shift+u
then you have to add a start point
then you have to add a start point
clearly. Sidewalks to climb FTW. The bitumen can be even more destroyed
Thanks you guys ! Looks like very promising (as expected) ! Eric is is going really deep into South City it seems, you keep the best for the end ! Good luck ! 
There is this snapshot :
https://www.lfs.net/static/screenshots/-1511439%206831570%20550636%2022144%20922%200.0%2060.6.jpg
https://www.lfs.net/static/screenshots/-1511439%206831570%20550636%2022144%20922%200.0%2060.6.jpg
Paypal do not transfer the thing directly, and so sometime you have to wait a bit more than what you may have exoected. Several cases already.
According to progress reports we had, Eric would have spent something like at least 5 months on South City ... Let's not expect Fern Bay to be as up to date within a lesser timeframe !!!
ACC is quite beautiful (some things are disturbing me graphically : when you do great, everything has to be in the same level I suppose
), the feeling is quite good (except at 0-20 km/h when you touch the gas pedal) ... but I am not able to love it ... because of the single type of cars maybe ... 
Anyway, Mount Panorama-Bathurst
! Great addition, wonderful track !
ACC is quite beautiful (some things are disturbing me graphically : when you do great, everything has to be in the same level I suppose
), the feeling is quite good (except at 0-20 km/h when you touch the gas pedal) ... but I am not able to love it ... because of the single type of cars maybe ... Anyway, Mount Panorama-Bathurst
! Great addition, wonderful track !
Last edited by Flotch, .
...coding tire physics...
indeed, rallycross only (I think ...). Examples :
I see there are imaginative people there 
For FE5, using FE6 (R) would make a dramatic junction before the final corner ! I would prefer something a bit less dangerous. In the attached picture I have put in red the areas for FE5, and in blue the ones for FE6 I have in mind.
I agree with you Racon for the pits of FE6, as they are not very useful at all.
For FE5, using FE6 (R) would make a dramatic junction before the final corner ! I would prefer something a bit less dangerous. In the attached picture I have put in red the areas for FE5, and in blue the ones for FE6 I have in mind.
I agree with you Racon for the pits of FE6, as they are not very useful at all.
Last edited by Flotch, .
Indeed, and please Eric, consider adding a Joker lap layout to the existing layouts, even if not implemented (code speaking), this is a must !! Same for Blackwood !
If we want to be purists : if the lights are there, the connections for them have to be present : under the road or over it.
As there is no connection visible over the road, we can assume the lights are in the concrete and the road with connections inside, and so not removable ^^ .
To be noted, they are not on the racing line, and overpassing there is more than a suicide, so it may not be that important in the end
: it will just narrow the line a little !Same here : no connection to the master server (my LFS 0.5F2 is already unlocked, but browsing online list is not possible).
Using win10, I have manually added LFS 0.5F2 to the list of "authorized" apps in the firewall, but same is occuring ...
Using win10, I have manually added LFS 0.5F2 to the list of "authorized" apps in the firewall, but same is occuring ...
Happy new year all !!!
Have all the success LFS team in this year 2020
!!!! You deserve it !
Have all the success LFS team in this year 2020
!!!! You deserve it !Look at some Dover raceway videos, it fits the look and feel Fern Bay could have ... nicely
examples :
examples :
Wait for Fern Bay progress report
Thank you Degats
Mr Eric, this is beatiful ! As usual/expected, of course, but really : it is superb !
Lighting and night ... it looks very natural ! Impressive job Mr Scawen !
Mr Eric, this is beatiful ! As usual/expected, of course, but really : it is superb !
Lighting and night ... it looks very natural ! Impressive job Mr Scawen !
Current cars engines : redline, types, etc ...
I did not find a dedicated thread for this by using the search function, but I am sure the subject has been mentionned regularly.
The following points are disturbing me (even if we are speaking about fictional cars) :
* FXO has a flat 4 engine (1.9L). It is a FWD with a transverse engine. Its race counterpart is using 2.0L flat 4 engine mounted longitudinally. It is an AWD/4WD, sorry to never remember what term is appropriate , and so :
- using the same kind of engine for a race car comparing to the production car with a different stroke (increasing or not the displacement) is common, so why not.
- changing from transverse to longitudinal sounds not so common ... even weird ... if it was the case, why keeping the engine at the front then ?
=> my point is that it would look more natural to have the FXR with the inherited shape of the FXO, but with a totally different engine (like a V6 or V8) to match the AWD/4WD thing while the production car is a FWD.
* FXR and XRR are sharing the exact same engine characteristics ... not so nice unless they would have the 'same' engine (what is not the case). They are aswell having a redline at 7500rpm ==> these kind of 'small' turbo engine in racing are usually getting a higher revs irl, no ? more than 8k would not look crazy. FZR redline sounds a bit low aswell : are Porsche racing cars with flat6 engine be limited to 8.5k ? I would have supposed they get higher
* Regarding TBO : 7500 rpm redline for those road cars look a bit high this time ... looks like reaching the score of a Ferrari F40 but with bigger cylinders :
. 7000 rpm at the very max sounds more reasonnable ...
* Same kind of remarks for UF1, XFG and XRG : 500rpm less would feel more natural (respectively : 6500, 7500 and 6500rpm)
What are your thoughts gentlemen ? I know we are more than used to the current numbers since we ran LFS years ago, but getting closer to what is done in real life will give a better experience in the end . Anyway, I am not an expert, so your thoughts and explanations are welcome
The following points are disturbing me (even if we are speaking about fictional cars) :
* FXO has a flat 4 engine (1.9L). It is a FWD with a transverse engine. Its race counterpart is using 2.0L flat 4 engine mounted longitudinally. It is an AWD/4WD, sorry to never remember what term is appropriate
, and so :- using the same kind of engine for a race car comparing to the production car with a different stroke (increasing or not the displacement) is common, so why not.
- changing from transverse to longitudinal sounds not so common ... even weird ... if it was the case, why keeping the engine at the front then ?
=> my point is that it would look more natural to have the FXR with the inherited shape of the FXO, but with a totally different engine (like a V6 or V8) to match the AWD/4WD thing while the production car is a FWD.
* FXR and XRR are sharing the exact same engine characteristics ... not so nice unless they would have the 'same' engine (what is not the case). They are aswell having a redline at 7500rpm ==> these kind of 'small' turbo engine in racing are usually getting a higher revs irl, no ? more than 8k would not look crazy. FZR redline sounds a bit low aswell : are Porsche racing cars with flat6 engine be limited to 8.5k ? I would have supposed they get higher
* Regarding TBO : 7500 rpm redline for those road cars look a bit high this time ... looks like reaching the score of a Ferrari F40 but with bigger cylinders :
. 7000 rpm at the very max sounds more reasonnable ...* Same kind of remarks for UF1, XFG and XRG : 500rpm less would feel more natural (respectively : 6500, 7500 and 6500rpm)
What are your thoughts gentlemen ? I know we are more than used to the current numbers since we ran LFS years ago, but getting closer to what is done in real life will give a better experience in the end
. Anyway, I am not an expert, so your thoughts and explanations are welcome iirc, Scawen mentioned that among the tire physics update he would like to segregate physics and graphics in different thread, allowing a largely greater optimized VR experience than the current 100Hz used.
This implies aswell the timescale with a 10ms unit currently, and not 1ms as we may expect in a coming future (drag racing fans on the starting line
)Let's first expect a great progress regarding SO 2.0 (Eric, do not be afraid, you can show it to us
) and Scawen lightings tests before having Scawen getting hardcore on the above topic ^^more than 16 years, and I still enjoy a lot doing a ride on any track !
2020 will bring crazy things for this masterpiece !
2020 will bring crazy things for this masterpiece !
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG