Scawen, blue and red colors on Russian flag aren't radioactively bright. Blue is like that in Finnish flag in LFS, red is like that on Chech flag. I guess, the same applies to Slovenian flag.
I'm 5 years in LFS so I think I can compare.
IMO, it wasn't a pure racing sim even that time. There were wreckers going wrong way (before the wrong way kick was introduced), there were those who dragged. Drifters were there in LFS 0.2, cruise-like servers appeared yet in 2003 after S1 release (C&R then) and became kinda mainstream in 2006.
I can't say that racing is cleaner or dirtier than that time. I clearly remember that as soon as the serious people bought S1 licenses, most of the demo hosts became a cesspit (in 2004 I used to go there to practice agressive driving
). But in S1 and S2 there were good and bad races all the time. In public hosts once you would meet a group of insanely fast drivers. Another time there would be a couple of sly wreckers.
LFS is like a growing city: once it was a group of more or less similar interests. Now there are more people and more niches.
IMO, it wasn't a pure racing sim even that time. There were wreckers going wrong way (before the wrong way kick was introduced), there were those who dragged. Drifters were there in LFS 0.2, cruise-like servers appeared yet in 2003 after S1 release (C&R then) and became kinda mainstream in 2006.
I can't say that racing is cleaner or dirtier than that time. I clearly remember that as soon as the serious people bought S1 licenses, most of the demo hosts became a cesspit (in 2004 I used to go there to practice agressive driving
). But in S1 and S2 there were good and bad races all the time. In public hosts once you would meet a group of insanely fast drivers. Another time there would be a couple of sly wreckers.LFS is like a growing city: once it was a group of more or less similar interests. Now there are more people and more niches.
I'd suggest two ways:
1) a last-52-weeks rank like in tennis. This would require a big database though and make licences less usable: if you don't race for a year, you gradually go down to copper.
2) licences based on quantiles. q<0.1% = titanium, 0.1%<=q<0.5%, - platinum, 0.5%<=q<2% - gold, 2%<=q<5% - silver, 5%<=q<20% - bronze, 20%<=q<50% - copper.
In both cases a person can't be sure of own licence and accessibility of hosts.
The issue with ranks and accumulating points regards the emotional payoff and motivations of players. The payoff from CTRA comes also from posession of a high-level licence. Just the same as in WoW. It gives the same feelings as in real life (tho, the number of people who admire your licence is much smaller than the number of those who would admire a luxury RL posession). Anyway, this still motivates many players. The problem is that if this system is removed or made more complicated, those who were motivated this way, will leave.
1) a last-52-weeks rank like in tennis. This would require a big database though and make licences less usable: if you don't race for a year, you gradually go down to copper.
2) licences based on quantiles. q<0.1% = titanium, 0.1%<=q<0.5%, - platinum, 0.5%<=q<2% - gold, 2%<=q<5% - silver, 5%<=q<20% - bronze, 20%<=q<50% - copper.
In both cases a person can't be sure of own licence and accessibility of hosts.
The issue with ranks and accumulating points regards the emotional payoff and motivations of players. The payoff from CTRA comes also from posession of a high-level licence. Just the same as in WoW. It gives the same feelings as in real life (tho, the number of people who admire your licence is much smaller than the number of those who would admire a luxury RL posession). Anyway, this still motivates many players. The problem is that if this system is removed or made more complicated, those who were motivated this way, will leave.
It is AU1 & XRT layout and AU1 & XRG.
BTW, had a ride at B&J yesterday @ BL3, the layout was the one with 3 intersection (right 135°, jump&intersection in the air, then intersection, right 200°, intersection, shared bidirectional straight, etc.) The major problem with this layout is T1. Maybe worth trying to make something similar, with mid-air intersection and a shared straight, but without such a narrow T1? Too many drivers are involved in collisions and lag-explosions there.
Update: here is my suggestion. The picture is very schematic, just to be understandable. The start place is the same, the red line. But everything else is moved, T1 is very simle and then there is no bottleneck in T2 after the jump.
Last edited by detail, .
SamH: maybe start the first race as a qual instantly, without waiting? And then let join to everybody who wants? That would even look more naturally, as people who are quicker will be able to change setups, send sets etc.
Bump & Jump InSim app gone mad
I've just been at BnJ host and was the first to come there. First, it set long labyrinth at BL3 and let me do 2 laps, then it disconnected and started changing track (maybe i lost connection, doesn't matter), then I entered it again, the track was AU1 and the new "boot" layout * XRG with 9(!!!) laps. Then another guy came and spectated as I raced to the finish. As soon as I finished, the system changed the race length, but then started changing the track again. It put the BL3, long labyrinth track. There were 3 of us at the host, but it didn't even let us finish: I leaded on the 2nd or 3rd lap when the 3rd guy left the host, and CTRA ended race and started changing the track AGAIN!!!
