alone often without due regard for system and theory
3 : capable of being verified or disproved by observation or experiment <empirical laws>
4 : of or relating to empiricism

which car are you snap spinning 180 degrees?? I can't remember the last time I had a self induced spin... I haven't been driving the bf1 though.

so... which bit of empirical knowledge would that be?

RBR is touted for it's quality physics, it has a heap more bite on tarmac. I'm no RBR fanboy, this is just an example of a quality game that clearly has a different view.

Last edited by Blowtus, Sun, 4 Jun 2006 01:31.

it's a simulation - you're playing the wrong game if you think effects are going to be canned for your benefit.

I don't agree with Woz though. There isn't a car or setup in LFS that breaks / gains traction nearly as angrily as plenty of cars out there, imho. I'd put more substance in the 'it's just because you can't feel it' theory if I hadn't also driven a couple of cars that break and gain traction as smoothly as LFS...

lol... wouldn't feel too bad mate, not exactly the easiest thing in the world to search for

I wasn't suggesting it wouldn't be worthwhile at some point, but I don't think it's useful to equate any current physics difficults as some sort of specific tyre trait. As far as being worthwhile 'at some point'... I really do think it's a minor issue, and also suspect data on the scale of differences between same profile / purpose tyres could be very hard to come by.

I don't think it's a tyre diversity issue... tyres of the same profile and purpose generally feel 'reasonably' similar in their behaviour on the road.

LFS has always lacked any form of 'violent' traction loss and gain... be nice to see it eventually. The lack of real world testing and a reliance on text books / physics, would seem to leave it very open for minor omissions and discrepancies to cause quite a different feel in game to RL At least the majority of physics feel very good, the mechanics of driving still bring a grin, things just happen a little slower, even at 250km/h...
Some cars I've driven behave a lot like this, but most feel quite a bit more violent in their transition between states of traction.

Last edited by Blowtus, Tue, 30 May 2006 23:08.

I found it hard too
my solution involves launching, bouncing off a swinging object, then landing on an overstressed extended support, breaking the support, and bouncing into the unbroken bit of it...

ah come on! Look at the name of the level!

you did read infiniti's post didn't you BWX?? No doubt I could've been all 'mature' and bitten my tongue, but that's hardly what forums are about is it?

you referring to me? I'm just anti-arrogance...

and people wonder where the reputation for arrogance comes from... illepall

As far as 'the good of motor racing' (or any dangerous sport / activity) it is a very useful adjustment to the mind. Being faced with critical situations, the adrenalin running through you, living life with a little bit of risk, is a very good thing for emotional balance, imho. Someone finishing your favourite breakfast cereal doesn't seem quite as bad when just yesterday you were squaring off against death and pain I feel far better all week when I head out on my dirtbike over the weekend.

yes... innocent little me didn't expect such an ongoing, vocal, pick to pieces session die thread die

not possible to effectively simulate with current control methods. any activity where body movement on it's own is the key, (as opposed to body movement simply being used to twiddle pedals / wheels) is useless as a simulator...

I did it with a cloth 'rope' contraption weighted with steel on the end. Didn't know how to use the rubber at that point

seems we've had some serious miscommunication around this one... sorry to anyone I've frustrated by posting it. Didn't really think the incident was bad enough driving from either to be at all concerned about posting it. Have since learnt (once again ) that others view things differently.

thanks folks, interesting reading! Sounds like we got it 'right' even with me stuffing things up
The ruling did go in favour of Olddog, I felt Shaun had successfully recovered before Olddog saw the opportunity for the overtake, and wanted to call it a race incident.

Had a protest lodged in one of our league races recently. It's all done and dusted, some fairly spirited debate went on, I'm interested in a few other perspectives on the situation. I find myself in the minority corner and unimpressed by this Obviously you won't know the specific league rules, but there's nothing too unusual there. Incident between Oldddog and Shaun in the dipper on lap 3. Will post my thoughts later.

http://www.ozbee-r.com/replays/mb62.mpr

I thought I tried everything possible setup wise to make it understeer in a steady state setting - ie, not lift off, not power on. Full front arb, no rear, raised front end, lower rear, reasonable camber and pressure at both ends. No doubt the grip at the front could be artificially reduced with crap tyres, but this shouldn't be necessary to create a car that is capable of steering induced understeer...

My question was in the subject - easy to miss I'm sure.

the rear end swings wildly about like a pendulum now, in a similar 'no throttle input, steady state' style to the lx of days gone by. The reason I gave was a hypothesis to start the ball rolling, I was curious if others have found the same and what they believe to be the reasons for it. My understanding of vehicle dynamics would lead me to believe that a front heavy fwd vehicle shouldn't pendulum at all, whereas this one goes nuts. Am wondering if perhaps the tyres 'downwards force to grip' ratio is somewhat linearly upwards, (as basic friction equations would imply) as opposed to tapering off as downwards force (weight in this case) increases.

Please don't treat me like an imbecile because you failed to expend any effort thinking about the original post. If you need everything written in scientific formula and are incapable of a free flowing, thoughtful discussion, then bugger off to science class.

I get the feeling you've totally failed to comprehend my post? Or has everyone already conclusively decided that fwd's are terrible since the patch or something? I've only tried the fxo, we have a series in the ufgtr starting soon though...

the fxo feels like the lx's used to... nothing I do can make it drive like a normal car, it just seems to rotate around the front end with only very marginal levels of grip on the rear. with an open dif, no throttle input, and similar suspension settings, it drives nothing like the xrt in similar conditions - main difference I see is the weight distribution?