I'll make you brake late
and pull a switch back on you
unlucky sucker

not on your nelly
you don't have fair overlap
corner rights are mine

another


how can this be so ?
with just a stream of numbers
we are racing now !


Col

and one for fun


you buy live for speed
blame Scawen, Vic and Eric
you now have no life

here's another


become the machine
feel the edge of the circle
master your desire


Col

This is fun, here's my first ever haiku:


concentrate focus
know time is irrelevant
use all for the win

Col

Quote from Sketchyrollin564 :

So now, if your flipped, and your on the last lap, and your winning, what do you do, just go back to the pits and exit so you can start from lap 1 again? i dont think its a fair thing.

I don't think its a fair thing when the guy in front crashes out, then just as you reach where he was, he resets and appears right in front of you taking you and himself out of the race !

car reset is BAD for racing

Quote from Smurfen :

only when the game is completely done!

Noooooo

A few months after it hits the shops, it will be in the bargain bins like every other retail game.... LFS is a different kind of game - it will never sell 'big', but it could last a long time, going 'retail' would just kill it prematurely. The devs should keep control of the sales, they will be able to make a reasonable profit for much longer that way.

Another reason is that they are small independant developers. To have a chance of competing in the retail environment they would need the influence and exposure that only a deal with major publisher can bring... not a good idea IMO (get sucked dry and spat out). It's well known that Scavier don't want to go down that road...

Quote from Test Driver :

I'd like to see this feature too, but without the presets. I like the idea that the vote-starter has to write down what happened, this gives him time to cool down and reconsider the situation, since kick/ban-votes can be a result of overreaction.

If someone just wrecked you, you don't need to "cool down and reconsider the situation" you need to vote to ban them... preferably without having to stop racing - so typing a 'reason' would just be hassle...
I can envision many votes like:
Jimbob votes to ban theGreatCornholio reason : .
Without a real reason, the folks who woulda just voted without thinking still will, and those who would only vote with personal negative experience of the banee will also still act as they did previosly...
So the only improvement is that the vote initiator had the extra hassle of typing '.' while he was trying to race.
(if you add a minimum number of letters requirement you get "reason: asdfdjk")

Currently if you get wrecked so that you cannot continue racing, there's nothing stopping you from using the chat system to explain in detail what the guy did before or after you initiate a vote to ban - so why does it have to be part of the voting system ? If you are still racing after the incident, the last thing you need is for voting to be more distracting than it already is.

Still haven't heard anything convincing that suggests this would improve the system in any way.

-1

I can't see why this is necessary!

Nobody should be voting unless they've witnessed actions of the bad driver - in which case they don't need to be given a reason...
In the case where the vote is unfair, the vote starter can easily give a fake reason - particularly if there is a multiple choice list...

If I'm racing and some asswipe does something that I think he should be kick/banned for, I don't want the extra hassle - its bad enough that I'm having to find his name on the list and klick the vote button... I also don't want folks to vote unless they have seen that driver doing something ban-worthy usually after a few incidents, there are enough annoyed folks and witnesses to make a fair vote

I don't see how introducing reasons to the process can improve things in any way - it just makes it more complicated and fiddly... certainly won't make it fairer in any way.

+1

it would be great if LFS always rendered the two closest cars in front and the closest one behind - this would make things much better for us poor folks who don't have fancy pants computers

You see what happens when you let a :monkey: play with your video effects console unsupervised

Quote from AndroidXP :

No, I think it's two different problems...

great analysis

I think that the second version - the 'non-lag' one should actually be solvable at least to the extent where its effect is not causing any problems during races. (I vaguely remember Scawen saying as much a while back). It should be possible to use some carefully constructed set of logical rules to decide whether the car has intersected an object in such a way that tyre collision response should be ignored or 'watered down' in favour of some more sensible response system.... this should at least be much simpler than dealing with any lag related issues where there are too many unknowns.

(Is there not also some less significant issue to do with the fact that some of the track-side components like the high kerbstones at south city (eg at the pitlane entry for classic reverse) have 'ideal' 90º infinitely sharp edges ?)

cheers

Col

Guys, the problem is not about an 'all absorbing' or 'all reflecting' system...

the problem is caused because of multiplayer lag issues... sometimes because of limitations of multiplayer gaming, there is suddenly a big overlap between cars, this causes the collision system to think that huge forces must have been applied... if you decided to 'absorb' them instead of 'reflect' them , then the cars would be crushed to little blocks instead of shooting for the moon...

The real trick - and its a difficult one is for the collision detection to 'know' when overlap is caused by lag and when its caused by a normal bonafide collision... it doesn't matter what 'solution' you use, there will be many implications and there will always be some situations where the resulting behaviour is unrealistic... the only way this will be completely resolved is when the internet gets fast enough and error free enough that lag becomes insignificant.

I'm sure Scawen will come up with something that is more acceptable then the current system (although it seems pretty good to me in most cases), just remember that the real limitation is the internet and don't expect miracles

I'm wondering what new car classes will be available in 'CTRA the next generation'....

It would be good to use the downtime to practice some of the up-and-coming combos

Quote from Dru :

how exactly?

becuase you were new - are you saying people would ram you - or drive aggresively that you were not prepared for?

No I am aware of this attitude precisely because I was _not_ new, but because I had been away from LFS for maybe a year, I was seen as new by many of the less experienced racers some of whom took that as a green light to treat me unfairly on track

Quote :

an example would be great

eh? This is my personal experience - take it or leave it - up to you.

Col

Quote from ajp71 :

I haven't seen that many people who regard the STCC servers as being a place where clean racing thrives, a lot of it may be down to their unfairly earnt reputation from people who have been unlucky enough to be on at bad times who post in threads like this. But I'm afraid that personally apart from the times when the server is full of admins and well respected people it seems to fall into anarchy.

My experience generally is that CTRA is a good place to get clean, fair, highly competitive racing. I think he reason there is a lot of discussion and complaining about the standards is because the folks in charge will listen and are actively developing systems to make it cleaner and better...
I started this thread because my perception at the time was that things were getting worse and that the reporting system was starting to fail... that perception was proved valid - it turned out that the reporting system was actually broken !
Since then things have IMO improved, reporting works again, and now if there is bad behaviour, I can report it and it will be dealt with - so its not nearly as big a deal )

There are always going to be idiots on track - fact of LFS
If you report an idiot and nothing happens and you see the same guy doing the same things the next day, then that is bad and makes CTRA look bad - this was happening but has been fixed.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

This affected your races in what way?

who me? (col looks over his shoulder then assumes its him)

in a negative way

...................

I think its down to the fact that there are some racers who in a situation where you make a fair move to pass them and win the corner rights, will let you through if they see you as being faster than them, but will close the door unfairly if they think you are new therefor slower than them....

..................

as to whether this is relevant to the silver servers, I dunno, I was just trying to assure niels1 that it's a wider attitude problem in the hope that it would help him deal with it rather than give up on the CTRA.

Last edited by col, Wed, 6 Jun 2007 13:23.

Quote from Dru :

sorry you quote is very misleading... not really sure what you are getting at...



any chance to re-explain your point.

niels1 said "it was a hostile enviremont for being new on a silver server"

I'm saying S2 is a hostile environment for anyone who is new or is perceived as new - basically many folk judge you not on your attitude or skill, but on whether they think you are new - I am aware of this because I had a year or so away from S2, and when I returned I was treated by a significant _minority_ of drivers as a 'noob' - mostly these were folks who were mid to rear of the pack... in my previous I likened this to 'playground mentality'

Its very possible that this is just my perception and that I have learned subconsciously to avoid some servers - maybe this attitude has nothing to do with bein 'new'

Quote from thisnameistaken :

Eh? I'm well aware of you, Col...

Oh noes!
I'd better quieten down on the forum to dip back under your radar

Quote from niels1 :

Hmmmz, I think you missing the point here. I never said that the server is the issue here. I only said that it was a hostile enviremont for being new on a silver server.

This is not a CTRA issue, this is an S2 issue !

In the past when I've had a break of a few months from LFS, when I've returned, its taken a few week before the folks who've joined since my last 'term' become aware of me and I build up sufficient levels of respect/notoriety.. It shouldn't be this way - but unfortunately it is

Its like the school playground, you have to fight for your place in the pecking order - once you've done that life becomes easier - until you decide on a sabbatical... then when you return, you will have to scrap it out with the idiots for a while again

Quote from Speed Soro :

I dont think it is a self owned or whatever. It just proves that how much time has passed by and nothing substantial happens.

It means, I'm right, you are wrong, and Scawen is postponing for too much time the things that are really necessary to a real simulator.

As has already been explained to you, the closer a Sim gets to being 'true to life', the less noticeable any improvements will be. Diminishing returns etc....
Each time there is a major update to LFS, it will be less noticable than the last update and will have taken much more work than the last update.

(in simpleton language, just for you: "If it's already really real, how much realer can it get - only a really really little bit... but if you make it a really really little bit realer, then next time you can only make it a really really really little bit realer... and making something a really really really little bit realer is really really really really hard to do, so get real")

Anyone with half a brain who has been paying any attention to the LFS development process can see that - so whats your excuse for missing it ?

So all 'it just proves' is that either you are arrogant and have a very short span of attention - or you have the brains of a :banana:

I think the jury's still out

Quote from faster111 :

mmm dev how about a daliy dairy?

I found this at www.scawensdiary.com (the link seems to be dead now...)

Quote :

Friday June 1st:

Up at the crack of noon again, damn, run out of aspirins - will have to take it easy on the Gin until I can get to Tescos.
Read the forum... had just about enough of those whinging b*st*rds.
Will try to get a little coding in before the snooker comes on the telly...

Saturday June 2nd:

Phoned the Police again to see if they've tracked down Eric yet... no luck though .. oh well, maybe I can get someone from the high school on work experience to do some new content for S3...

Sunday June 3rd:

Vic phoned, his cousin is on holiday, so they're going to the Dam for a couple of days to get wrecked - do I want to come?

Hell yeah I've had LFS up to here !!!
I'll just spin some crap about incompatibility and switch on the Scawen Bot... that always works.

Now, where did I put that spliff ?
...

I was shocked an horrified

Quote from birder :

Our blue flag rules are

Blue Flag
One or more competitors are about to lap you. You must hold your course and allow them to pass UNIMPEDED. You must make sure you change speed and leave room to be passed. DO NOT RACE A CAR THAT IS A LAP AHEAD.

Should you pass a slower car and then find you get a blue flag warning you can carry on but MUST NOT IMPEAD THEM IN ANY WAY.

In both the LFS: GTR League and the ConeDodgers servers, not obeying the blue flag is considered unsporting and anyone doing so with have points deducted or may be forced to leave the server.

These rules are contradictory and therefor impossible to uphold!

There are many places on many tracks where it would be impossible to 'hold your course' and 'change speed' without impeding the driver behind.

on a straight, either you change course then slow down, or you hold you course and slow down which means the following racer will have to move off the optimum line to pass you - you rules forbid both of these options ! the first because you're not holding your line, second because you're impeding the following driver.

approaching a corner, its better not to change speed but to brake later and take the turn wider allowing the following racer to take the inside without losing too much speed - your rules forbid this...

The real problem is that you are being much too specific in your rules, the reality of racing means that for rules to be this specific and not contradictory, you need pages and pages of 'small print' specifying every single exception to your rules for each part of each track and for each car type...

Thats why in real racing and in most sensible sim racing organisations, the rules are more general...
e.g. "let the lapper pass at the first safe opportunity...."
OR "keep your line and speed but do not block or 'race' the lapper"
OR "let the lapper pass safely before you are shown three blue flags"

Rules like these are general enough that the guy being passed can use their experience and common sense to make the correct move depending on the current situation...

From reading how you've replied to the OP in this thread I think the rule you really need is :
"If you get a blue flag, you MUST tele-pit immediately using SHIFT+S"
This is the only rule that will ensure the leaders are not impeded in any way! All other rules are either contradictory like your existing ones, or they will sometimes involve the leaders having to slow a little while waiting to pass - like real racing (shock horror)

FWIW, I'm not a regular on your servers, and you can ignore me if you like, but you would be foolish to ignore the fact that your existing rules are contradictory and that contradictory rules are worse than no rules at all !!

No offense intended

cheers

Col

I wonder if you are using IS_REO to set the starting grid based on some sort of algorithm using one or more of:

finishing position in _your_ last race of the session
best lap in _your_ last race of the session
pb
licence type
type of car