SamH, is it a new AI system that judges if a track is popular or not? Why does it change tracks that madly? Why not let me finish a race? Does it interrupt the race with few players on purpose?
Check the replays, it has happened just 15 minutes ago, then I came here to write the message.
SamH, is it a new AI system that judges if a track is popular or not? Why does it change tracks that madly? Why not let me finish a race? Does it interrupt the race with few players on purpose?
Check the replays, it has happened just 15 minutes ago, then I came here to write the message.
I "have admin $notes" though I haven't any
1 screenshot is worth 100 words.
I swear I haven't had any at that moment, though I had had them before for swearing.
I swear I haven't had any at that moment, though I had had them before for swearing.
Looks like at first I wrote it correctly: (260/230)^2 and 27%, not 6%. Anyway, the data fed into the model can easily differ this much.
I think, it is better to do the following: when a car disconnects, they can't rejoin race before a particular time depending on their distance from pits. Then the question is how much time to take from the player (getting to pits takes the same time, but repairing can be different).
So pity, Audi prototype couldn't Shift+p in Le Mans 2007.
As for what Scawen can do:
Making AI on a host requires at least running a full version with physics (dedi host doesn't calculate it).
What seems more implementable is 1) making engine repairable but long enough 2) reporting car's state to the InSim application (engine, suspension & clutch damage). Then an InSim app may force players to stay out of the race for the time they'd spend on repairs.
So pity, Audi prototype couldn't Shift+p in Le Mans 2007.
As for what Scawen can do:
Making AI on a host requires at least running a full version with physics (dedi host doesn't calculate it).
What seems more implementable is 1) making engine repairable but long enough 2) reporting car's state to the InSim application (engine, suspension & clutch damage). Then an InSim app may force players to stay out of the race for the time they'd spend on repairs.
I think, it is the aerodynamic resistance that makes the difference. Just increase the coefficient and the top speed drops.
(260/230)^0.5 = 1.13^0.5 = 1.06. So, if the aero coeff is 6% more than needed, the top speed drops this much.
Those flaws that are there in the physics engine, have nothing to do with this.
(260/230)^0.5 = 1.13^0.5 = 1.06. So, if the aero coeff is 6% more than needed, the top speed drops this much.
Those flaws that are there in the physics engine, have nothing to do with this.
Last edited by detail, .
Hehe. BTW, now it offers another challenge: try stopping at each traffic light and crossover and save your clutch from overheating.
BTW, now it offers another challenge: try stopping at each traffic light and crossover and save your clutch from overheating.Search "mysql erorr 10061" gives hints to what may happen: in MS Windows it is when a port is closed or a firewall. In case of web servers, I guess it means the port is closed.
Take the world record hotlap, output .raf, read the positions from there and calculate the total distance.
Small update: fixed the button function in Sender plugin.
Let me reply basing just on my memory: In LFS settings you can set camera heading and pitch relative to car body. So I assume they are relative to car body as well.
Found it. I've talked to Knu, the guy who found this. That was very helpful from him to make the research.
Here I'll make an irresponsible suggestion to Scawen to modify network code. That's the simplest solution to the currest situation that I see.
1. Let a client send retrospective data to the host, i.e. not only current position, but also from the middle between current moment and the moment the previous packet was sent. That increases the upload ratio twice, but upload isn't a concern for a client. Host's download will double, but host's main concern is upload, which will remain the same (clients don't need retrospective info).
2. Let dedicated host provide retrospective data (storing just NLP/MCI info), maybe half a second earlier than current moment. This way the InSim on dedicated host's side can see twice more detailed information.
3. Last thing (don't believe it may happen, but will tell) is to calculate physics in a fat dedi (with cars' properties and tracks). It would make it heavier and CPU consuming, but making reliable data for host's controlling software.
Ok, well, I'll better go make some code instead of public speech...
[edit] 0. I want everything in MCI to be in 3D, just like in OutSim
Here I'll make an irresponsible suggestion to Scawen to modify network code. That's the simplest solution to the currest situation that I see.
1. Let a client send retrospective data to the host, i.e. not only current position, but also from the middle between current moment and the moment the previous packet was sent. That increases the upload ratio twice, but upload isn't a concern for a client. Host's download will double, but host's main concern is upload, which will remain the same (clients don't need retrospective info).
2. Let dedicated host provide retrospective data (storing just NLP/MCI info), maybe half a second earlier than current moment. This way the InSim on dedicated host's side can see twice more detailed information.
3. Last thing (don't believe it may happen, but will tell) is to calculate physics in a fat dedi (with cars' properties and tracks). It would make it heavier and CPU consuming, but making reliable data for host's controlling software.
Ok, well, I'll better go make some code instead of public speech...
[edit] 0. I want everything in MCI to be in 3D, just like in OutSim
Last edited by detail, .
Good job, Victor. When I was writing my php insim handler, I thought of the same idea (except for the media - I thought of Ajax+SVG)
Interesting thing. Was it discussed in this section?
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=33360
Personally I'd prefer a "fat" dedicated host with physics calculations, just because interpolations are at average physics-based estimations are more exact and it is almost the same what the players see themselves.
Learning things described in that thread really dissapointed me. Now I write an MCI wrapper in PHP that would interpolate positions between "real" packets and take into account the time of packet delivery. I HOPE, just hope, it won't consume much CPU.
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=33360
Personally I'd prefer a "fat" dedicated host with physics calculations, just because interpolations are at average physics-based estimations are more exact and it is almost the same what the players see themselves.
Learning things described in that thread really dissapointed me. Now I write an MCI wrapper in PHP that would interpolate positions between "real" packets and take into account the time of packet delivery. I HOPE, just hope, it won't consume much CPU.
Last edited by detail, .
Bump'n'Jump positions list hides the clutch indicator
1. Well, as said the title, the bottom bar with opponents list covers the clutch temperature bar. I think clutch is the first thing you have to care about in B'n'J, because almost everybody finishes with red bar.
2. A different problem: the blue flag system starts screaming "GIVE WAY TO X" and "WAVED" before I see the "BLUE FLAG" message in LFS. Often I join mid-race, pass a driver who is a bit slower than me but is laps ahead, and the system starts screaming "Give way!!..." That really annoys. I hope CTRA doesn't log the time of blue flagging, because I'll have so much blue flag time on my account and will probably be banned for non-cooperating behaviour.
BTW, as I see, blue flag "waving" works from some distance. So if you join mid-race in FE1 and there are many cars on the track uniformely distributed, there is just no place where you don't see a blue flag.
2. A different problem: the blue flag system starts screaming "GIVE WAY TO X" and "WAVED" before I see the "BLUE FLAG" message in LFS. Often I join mid-race, pass a driver who is a bit slower than me but is laps ahead, and the system starts screaming "Give way!!..." That really annoys. I hope CTRA doesn't log the time of blue flagging, because I'll have so much blue flag time on my account and will probably be banned for non-cooperating behaviour.
BTW, as I see, blue flag "waving" works from some distance. So if you join mid-race in FE1 and there are many cars on the track uniformely distributed, there is just no place where you don't see a blue flag.
Last edited by detail, .
Something wrong with InSim or with me?
[edit] I set an InSim connection to LFS with Interval parameter equal to 50, which means an MCI packet every 50 ms. But in fact I receive a packet each 60 ms. Guess what I get if I try to calculate speed or acceleration by XYZ?
Compare dX/50^2 and dX/60^2 where dX is equal in both expressions. First differential (mathematical) is greater than expected by the factor of 1.2, second diff is 1.44 times greater! According to these calculations, a free falling car accelerates at 11.78 m/s^2 (first diff) or 14.4 m/s^2 (if you take second diff).
This made me feel really paranoic for an hour or two, because I searched for errors in the calculations that produced incorrect results, but were correct. I spent much time before I finally dumped all the data in tabbed txt and reproduced the calculations in Excel, and they made incorrect results as well (and only after that I noticed the 60/50 and (60/50)^2 "scaling" factors in the figures).
So, apparently the interval in LFS is taken as your parameter + 1ms. If Scawen reads this, please document this thing or fix it.
Compare dX/50^2 and dX/60^2 where dX is equal in both expressions. First differential (mathematical) is greater than expected by the factor of 1.2, second diff is 1.44 times greater! According to these calculations, a free falling car accelerates at 11.78 m/s^2 (first diff) or 14.4 m/s^2 (if you take second diff).
This made me feel really paranoic for an hour or two, because I searched for errors in the calculations that produced incorrect results, but were correct. I spent much time before I finally dumped all the data in tabbed txt and reproduced the calculations in Excel, and they made incorrect results as well (and only after that I noticed the 60/50 and (60/50)^2 "scaling" factors in the figures).
So, apparently the interval in LFS is taken as your parameter + 1ms. If Scawen reads this, please document this thing or fix it.
Last edited by detail, .
Sorry, but by what you've written I thought you confused vps and web hosting. The forum was useful, btw, thank you.
Well, AFAIK, virtual machine can be limited in CPU time. For example, you not more than 10% CPU for a particular VM. If the host hardware has 4GHz CPU, then 10% of it will be 400 MHz, and your virtual machine can't exceed that.
Cool. Is there a way to know how much MHz you get in your VM?
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG