Well I've never driven anything even a fraction as fast, (car wise anyway), so I'll accept your greater experience in that respect. But I would say that what you say would only be true for those that can over come the "fear" factor. You may say it's not that scary but for the average joe I would expect it to be an extremely scary experience. I was thinking more along those lines when I stated 60 seconds really.
I think intrepid has a very valid point. I knew a guy who used to race 600s in low level club races. His racing costs were around £6-7,000 a year (back in the early nineties that is) and he used to have to make tyres last several races to acheive that low buget level. No surprises that he was from a relatively well to do family and was a lawer. Motor racing costs at every level, and in terms of the average salary it costs way too much for 99% of people to even consider getting involved in, (even just for fun).
However, there is one other thing to consider to the argument and that is will. Are Schumacher/Senna, Maradonna/Pele, Usain Bolt, Valentino Rossi etc all the best ever? Well all that can be said for certain is that they are (were) the best of a select few that even cared to get involved in their respective sports never mind the even smaller pool that had the true opportunities required other than tallent that you need to get to the top of the game to even be compared. Is 9.72 the fastest any human can run 100m ? who knows what joe blogs or fred smith might have acheived if they had decided to take up sprinting as a sport. Not all the fastest running kids in the playground are interested at being the fastest running kid on the track, most have other priorities. The probability that there are better drivers/footballers/sprinters etc out there than the ones we currently call "the best" is 100%. It's a certainty. They just never got involved.
However, there is one other thing to consider to the argument and that is will. Are Schumacher/Senna, Maradonna/Pele, Usain Bolt, Valentino Rossi etc all the best ever? Well all that can be said for certain is that they are (were) the best of a select few that even cared to get involved in their respective sports never mind the even smaller pool that had the true opportunities required other than tallent that you need to get to the top of the game to even be compared. Is 9.72 the fastest any human can run 100m ? who knows what joe blogs or fred smith might have acheived if they had decided to take up sprinting as a sport. Not all the fastest running kids in the playground are interested at being the fastest running kid on the track, most have other priorities. The probability that there are better drivers/footballers/sprinters etc out there than the ones we currently call "the best" is 100%. It's a certainty. They just never got involved.
It was quite a while ago now but I remember a comment by someone in F1 (can't recall whom - might have been murray walker). That the difference between the pole sitter and the guy sitting at the back of the grid (around 6.5-7 seconds in those days) was 5 seconds car and 1.5-2 seconds driver. In the grand scheme of things being 2 seconds a lap off the fastest driver in the fastest cars in the world, (that go around tracks that is), is an irrelevant difference. Put any one of us here in one of those cars and I'm betting we wouldn't be within 60 seconds.
24,000 S2 licences sold. Even if we assume their all upgrades at £12 a go that's £288,000 revenue over 3 years or £96,000 a year (averaged). That's enough for an income of £25k pa each (which is essentially the national average). Leaving £21k per year left over to put back in to funding LFS. Dedicated hosting isn't that expensive, example cost is around £2.8k per year, (that's for a 2.66Ghz core duo machine, 3GB ram, 1TB storage, 10mb/s dedicated pipe and unlimited bandwidth usage).
If they're half upgrades and half new sales then the revenue is up to £432,000 or £144,000 pa - could pay themselves £40k pa and still have £24k pa to reinvest in LFS !!
Yes I know it most likely hasn't been that even a cashflow situation but with those kinds of numbers you have to be pretty poor at cash management to not come out sitting pretty no matter how the cash flow has varied over the 3 year period.
Except copyright and intellectual property rights issues of course ...
The height of my wheel in LFS isn't of concern to me, I never look at it (or the one on screen) anyway. I was merely stating the difference between the positioning of steering wheels/dash/seat in a real car compared to a normal pc screen/desk/office seat set up.
If ever proof was needed of the inadequacies of democracy the LFS voting to ban/kick system is it.
People just vote whenever a vote is started:
a) as above out of pig minded stupid ignorance
or
b) can anyone say "clique" ?
Unfortunately these do exist on LFS and the only thing to do about it is steer clear of these servers. Not always possible I accept, but not much else to do usually.
Glad you got a second chance (everyone deserves one IMO even if they did wreck on purpose first time around), and good to hear another server removing the pointless vote option.
It's not. I have an nVidia card and I have the same problem as you. After applying AA it stays on even when I set it to "off" in game. Even worse it sets the AA in my other install of LFS (Patch Y) which doesn't even have AA settings.
Quick question are you running Vista or XP??
Scawen,
I tried what you suggested and renamed LFS.exe to LFS2.exe and when I run LFS with a changed executable name the AA is now gone.
Would appear that the issue is related to either the drivers or the OS remembering the applications settings and not reverting them.
Err yeah but... Then the seat in a car is much lower than any office chair you would use to play LFS, especially in anything except a van !
Get in your car and look at exactly where the wheel is in relation to your body. I'm betting it's around chest height. Unless, like I said you drive a van or are really tall.
Ok let me rephrase what I mean. Contact is inevitable in close racing. But the majority of that contact is harmless in real life. It doesn't put people off their lines, doesn't force them to stay out wide and not be able to turn in etc. It's unintentional, and when it's made the drivers make efforts to back off and/or separate. The difference is that in LFS many people purposely nudge others to unsettle their cars just going in to a corner and there by are able to pass for example. Or they just plain use the other car to make the corner at a speed they would never be able to if they weren't "resting" on the other car. Or they dive up the inside knowing full well that they are going to ram the car ahead when it turns in, but doing it just right that they get through unscathed. Those are just a few examples of the kind of racing "techniques" I've seen used regularly in LFS that just wouldn't be tolerated in real racing.
Another example from F1, I can't recall the drivers but it was a tight right and one of the drivers had managed top pull up on the left of the driver in front going down the straight approaching the corner. They both went in to the right hander pretty much side by side, (3/4 car overlap with the ouside driver just nudging ahead), but the inside driver was defending the line and so the outside driver braked to avoid a collision when he realised he was going to be squeezed out by the outside curb of the corner. He actually braked and allowed the inside driver through. In other words his over taking attempt wasn't sucessful and he fell in behind to try again later on.
Now in LFS I garuentee that 90% of players in the same position as the guy on the outside would just attempt to drive over the curb or just plain collide with the inside car. That's the difference, I practically never see people back off to avoid colisions in LFS. Especially in situations where they think they can get through by hitting the other driver.
Simple fact is that in real racing it is the responsibilty of the driver behind to pass cleanly. It is NOT the responsibility of the driver ahead to make space for the driver behind to pass cleanly. The driver ahead is fully entitled to stick to their line and it's just tough if that means you can't pass. If there is going to be a collision it is the driver behinds responsibility to back off and avoid the collision not the defending drivers. The only real exception being a late braking charge up the inside where the defending driver should not turn in if it's going to cause a colision, if it isn't going to cause a collision and the overtaking driver can stop in time then the defending driver is entitled to block the move. The important point to note in such a situation is that the overtaking driver can NOT dive in so late and fast that it will cause a collision unless the defending driver doesn't attempt the corner at all, ie goes straight or has to stop completely etc.
Last edited by gezmoor, .
Nothing to do with the LFS collision bug. If that was a replay of an average Tintop race in LFS it would be considered a very clean one, and that would be on tarmac too !! I think that video just goes so serve the point that LFS races are in general anything but clean, and just how far from reality so called "clean racing" in LFS is a lot of the time. I don't think i've driven one single race in LFS where someone hasn't at least nudged me. In LFS contact seems to be considered the norm. In real racing it is anything but.
Mmmm rare steak and grilled sardines.. damn you it's lunch time such conversations shouldn't be allowed at this time of day !!
Another couple of tweaks.
I've changed the gravel slightly to blend better, (grasspit and gravel files), and if anyone prefers red stripped curbs use the curbs file.
I've changed the gravel slightly to blend better, (grasspit and gravel files), and if anyone prefers red stripped curbs use the curbs file.
Thanks.
It's all done now and in the zip file attached to my sig, (assuming the link is still working). I've touched up other little bits and pieces, (the bridge/walls/pit lane road etc), and included them in the zip file too.
It's all subtle stuff just intended to create an overall feel rather than any dramatic changes. Only thing I'm in two minds about is the "damp" patches on the road, I might remove them as they look a bit too regular to be realistic IMO.
Anyway any further feed back would be appreciated.
I don't believe anyone here is taking anything away from Hamilton with regards to his skill and ability. It's patently clear that Hamilton is a very good driver. So are all of the F1 drivers, anyone that believes otherwise is just naieve in the extreme. All of what you say is true, but non of it is anything more than we should expect from a driver in the highest level of car racing in the world. That's the whole point I believe. Hamilton is to be judged by comparison with his peers not by the standard of lesser drivers in lesser formuae. In this context, is he an exceptionally talented F1 driver? Personally, I don't believe so. He's certainly one of the top F1 drivers, but I don't see anything exceptional yet. He is clearly in at the least equal best car in F1 and has been matched in terms of pace by his team mate on several occasions.
Lets be honest about it, if Schumacher or Senna where in the same car, does anyone believe they wouldn't be clearly in the lead of the championship having won or placed second in all of the races? So far the person that Hamiltons F1 career most closely represents is that of Jacques Villeneuve who placed second in his first year, (just like Hamilton), and then went on to win 7 races the next year and take the championship title, (only time will tell for Hamilton). Did anyone ever compare Villeneuve with Senna? Of course not.
I'm not anti-Hamilton either. I am however very anti all the sycophantic Hamilton hype. But then it's not surprising, we do it every time any of our drivers show the slightest bit of competence in F1. But I draw the line at having Hamiltons face in the credits of all the F1 coverage and all the commentators wetting themselves over him. At least not at this stage of his career and performance, it's just not warranted as yet in my opinion. He needs to win his first championship at least before we can start idolising him.
I'd agree with all of the above. I too get this, days where I'm just on it, (like you a relative thing 
), and others when I just can't drive for toffee. I think it's down to two things:
a) Concentration/Focus
b) Biology - as stigpt alludes to.
Concentration/Focus -
There are all sorts of things that can affect your concentration and focus, so many things can distract. Being quick is about being in the zone, where the rest of the world just fades away and everything is tuned in to driving. The track just seems to flow and you do most stuff unconciously.
Biology -
There are simply just times of the day and days where you're body just isn't capable of the same levels of concentration and focus. All sorts of things affect it: Time, how much sleep you've had, when did you last eat and what did you eat, (carbs feed the brain - low blood sugar levels are very bad for concentration), and all sorts of other things contribute to being able to focus on what's in front of you.
Of course learning braking points, corner entries etc etc are all important, but if you're conciously having to think about this as you drive you're not going to be the quickest you can be. It's when it all becomes instinctive that you set your best times, and this requires being in the zone. I actually disagree with hyperactive to an extent. The best drivers do drive by feel, they just know from experience when/where to brake, how to enter the corner etc. They're not conciously thinking about it when they do it, they just do it.
), and others when I just can't drive for toffee. I think it's down to two things:a) Concentration/Focus
b) Biology - as stigpt alludes to.
Concentration/Focus -
There are all sorts of things that can affect your concentration and focus, so many things can distract. Being quick is about being in the zone, where the rest of the world just fades away and everything is tuned in to driving. The track just seems to flow and you do most stuff unconciously.
Biology -
There are simply just times of the day and days where you're body just isn't capable of the same levels of concentration and focus. All sorts of things affect it: Time, how much sleep you've had, when did you last eat and what did you eat, (carbs feed the brain - low blood sugar levels are very bad for concentration), and all sorts of other things contribute to being able to focus on what's in front of you.
Of course learning braking points, corner entries etc etc are all important, but if you're conciously having to think about this as you drive you're not going to be the quickest you can be. It's when it all becomes instinctive that you set your best times, and this requires being in the zone. I actually disagree with hyperactive to an extent. The best drivers do drive by feel, they just know from experience when/where to brake, how to enter the corner etc. They're not conciously thinking about it when they do it, they just do it.
I see it very simply. As far as credit for winning races is concerned it comes down to this:
a) Driver can take credit for anything he does/doesn't do on the track.
b) Team takes credit for everything else.
So where does that leave Hamiltons win??
Well he crashed, and put himself a few places back. After that he at best matched the pace of the other quicker drivers. So that's an average, (maybe a bit above average) performance marred by a fairly fundamental mistake. That's got to score less than 5/10.
The team however, took a gamble and it paid off in that Hamilton didn't need to pit just to change tyres, as did the majority of the rest of the field. Team performance 8/10.
Conclusion. The team won the race not Hamiltons drive. If he hadn't had the good fortune, of his teams decision, to be able to make the tyre swap at the same time as fuel up for the last stint he would most likely have finished 4th at best, possibly even 5th.
There was one other contributing factor, which no one seemed to comment on on the day. That was the fact that the race was unduely held up behind the safety car for several more laps than it should have been as two drivers refused to unlap themselves. This significantly reduced the chances of the top drivers to gain on and overtake Hamilton, and also ensured that the race didn't go the full distance. Guess what teams those two drivers belonged to. Yep the same teams as the two front runners. Concidence? You decide.
a) Driver can take credit for anything he does/doesn't do on the track.
b) Team takes credit for everything else.
So where does that leave Hamiltons win??
Well he crashed, and put himself a few places back. After that he at best matched the pace of the other quicker drivers. So that's an average, (maybe a bit above average) performance marred by a fairly fundamental mistake. That's got to score less than 5/10.
The team however, took a gamble and it paid off in that Hamilton didn't need to pit just to change tyres, as did the majority of the rest of the field. Team performance 8/10.
Conclusion. The team won the race not Hamiltons drive. If he hadn't had the good fortune, of his teams decision, to be able to make the tyre swap at the same time as fuel up for the last stint he would most likely have finished 4th at best, possibly even 5th.
There was one other contributing factor, which no one seemed to comment on on the day. That was the fact that the race was unduely held up behind the safety car for several more laps than it should have been as two drivers refused to unlap themselves. This significantly reduced the chances of the top drivers to gain on and overtake Hamilton, and also ensured that the race didn't go the full distance. Guess what teams those two drivers belonged to. Yep the same teams as the two front runners. Concidence? You decide.
I like F1 but its not my favorite. Those would be:
a) Any motorcycle racing - it's just more exciting than cars sorry.
b) Touring car championships - again because of the close racing.
Nascar? hmm sorry I don't get it. Go round and round mostly in a parade until someone messes up.
a) Any motorcycle racing - it's just more exciting than cars sorry.
b) Touring car championships - again because of the close racing.
Nascar? hmm sorry I don't get it. Go round and round mostly in a parade until someone messes up.
some place somewhere without one of those wooden stick thingies.. oh you know what I mean !
Sounds like the usual excuse to me. I'm betting the person that said that will behave in exactly the same way on tarmac. Far too many people with this attitude in LFS unfortunately. They seem to think that being fast gives them a god given right to pass you and win. They're usually the ones that say "its just a game" too. I sometimes wonder if any of these people have ever watched racing on TV let alone actually ever driven a car.
Oh and yes, there is a lot more to racing than just driving fast. Look at how many guys in F1, (and other motorsports), are capable of setting fast times in qualifying. Then when it comes to the race and being conistant etc they drop right down the field.
Edited to add - The sport their talking about is stock car racing NOT rally. The only motorsport where contact is allowed is stock car racing. All other forms of motorsport are strictly non contact. Although of course the occasional mild bump does occur but it's not condoned in any way.
Last edited by gezmoor, .
Forgot about that.
Do the command above. It will give you a rather long list whilst connected to LFS. When you actually log on to a server, one of them should have the State = Established. This is probably the IP address of the server you're logged on to. Use that IP address to do a Ping as I mentioned before and look for any dropped packets or very long times.
Edited to add - actually whether you get a long list of IP addresses depends on when you do the command. If you wait a bit after connecting to the server in question you should get only a couple of lines above where it says LFS.EXE the one that is Established is the one you wan to use.
Wont be the ports being blocked anyway. If they were you'd never be able to connect initially. Sounds like dropped packets or high latentcy to me.
I've no idea how you'd find out what the server IP addresses are but if you can open a command prompt window and type in:
ping -t xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx (where xxx.xxx etc is the server IP)
let it run for a couple of minutes and see if you get any high numbers or any lack of numbers being shown. To end it just do <cntrl> + C
I've no idea how you'd find out what the server IP addresses are but if you can open a command prompt window and type in:
ping -t xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx (where xxx.xxx etc is the server IP)
let it run for a couple of minutes and see if you get any high numbers or any lack of numbers being shown. To end it just do <cntrl> + C
I never knew that. Gits !
it's like letting you see a juicy rare steak and not letting you eat it !! :hihi:Ok here's my first attempt at road.
If you look carefully you should be able so see some damp patches and also the hills in the background are slightly less green.
Let me know what you think.
If you look carefully you should be able so see some damp patches and also the hills in the background are slightly less green.
Let me know what you think.
Ok I'll give that a go, if I can work out which files they are.
I'd be happy to attach the files here, (assuming it's allowed), but I'm making the changes to a Patch Y20 test install that I have on my PC. Not sure if all the file names are the same as a couple are called xxxTEST.dds etc
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG