Again, I stress that forced setup for private races and leagues. Just leave it out of purely public servers. Besides, if the forced setup is a fundamentally good one, it's fine eith me if I happen to find time to join such a short league. But as someone here already said, it's a novelty that could quickly wear off, especilaly those who find the setups particularly unsuited to them. 
I apologize if my previous post was a bit on the strong side. I'm just unhappy with someone IMPLYING (but not quite explicitly saying) that people who bother to come up with good personal setups are mostly if not all a bunch of no life junkies. The truth is, those with some basic undrstanding of automotive engineering can quickly come up with a good setups in half an hour, including some limited testing. And if forced setups are actually used, people should be allowed to choose from a LIMITED choice of setups instead of one that favours some and disadvantages others. This would help level the playing field. All you need is a good understanding of your driving and make the best choice.
On the subject of top drivers with NO understanding of automotive engineering and basic physics of car setups, well, think again. Some "top" drivers simply know almost nothing but simply just try to drive to the setup no matter how non-optimal it is.
Then there are CHAMPIONS. People like Micheal Schumacher and Aryton Senna. Aryton Senna was well known as one who was absoultely obsessed with telemetry and engineering of the F-1 cars he drove. He would constantly bug the engineers in his team, asking incessant questions to extract every bit of knowledge and understanding he could. He would spend hours reading his own telemetry, trying to detect and correct every nuance of setup and driving. In essence, he was obsessed with anything that would improve his understanding of F-1 cars and ultimately improve his setup and ultimately driving skills. No wonder he's THE legend.
Micheal Scumacher isn't just a driver, he's a great MANAGER as well. Getting rid of the useless and receiving and mantaining quality staff is essential to thrive in F-1.
Another well know Indycar top driver is Sebastian Bourdois (I think that's the spelling, but I'm no European) He is well known to be very studious. Give him a car and he'll tell our setup engineer what to do in just a couple of laps to optimise the setup.
Overspecializaton leads to growing weakness and slow death. As technology advances, multi-disciplinary approaches are increasingly important in many fields. Last but not least, RL racing is not a driver gets all the glory glamour fest. It's a TEAM sport, and it doesn't really matter what the media says. The truth of every race success is terribly obvious to those in the know, even if it's only in a limited way.
BTW, when I do get something like the G25 someday, don't bother with banning driver aids. I won't use them at all, as I always try to drive LFS as realistically as my hardware can practically allow me to. Sequentials should be driven as sequentials and vice-versa. And the reason I completely agree with forcing cockpit mode is that that's how we drive IRL, in the driver's seat. When was the last time someone raced in bumper/chase cam IRL? A sim is suppeosed to approximate RL as closely as possible. It's not about eliminating some silly unfair advantages. It's about keeping it as realistic as practically possible. Isn't that the whole point of a hardcore mode?
No, we don't have a need for speed. We LIVE FOR SPEED!
I apologize if my previous post was a bit on the strong side. I'm just unhappy with someone IMPLYING (but not quite explicitly saying) that people who bother to come up with good personal setups are mostly if not all a bunch of no life junkies. The truth is, those with some basic undrstanding of automotive engineering can quickly come up with a good setups in half an hour, including some limited testing. And if forced setups are actually used, people should be allowed to choose from a LIMITED choice of setups instead of one that favours some and disadvantages others. This would help level the playing field. All you need is a good understanding of your driving and make the best choice.
On the subject of top drivers with NO understanding of automotive engineering and basic physics of car setups, well, think again. Some "top" drivers simply know almost nothing but simply just try to drive to the setup no matter how non-optimal it is.
Then there are CHAMPIONS. People like Micheal Schumacher and Aryton Senna. Aryton Senna was well known as one who was absoultely obsessed with telemetry and engineering of the F-1 cars he drove. He would constantly bug the engineers in his team, asking incessant questions to extract every bit of knowledge and understanding he could. He would spend hours reading his own telemetry, trying to detect and correct every nuance of setup and driving. In essence, he was obsessed with anything that would improve his understanding of F-1 cars and ultimately improve his setup and ultimately driving skills. No wonder he's THE legend.
Micheal Scumacher isn't just a driver, he's a great MANAGER as well. Getting rid of the useless and receiving and mantaining quality staff is essential to thrive in F-1.
Another well know Indycar top driver is Sebastian Bourdois (I think that's the spelling, but I'm no European
) He is well known to be very studious. Give him a car and he'll tell our setup engineer what to do in just a couple of laps to optimise the setup. Overspecializaton leads to growing weakness and slow death. As technology advances, multi-disciplinary approaches are increasingly important in many fields. Last but not least, RL racing is not a driver gets all the glory glamour fest. It's a TEAM sport, and it doesn't really matter what the media says. The truth of every race success is terribly obvious to those in the know, even if it's only in a limited way.
BTW, when I do get something like the G25 someday, don't bother with banning driver aids. I won't use them at all, as I always try to drive LFS as realistically as my hardware can practically allow me to. Sequentials should be driven as sequentials and vice-versa. And the reason I completely agree with forcing cockpit mode is that that's how we drive IRL, in the driver's seat. When was the last time someone raced in bumper/chase cam IRL? A sim is suppeosed to approximate RL as closely as possible. It's not about eliminating some silly unfair advantages. It's about keeping it as realistic as practically possible. Isn't that the whole point of a hardcore mode?
No, we don't have a need for speed. We LIVE FOR SPEED!
Last edited by Jamexing, .
FYI, the McLaren F1 GTRs were centally seated by OEM design.
I happen to have a busy life and I still make my own setups. So you're saying that guys who bother to work on their own setups are all a bunch of workless no life junkies?
That would offend a LOT of guys in the LFS community who happen to make their own quality setups and STILL have productive lives. BTW, there are already all sorts of good setups awaiting download all over the LFS community, so you don't need to spend more than a couple of laps around your chosen track to get something that compliments your driving skills. And no, you don't need to quit school or work to spend half an hour on your car in your favourite sim to tweak a setup in your free time.
When was the last time any RL race driver achieved major success with NO understanding of automotive engineering and the effects of car setup? Isn't a racing sim supposed to simulate what RL racers do to get their machines tweaked? A driver cannot excel IRL racing by driving alone.
The truth is setup skills are also a part of one's driving skills. For those uninformed, you are all welcome to ask valid questions on car setup. If you'r just too busy, there's always the download option. So no, you shouldn't be painfully slow just because you're a newbie with no setup of your own.
Forced setups are perfectly fine to me as long as they're confined to special leagues where all are supposed to drove supposedly identical stock cars. Just don't get in onto more public servers.
BTW, most other sims I've driven don't have terrible setups to start with. As it is, the current LFS default setups are mostly horrid. So NASCAR is NASCAR and can't be compared directly to LFS.
Besides in a top level league where the best LFS players get to compete with each other, shouldn't they be allowed to show their top form with their own custom setup cars? Let's pit the best against each other and see how good they can REALLY get. Now that's racing.
And yes, cockpit mode should have been forced a long time ago for all online or multiplayer races. It's about time everyone drives in LFS as a sim.
One thing that escapes me is why the guy who actually bothers to put in the effort to setup his car well be penalized while the guys who can't be bothered to setup his car properly be favoured? Beats me. Point is, it's not as fair as it might be cracked up to be. Races should favour those who put in effort to setup and drive well. I just believe that it's more fair overall. Forced setups is fine as long as they are confined to private leagues, but beyond that is simply draconian and basically unfair.
As for forced cockpit mode, it's about time that becomes compulsory in online races. We can't drive from a view OUTSIDE of our cars IRL, can we?
Last edited by Jamexing, .
360hp LX8 with MASSIVE slicks. Hmm.
Ferrari definitely uses the 3rd spring/damper setup, and they happen to use rotary dampers too. Last time I checked, so did Sauber, which got the technology off Ferrari when it was using it's engines. The dampers provide the moment arms to mount the 3rd spring/damper. Anything that helps even out contact pressures of the rear contact patches helps put that immense power onto the ground.
Downforce is pretty useless if your tire's aren't up to it. LX-8s would need large, wide slicks to make use of its relatively large amount of power. Something like 255/45/16 would be necessary if its to reach its full track potential, with or wiyhout downforce.
However, LX cars aren't so terribly aerodynamic to start with anyway. And there's almost no way to realistically make a rear wing work IRL on a car with roof shape like the LX-6. Unless you mount the wing even higher than the roof, which doesn't look so good.
So if the LX-8 would some day make it into LFS, give it properly sized race tires, with slicks, intermediates and full wets. Downforce will not realistically work with a car like it unless the aerodynamic profile is heavily revised.
However, LX cars aren't so terribly aerodynamic to start with anyway. And there's almost no way to realistically make a rear wing work IRL on a car with roof shape like the LX-6. Unless you mount the wing even higher than the roof, which doesn't look so good.
So if the LX-8 would some day make it into LFS, give it properly sized race tires, with slicks, intermediates and full wets. Downforce will not realistically work with a car like it unless the aerodynamic profile is heavily revised.
Th 3rd spring I'm talking about for the rear suspension is the one that links left and right sides of the rear suspension. The rear suspension is basically a torsion bar system. Basically, the upper "wishbones" have protusions perpendicular to the compnent that provides a moment arm to which a coilover system cross links left and right suspension arms. The purposes include heave control and all the technical stuff that's better explained in lectures than forums.
Well, I thought everyone was familiar about curent F-1 suspension design practice.
Guess not.
Well, I thought everyone was familiar about curent F-1 suspension design practice.
Guess not.
Last edited by Jamexing, .
4 way dampers, asymetric spring setups, active electronic diffs and customizable brake ducts. A racer's/setup engineer's dream. And the F-1 car should use a third spring in the rear. It's standard practice in current F-1 cars.
I would recommend the addition of non-linear springs and helper springs too, which would both comply with current racing practice and allow LFS to simulate modern rallycars properly. The active diff would be a major boon especially for the 4WDs.
Another step towards realism.
I would recommend the addition of non-linear springs and helper springs too, which would both comply with current racing practice and allow LFS to simulate modern rallycars properly. The active diff would be a major boon especially for the 4WDs.
Another step towards realism.
Last edited by Jamexing, .
I was just wishing that there would be more thought and consideration before anyone forcing something. And button clutch is even more unrealistic than auto clutch+autoblip/lift whilst providing faster acceleration, especially with the current turbo cars.
And you do have a good point of simply skipping races that unfairly penalize you because of control hardware issues (such a lack of G25), but as it is, there aren't that many good servers to choose from where I am now. Last thing I want is an exclusive club/caste/class based or any other thing like that to reduce server choices. As if there aren't enough arbitrary and logically unexplainable forms of segregation in RL society already.
A rule for some major league is one thing, but to have LFS players show up online for some racing fun only to dicover the best performing servers punishing anyone who lacks a G25 or something of similiar or better quality is just plain wrong.
Just trying to be fair to every LFS online racer looking for a good race, no matter you're a kb, mouse, joytstick or G25 user.
Forced setups? I'm all for no throttle and brake help, but no auto clutch and throttle blip/lift and FORCED SETUPS? What is this, a joke? So button clutches are supposed to be than better auoclutch + throttle blip/lift?
When was the last time LFS was dominated by G25 owners and users? I'm all for no assist if over 90% of the LFS population owns and uses G25s, but at the moment such silly bans are just absurd.
Forced setups do not induce parity, contrary to popular belief. All they do is unfairly favour those whose driving styles are more suited to the particular forced setup. It also does a great job of punishing those who bother to learn how to make excellent setups. Or would we be forced to use absurdly bad setups that cause more crashes than promote good racing? More misery than fun?
Before anyone suggests such silly bans, please give it a hard thought. How's ostracizing the majority of the LFS population going to do us any good? Beats me.
When was the last time LFS was dominated by G25 owners and users? I'm all for no assist if over 90% of the LFS population owns and uses G25s, but at the moment such silly bans are just absurd.
Forced setups do not induce parity, contrary to popular belief. All they do is unfairly favour those whose driving styles are more suited to the particular forced setup. It also does a great job of punishing those who bother to learn how to make excellent setups. Or would we be forced to use absurdly bad setups that cause more crashes than promote good racing? More misery than fun?
Before anyone suggests such silly bans, please give it a hard thought. How's ostracizing the majority of the LFS population going to do us any good? Beats me.
My, that's the kind of well organised and comprehensive setup menu I've always wished for.
+infinity for this new menu design.
Nice torque curves. Those would be a boon for setting up a car. And those gear ratios are much better than the currently unrealistic numerics. IRL, gear ratios can only be expressed exactly as fractions anyway.
The only problem wit this menu design is the rather dreary menu colour choices. Too much monotone green all over the place. Then again, I'm used gauging car behavior via telemetric graphical data lines, so that's not too much of a problem for me.
+infinity for this new menu design.
Nice torque curves. Those would be a boon for setting up a car. And those gear ratios are much better than the currently unrealistic numerics. IRL, gear ratios can only be expressed exactly as fractions anyway.
The only problem wit this menu design is the rather dreary menu colour choices. Too much monotone green all over the place. Then again, I'm used gauging car behavior via telemetric graphical data lines, so that's not too much of a problem for me.
Last edited by Jamexing, .
300-400hp and massive torque curve vs a 243hp with so-so midrange and TERRIBLE top end? Hmm...
Next thing we know we'll have G25 only servers all over the place. As if the current LFS community isn't already small enough.
Last edited by Jamexing, .
None of the Rallycross circuits currently available would challenge a production SUV such as a Nissan Pathfiner.
Make a LONG snad track filled with sand dunes like those a real desert would have. Add VERY realistic sand driving physics, Pajero Evolutions, Volkswagon Touregs, etc and we've got a Paris Dakar Rally Style enduro! Done properly, we'll attract licensees from an entirely new crowd: the serious rally raiders.
Make a LONG snad track filled with sand dunes like those a real desert would have. Add VERY realistic sand driving physics, Pajero Evolutions, Volkswagon Touregs, etc and we've got a Paris Dakar Rally Style enduro! Done properly, we'll attract licensees from an entirely new crowd: the serious rally raiders.
Noob/wrecker uses NOS to get ahead, only to enter a tight corner right after the pass, fails to slow down properly and causes a MAJOR pileup.
Hmm, the potential team strategies are endless.
Seriously, NOS is great for drags but crap for circuits with ANY corners. Conclusion, LFS should NOT use NOS.
Hmm, the potential team strategies are endless.
Seriously, NOS is great for drags but crap for circuits with ANY corners. Conclusion, LFS should NOT use NOS.
Agreed. First priority is sorting the physics, but the real cars already in such as the RA should be made to perform as closley to the real thing as possible. We don't really need more real cars until the physics are done.
I fully agree that we don't really need real car names, but isn't it obvious that a few cars already in LFS are ALREADY very close copies of the real things? Might as well let their engines perform like the real thing. We don't need to match the real thing exactly, but shouldn't we try to make it behave very closely to the real car? Or do we need to redefine the word "SIMULATOR"?
The RB4 isn't really too heavy. I'm fine with its weight as long as it's current weight remains unchanged. It just needs proper turbo behavior and a better powerband along with a minor increase in power. I won't agree to anything more than 250hp, since anything more won't help balance the TBO cars or make the racing better.
No, the UF1 doesn't feel too off. lack of weight does make p for the tiny engine. It'll be so much more fun if it had a proper LSD though it's wasn't available OEM, so it's just a fun option. Well, they're already running adjustable dampers anyway. It's fine as it is for now.
My real concern isn't to get all the brand names, it's to get all the car physics as perfected as a PC racing simulation technically could. The BF1 is great, but I'll rather trade it for significantly better turbo and aero models.
However, one point stands. If real cars are really implemented, they should definitely handle as close to the real thing as possible. IRL, cars such as the BF1 are very aerodynamically sensitive, and the current aero simply isn't adequate to make it run as close to the real thing as possible.
ATM, only lacks dynamic toe to simulate multilink suspensions and a live axle simulation. Otherwise, LFS already has a very comprehensive simulation of almost all major suspension types.
Again, as I've already said, I'll trade a real brand name car for more perfected physics anytime. Those real cars or very close clones of real cars must behave as close to the real thing as possible.
and if the cars are lookalikes only, people can't complain about what acts correct or not compared to RL! 
like a old e30 m3 racer, how fancy wouldn't that be?
or as it could be named in LFS: XR M (s38b36 anyone?) 
[/quote]
The fact is that ignoring how the real car lookalike is based on behaves will NOT aid realism. I thought LFS is supposed to be a simulation, not an arcade game, so why should we expect to get anything less than behavior close to the real thing? Isn't the whole point of a simulation to closely approximate RL behavior? Unless of course LFS's moniker as the ultimate racing sim is just that, a moniker, with no sustance to back it up.
I don't mind small tweaks to parameters like power and absolute weight to balance the cars in a class somewhat. In fact, the TBO and GTR classess need quite a few changes to get a reasonably level field. But to have engines and handling that doesn't come close to the real thing with a similiar setup is simply wrong. But with the current aero and turbo models, we are still unable to generate fully realistic engine(for turbo cars) and handling(for downforce cars) yet. I'm just surprised why those 2 major issues haven't really had a mention for so many months after the release of patch U. I understand that the aero issue takes time as it's complicated, but the turbo issue is really OLD and has so far received no attention at all.
As for licensing cars, it's already been done on 2 cars (RA and BF1). If there's no intention to mimic the behavior of the real car very closely, than don't bother.
like a old e30 m3 racer, how fancy wouldn't that be?
or as it could be named in LFS: XR M (s38b36 anyone?) [/quote]The fact is that ignoring how the real car lookalike is based on behaves will NOT aid realism. I thought LFS is supposed to be a simulation, not an arcade game, so why should we expect to get anything less than behavior close to the real thing? Isn't the whole point of a simulation to closely approximate RL behavior? Unless of course LFS's moniker as the ultimate racing sim is just that, a moniker, with no sustance to back it up.
I don't mind small tweaks to parameters like power and absolute weight to balance the cars in a class somewhat. In fact, the TBO and GTR classess need quite a few changes to get a reasonably level field. But to have engines and handling that doesn't come close to the real thing with a similiar setup is simply wrong. But with the current aero and turbo models, we are still unable to generate fully realistic engine(for turbo cars) and handling(for downforce cars) yet. I'm just surprised why those 2 major issues haven't really had a mention for so many months after the release of patch U. I understand that the aero issue takes time as it's complicated, but the turbo issue is really OLD and has so far received no attention at all.
As for licensing cars, it's already been done on 2 cars (RA and BF1). If there's no intention to mimic the behavior of the real car very closely, than don't bother.
Ruf is a Porsche tuning specialist IRL.
As I've said before, if we used very close if not exact copies of RL cars, we shouldn't have any issues if the names are left out. Not as if our developers can actually sell those cars for real.
We already have 2 cars that are almost carbon copies of RL Mitsubishi Starions, the XR and the XR GTT.
The XR GT is basically a direct copy of a low end Mitsubishi Starion anyway.
Last edited by Jamexing, .
Guys, we don't need randomness. What we REALLY need is proper siulation of imperfect track condtions such as rain, dust, etc.
Yep, Ferrari's variable cam system.
WAY better than VTEC. Actually, if there is an LFS tweak for version U, we could easily do it with that weirdo turbo lag that's already in existance. All the TBO cars have engines that exhibit VTEC like jumps in power(sudden surge of turbo boost) anyway. Just remember to tweak the top end powerband so that power runs all the way to the redline.
Last edited by Jamexing, .
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG