phew, i knew this hosting lark was pretty demanding, but i was a little worried if people felt we'd appeared and disappeared within ~3wks and hadnt even officially open the doors as such hehe.
so why not bump bertie up?
I thought that was the point of people 'grassing' up demo folk who dared to so much as mention a licence car
I thought that was the point of people 'grassing' up demo folk who dared to so much as mention a licence car
Dunno about testicle jokes but you've made it easier to make cock jokes
Of the poultry variety, you do understand that right kiddies.
Of the poultry variety, you do understand that right kiddies.
meh, just found this snippet on wikipedia while looking to see if there was any reference to folk outside Japan getting a peek at GT5P:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Turismo_5_Prologue (under the subsection 'concept')
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gran_Turismo_5_Prologue (under the subsection 'concept')
hmm, okay, i'd only read the previous page to this thread starting up again (pg3/4), and the only comment i'd seen wasnt particularly unreasonable.
If he's being an ass, then he's being an ass, but as i said the allowance of those willing/able to take a higher quality texture or skin doesnt harm anyone, if it criples some peoples computers then they shouldnt use them, they wouldnt enable AA/AF & other settings if they had low frames already, so shouldnt pay extra for even higher res skins unless they were a little bonkers deep down. So okay he was being an ass in the way he's putting forward his point, but the actual idea isnt as stupid or idiotic as its being put across thanks to his insulting comments about those with lower spec machines.
If he's being an ass, then he's being an ass, but as i said the allowance of those willing/able to take a higher quality texture or skin doesnt harm anyone, if it criples some peoples computers then they shouldnt use them, they wouldnt enable AA/AF & other settings if they had low frames already, so shouldnt pay extra for even higher res skins unless they were a little bonkers deep down. So okay he was being an ass in the way he's putting forward his point, but the actual idea isnt as stupid or idiotic as its being put across thanks to his insulting comments about those with lower spec machines.
Really? Funny, cos i could have swore im looking at them.
They didnt come out in AMERICA, they apparently didnt see you guys as being a worthwhile market, whether thats because you wouldnt find the appeal in a mini-version or you guys dont buy into the GT market, i dont know, but Europe has had 2-3 secondary titles before/after their main releases. GT Concept 2002 (Geneva/Tokyo) and GT4 "Prologue" being 2 i can see, not sure if there was another thinking about it, if there was, i bought it.
As i mentioned last time someone commented on how bad it sounds, ever consider that its a crap recording? I can tell you for fact that isnt how it sounds, at least not on my TV, my mates TV and surely anyone elses TV if they heard it too. Its a terrible recording, but if you want to judge something off a camcorder then be my guest.
True, but thats the stupidity of people in general isnt it!?
We all think our football team is the best (or whatever sport we follow, likewise nations, religions etc etc) and despite evidence to the contrary you try telling them they're wrong on their own opinions.
So 'tismo isnt 100% realistic, but if you hit another car it bumps off it, i've never seen my or anyone elses car go flying into the air like a firework, so maybe its not perfect, everyone playing LFS will almost certainly claim it to be the best sim around, you try telling that to anyone in the rF, GTR or Race Driver community, heck even the idiots that drive Need for Speed will claim its the best there is, afterall what other sim (yes, i know!) offers bodykits and huge wings....
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, its whatever floats your boat, if you didnt like what you were playing you probably wouldnt be playing it. Maybe there is better out there, but if people are happy with what they've got then wheres the harm in it if they geniunely feel its the best.
Personally i'd much rather have a bit of fun in 'tismo, driving the cars you'd love to own, visiting the tracks you'd love to go to let alone drive round. Ok, so its not perfect, it cant be because it has to appeal to a mass market not a niche group. If i want to race seriously then i know where to do that, and if i want to experience orbitting the moon i know where to get that too
Disappeared? Well, we havent really 'appeared' as such, and even then its only been maybe 3 weeks
We're currently conducting tests before actually offering anything, as im sure you did yourself when starting, so theres a few people getting free LFS servers for the term of the tests. We dont want to start selling something if we dont know its limits and how stable it'll be etc. We get a 'free' evaluation (still gotta pay DC fee's) and a few folks get free game hosting for a while, everyones a winner.
I know im a little late on this but....
As you see, most of Europe & all of the America's wouldnt bother turning up for week 2, 4.....
10utc is between 4am & 7am in the states IIRC
If you looked at the license pie chart, Europe probably accounts for 60-75% of them. In terms of nations, Europe will account for probably more than half of the competing teams.
Lets be honest, if it wasnt being organised by Aussies, then you wouldnt get a bloody look in in regards to what time it started. Im not saying thats right/fair but its true, everyone would be told the races start at XXutc, who's up for it. Because its Aussie based, and your on the other side of the planet from the majority of people you want to compete against, your kinda forced into catering for everyone because otherwise nobody would turn up because its inconvenient.
I'll say it again, cos people will ignore it, im not saying any of thats fair, but lets be honest it is the reality of it. Nobody will stop the series taking place at an inconvenient time for the majority, but only those its convenient to will be taking part.
If its inconvenient for Europe, you lose over half your entrants, the Americas you'd lose 1/4, the Oceana region another 1/4 and then middle east & remaining areas probably wont have anyone or not enough to cater towards.
Also, dont forget that a 20utc start is Saturday night in Europe, its 8pm-10 to 10pm-midnight depending where you are, so European entrants would be giving up their Saturday nights, its not exactly perfect for Europe either.
As you see, most of Europe & all of the America's wouldnt bother turning up for week 2, 4.....
10utc is between 4am & 7am in the states IIRC
If you looked at the license pie chart, Europe probably accounts for 60-75% of them. In terms of nations, Europe will account for probably more than half of the competing teams.
Lets be honest, if it wasnt being organised by Aussies, then you wouldnt get a bloody look in in regards to what time it started. Im not saying thats right/fair but its true, everyone would be told the races start at XXutc, who's up for it. Because its Aussie based, and your on the other side of the planet from the majority of people you want to compete against, your kinda forced into catering for everyone because otherwise nobody would turn up because its inconvenient.
I'll say it again, cos people will ignore it, im not saying any of thats fair, but lets be honest it is the reality of it. Nobody will stop the series taking place at an inconvenient time for the majority, but only those its convenient to will be taking part.
If its inconvenient for Europe, you lose over half your entrants, the Americas you'd lose 1/4, the Oceana region another 1/4 and then middle east & remaining areas probably wont have anyone or not enough to cater towards.
Also, dont forget that a 20utc start is Saturday night in Europe, its 8pm-10 to 10pm-midnight depending where you are, so European entrants would be giving up their Saturday nights, its not exactly perfect for Europe either.
I dont think he was bragging, simply putting in a request for the ability to 'trade' higher resolution skins. I wouldnt say its a peice of p*** to implement it, but its not as complicated or as resource sucking as people are claiming it to be, and to those who understand it its quite offensive when people make things up as they go along as a reason something shouldnt be done. If they werent ill-educated guesses and assumptions then their comments could be perfectly valid, instead they're nonsense being touted as fact, it's like saying a 6 speed gearbox makes a car 50% faster than if it has a 4 speed. What i dont get though is the fact that people with what *they* seem to feel is inferior are the ones who dont want things implementing that they cannot use/appreciate. AFAIK nobody is asking for DX10 because they've splashed £1k on SLi'ing 8800 Ultra's, but the implication is that they're demanding the dev team to cater to them, when its really nothing of the sort. If they made 10240x10240 sized textures available, nobody is forced to use them, but anyone who really wished to could, and in cases where it doesnt do anyone any harm and any extra cost for its use was recouped in a similar manner to the current methods, then i dont think its doing any harm asking if it can be implemented.
Certainly, that was my intention, if someones going to go out of their way to be ignorant and insulting they can at least check they're facts first, particularly if it was aimed at me.
A misunderstanding is one thing, not even bothering to check you understand the comment is another.
IIRC the demo was available until GT5P was released, which makes it something like a 3wk stop-gap which is pretty odd to say the least because it couldnt have been worth the hassle.
The demo was 50% Japanese, but 90% fairly obvious anyway from the previous GT demos and intuition, but im still not sure if i could go out and buy a foreign version rather than wait the 3-4 months for them to translate a couple of buttons.
The demo was 50% Japanese, but 90% fairly obvious anyway from the previous GT demos and intuition, but im still not sure if i could go out and buy a foreign version rather than wait the 3-4 months for them to translate a couple of buttons.
Oh, and for the record, it doesnt sound like that in real life either, Tismo or the real car, thats a shockingly poor TV or recording!
The cars in the Prologue demo (& GTHD) sound far nicer than that thats for sure, i can make brum brum, eeeeeeeer, noises better than that, infact that text is closer to the real thing than that video
The cars in the Prologue demo (& GTHD) sound far nicer than that thats for sure, i can make brum brum, eeeeeeeer, noises better than that, infact that text is closer to the real thing than that video
Just wish it was out in the rest of the world too, March is still being touted as the release for everyone else 
Also, dont think i've ever paid more than £22 for a limited 'Tismo, infact im pretty sure i only paid £17.99 for Concept and that turned up a day early too. Ive found a shop which sells UK/EU region PS3 games as soon as they come into the store, which can be 10-14 days before release. I had Skate a week before UK launch the only downside is they're not as cheap as average stores would be (in general, not cos its early) + postage so they end up being about £5-10 more after postage. Worth every penny for GT5, Prologue... no
Anyone know if it has it been *confirmed* if there is anything different between download and BluRay versions? I've always prefered to own a phsyical copy, however not having to stick a disc in there to play it is a nice upside (unless BR version fully installs like a download title).
Also, dont think i've ever paid more than £22 for a limited 'Tismo, infact im pretty sure i only paid £17.99 for Concept and that turned up a day early too. Ive found a shop which sells UK/EU region PS3 games as soon as they come into the store, which can be 10-14 days before release. I had Skate a week before UK launch the only downside is they're not as cheap as average stores would be (in general, not cos its early) + postage so they end up being about £5-10 more after postage. Worth every penny for GT5, Prologue... no
Anyone know if it has it been *confirmed* if there is anything different between download and BluRay versions? I've always prefered to own a phsyical copy, however not having to stick a disc in there to play it is a nice upside (unless BR version fully installs like a download title).
And the FZR can go ploughing through gravel traps.
While your being 'delicate' with your throttle control your still going miles quicker than the FXR with or without bumping over curbs etc
FZR is most responsive, in steering & acceleration, which is why its quickest round the majority of tracks (>90% im sure, most by a fair margin too), its not really that hard to drive and it can drive straight out of gravel unharmed unlike the others.
On the other hand you cant mash the throttle & need to shift at the correct times just like all cars, but its slightly more sensitive, and then if your doing ~1h+ races it uses more fuel although tyres wear sooner than a tank empties round tracks on competitive tyres anyway.
So it punishes you if you drive badly, that'll only make it harder for n00bs, and personally that sounds spot on to me because its too easy and too quick and thats why everyone jumps onto it. If only the very best could drive it quick, then im all for them being rewarded for it, but as a self-confessed RWD hater who can drive the FZR considerably faster with an 'easy does it' approach than the FXR (& XRR) it shows even a rwd n00b is quicker in the car supposedly faster because its harder to drive?!? Since when!!?
If people are going to complain about the negative aspects of a car, they should at least consider the benefits of driving it, and likewise for the cars they're comparing against. Im betting the people who've complained about the FZR changes still use the FZR though, and thats usually because its still considerably quicker even with the newly added 'penalties' on there.
For the record, i have no interest in driving the FXR specificly, i've driven considerably more miles in the FZR than FXR & XRR combined since S2 came out and since the X patch too, its an unwanted car thats being heavily punished because its the easiest to drive.
While your being 'delicate' with your throttle control your still going miles quicker than the FXR with or without bumping over curbs etc
FZR is most responsive, in steering & acceleration, which is why its quickest round the majority of tracks (>90% im sure, most by a fair margin too), its not really that hard to drive and it can drive straight out of gravel unharmed unlike the others.
On the other hand you cant mash the throttle & need to shift at the correct times just like all cars, but its slightly more sensitive, and then if your doing ~1h+ races it uses more fuel although tyres wear sooner than a tank empties round tracks on competitive tyres anyway.
So it punishes you if you drive badly, that'll only make it harder for n00bs, and personally that sounds spot on to me because its too easy and too quick and thats why everyone jumps onto it. If only the very best could drive it quick, then im all for them being rewarded for it, but as a self-confessed RWD hater who can drive the FZR considerably faster with an 'easy does it' approach than the FXR (& XRR) it shows even a rwd n00b is quicker in the car supposedly faster because its harder to drive?!? Since when!!?
If people are going to complain about the negative aspects of a car, they should at least consider the benefits of driving it, and likewise for the cars they're comparing against. Im betting the people who've complained about the FZR changes still use the FZR though, and thats usually because its still considerably quicker even with the newly added 'penalties' on there.
For the record, i have no interest in driving the FXR specificly, i've driven considerably more miles in the FZR than FXR & XRR combined since S2 came out and since the X patch too, its an unwanted car thats being heavily punished because its the easiest to drive.
Its been taken out because were entering the hardcore era where it doesnt matter what people would prefer if its not realistic. So the XRR gets sequencial and no other option.
I dont like it personally (the attitude, not arsed about the gearbox types specificly) because LFS started by catering for a lot of peoples preferences and they're slowly being removed again. The options which were open to the driver are being removed in the name of realism when theres no harm or in a few cases nothing unrealistic about them staying.
Personally i find some of the enforced changes in the name of realism pathetic while its considered acceptable for people to play the game using a mouse or keyboard... thats realistic. You cant have a H shifter in your XRR, but you can drive around using Q,A < & > no problem. Some things you just wonder what the harm is in leaving them in there.
I dont like it personally (the attitude, not arsed about the gearbox types specificly) because LFS started by catering for a lot of peoples preferences and they're slowly being removed again. The options which were open to the driver are being removed in the name of realism when theres no harm or in a few cases nothing unrealistic about them staying.
Personally i find some of the enforced changes in the name of realism pathetic while its considered acceptable for people to play the game using a mouse or keyboard... thats realistic. You cant have a H shifter in your XRR, but you can drive around using Q,A < & > no problem. Some things you just wonder what the harm is in leaving them in there.
Keep ATIs 'Catalyst Control Center' (CCC) open in the background, if it does it just nudge any one of the settings and it should reset all your graphics fine. If it instantly blocks those out too then i've no idea, but i often race with CCC open on the other window because for some stupid reason if i go from full-screen to windowed (or alt+tab to desktop to do something) when i go back in ive lost my AA/AF settings and i cant drive like that.
I did fix it using a different refresh rate in LFS than on desktop, however it means it takes a while alternating those settings to go out of lfs and then back in again... very frustraiting.
Its nothing to do with heat or drivers, i've seen it on the odd occasion for a good year or 2, only recently did i realise i can just alter the AA/AF settings to re-vitalise things like losing my AA/AF settings and just the other day i had the blocked text, models turn transparent & background goes white etc and normally i'd reboot the PC but i tried tweaking the settings and it worked fine. Its like card struggles to hold the information in its memory and things grind to a halt and it ends up dumping the memory to get things smooth again, so you've lost all textures and stuff. My card is a X1900XTX (which is 512mb) and ive never seen it on any other game before and 512mb is plenty for textures which makes me wonder what it actually is causing the problems.
Last edited by PaulC2K, .
Well, i've definately not selected 1024 skins myself, nobody else uses the computer, and i hardly think my friends who play LFS on & off would have bothered messing with my settings, and having just downloaded X from scratch and see the warning message i can definately say i've never seen it before yesterday (which is why i mentioned it being a nice addition in my first post). At the same time, i dont recall ever swapping config files with anyone, i've had 5x >200gb HDDs in my computer for a good few years (now upto 7) and keep most things well backed up, the fact that until a few weeks back I had replays from 2005 (auto-save) tells me i've never accidently deleted it or lost it in a format.
So i dont know how i ended up downloading the hi-res skins, ive never been interested in them in the slightest, if they were free then sure, otherwise i'll download those i actually care to see in detail (series skins) from this forum.
Okay, so its not deleting the high-res skins but it is ignoring them, somehow the childproof lock on hi-res skins was unlocked without my knowledge and ive inadvertently ended up buying skin credits, i have over 1000 left (had about 11xx when i first spotted it when checking pubstat credits), however i dont wish to continue downloading them purely because i dont wish to keep having £1 taken for skins i care very little about, but would at least like to continue using the ones i have got as i can still use 50% of them in the remaining series rounds. But the problems is, how do i do so?
As for bertie big bollax, i though folks with S2 and using a demo forum account were supposed to report this to the moderators to get it corrected/deleted seeing as your not allowed multiple accounts?
So i dont know how i ended up downloading the hi-res skins, ive never been interested in them in the slightest, if they were free then sure, otherwise i'll download those i actually care to see in detail (series skins) from this forum.
Okay, so its not deleting the high-res skins but it is ignoring them, somehow the childproof lock on hi-res skins was unlocked without my knowledge and ive inadvertently ended up buying skin credits, i have over 1000 left (had about 11xx when i first spotted it when checking pubstat credits), however i dont wish to continue downloading them purely because i dont wish to keep having £1 taken for skins i care very little about, but would at least like to continue using the ones i have got as i can still use 50% of them in the remaining series rounds. But the problems is, how do i do so?
As for bertie big bollax, i though folks with S2 and using a demo forum account were supposed to report this to the moderators to get it corrected/deleted seeing as your not allowed multiple accounts?
HAHA, says demo guy who's racked up almost 1000 posts but wont shell out for a license??
Do you feel like a big boy now you've put the world straight, mummy will be proud 
Thanks for your helpful contribution to the discussion, it was very thought provoking. I particularly liked the bit where you took the time to read what was said, and contributed to the thread rather than just reading 2 words, coming to your own conclusion, and then make completely unhelpful and inaccurate statements about them.
It wouldnt be quadruple it'd be far from it and certainly not the 10x some idiots are proclaiming it would be. I save our teams skins at 70-80% quality and that hits ~500kb, so were talking 4 times better quality, for about 25-50% extra bandwidth, how that is 400% or 1000% some clueless people are using is beyond me.
I never 'demanded' anything, so get your facts straight!
The truely high-res skins could cost double, who here has said anything about it being free or replacing the current system??
Also I never even said i'd use it, i probably wouldnt because as ive already said i have no interest in paying to download peoples random skins, i'll settle for their crappy skins looking crappy in 512 size just fine, however i think you'll find my points still stand as being valid unlike idiots like yourself who have nothing to contribute and just want to mouth off. This subject has peices that dont interest me in the slightest, but it doesnt mean i have to ignore the stupidity of some comments when its plainly obvious.
Secondly:
I've already said on multiple occasions im not arsed about it taking a quid ffs, but the fact that it took it unknowingly isnt right, something they've now fixed by putting in a message warning you they're going to take your money with consent. My issue is with having paid for something and now being unable to use it because i dont wish to download other hi-res skins.
So when you've finished not reading peoples posts and done insulting people because of your own ignorance, have a good day.
chunkyracer:
Yeah, thats the conclusion ive come to now, but what i dont understand is why it wont let me use them, in theory it should do it in 4 steps:
> own skins folder
> hi-res folder
> low-res folder
> ask if you want to download it
That doesnt happen right now for some bizarre reason, either intentionally or accidentally, its not letting you use the files you have available to you, and that was the reason for posting about them, i have them available to me, ive lost skin credits in order to have them, but LFS doesnt let me use them presumably because i've said i no longer wish to *download* hi-res skins. It lets me view my own personal hi-res skins, but not those ive downloaded, whats the difference??
1 option might be to copy all the hi-res files into the low-res and see how it handles that, but you shouldnt have to do that.
Well, i base this off the fact that as soon i go to watch MoE replays ive watched a few times over its had to download 30+ skins. I had to redo a couple of screenshots last week as i somehow lost the psd file and the image needed minor editing, so out came lfs and fraps and as soon as i started to load up the replay its immediately downloading skins again. Unless this is now refusing to let me USE the hi-res skins i've 'paid' to download with my hi-res credits i never wanted in the first place, and now im being given crappy 512 skins as well, i dont know, however I know ive viewed those skins before, havent touched the files, and now then its downloading low-res versions which im seeing in the game despite possibly having high-res ones.
Deleting them or refusing to let me use them, thats seems to be what its doing, i've lost credits to get them, but because i dont want to continue handing out credits to view other random peoples so-so skins it doesnt appear to let me view those i already have.
This comes from 2-3 MoE replays, i dont do random public server racing, thankfully, but i've participated and watched these races from start to finish at least once and i suspect all 3 were whilst having hi-res downloads enabled.
Seeing as your reading, did i at some point click on 1024 skins, or was that the default option in X Patch?
Added attachment:
skins_x > FXR_FusionMOE_r3.dds > 171KB > Dated 28/11/2007 02:03
skins_y > FXR_FusionMOE_r3.dds > 683KB > Dated 25/11/2007 01:05
Can say the same for the files located above this skin in both folders, and im sure many more. I have 2 versions, the date clearly shows i have the high-res version available to me BEFORE the low-res version comes along... why do i need the low res when i've lost credits to download the hi-res. I've 'paid' for it, but seemingly because i dont wish to continue 'buying' others it means i seemingly lose the right to use them.
So fair enough, its not deleting them, but its certainly not letting me view the files i have lost credits (and money) to view.
Deleting them or refusing to let me use them, thats seems to be what its doing, i've lost credits to get them, but because i dont want to continue handing out credits to view other random peoples so-so skins it doesnt appear to let me view those i already have.
This comes from 2-3 MoE replays, i dont do random public server racing, thankfully, but i've participated and watched these races from start to finish at least once and i suspect all 3 were whilst having hi-res downloads enabled.
Seeing as your reading, did i at some point click on 1024 skins, or was that the default option in X Patch?
Added attachment:
skins_x > FXR_FusionMOE_r3.dds > 171KB > Dated 28/11/2007 02:03
skins_y > FXR_FusionMOE_r3.dds > 683KB > Dated 25/11/2007 01:05
Can say the same for the files located above this skin in both folders, and im sure many more. I have 2 versions, the date clearly shows i have the high-res version available to me BEFORE the low-res version comes along... why do i need the low res when i've lost credits to download the hi-res. I've 'paid' for it, but seemingly because i dont wish to continue 'buying' others it means i seemingly lose the right to use them.
So fair enough, its not deleting them, but its certainly not letting me view the files i have lost credits (and money) to view.
Last edited by PaulC2K, .
Well, the point i was getting at is that the FXR just simply isnt a car you'd consider when you look at the 3 car line-up.
I dont have a problem with the hardest cars to drive being the most rewarding when you get it right, but the fact that the average Joe can beat the FXR HLVC in an FZR says something isnt right. You get it right, you get a cookie. The FZR in comparison to the FXR is more like 'you keep it pointing in the right direction, heres a jar of cookies' because its unreasonably quick, and the XRR is too for that matter.
The FZR isnt exactly a car that takes years to master and only the aliens can drive, IMO its easier than the XRR, and thats from someone who'll happily admit to struggling to drive RWD cars with ease (if left on my own and i've got a good feel for the car im fine, but i cant lock horns with someone without being slightly concerned) and yet with that said im still considerably quicker in a car im not happy in compared to something i know i can attack the track in.
As i say, the fact that they are faster isnt a problem, i dont think anyone would argue that, however the margin in which it dominates is excessive to say the least. If this really is supposed to be balancing then the FXR should be slightly slower than the XRR on a laptime basis, and the FZR should be slightly quicker than the XRR due to its slightly harder tyre wear rather than its fuel consumption. In X10 none of the cars can go a full tank on race competitive tyres so they cant use it to their tanks as an advantage, the tyres are the first limit that you hit, not the consumption of fuel. That might have changed with the new tyre changes, softs are useless even for sprint races it seems, mediums look to be the norm now, maybe they can go further, it'll take a while to find out setup-wise what will and wont work.
I dont have a problem with the hardest cars to drive being the most rewarding when you get it right, but the fact that the average Joe can beat the FXR HLVC in an FZR says something isnt right. You get it right, you get a cookie. The FZR in comparison to the FXR is more like 'you keep it pointing in the right direction, heres a jar of cookies' because its unreasonably quick, and the XRR is too for that matter.
The FZR isnt exactly a car that takes years to master and only the aliens can drive, IMO its easier than the XRR, and thats from someone who'll happily admit to struggling to drive RWD cars with ease (if left on my own and i've got a good feel for the car im fine, but i cant lock horns with someone without being slightly concerned) and yet with that said im still considerably quicker in a car im not happy in compared to something i know i can attack the track in.
As i say, the fact that they are faster isnt a problem, i dont think anyone would argue that, however the margin in which it dominates is excessive to say the least. If this really is supposed to be balancing then the FXR should be slightly slower than the XRR on a laptime basis, and the FZR should be slightly quicker than the XRR due to its slightly harder tyre wear rather than its fuel consumption. In X10 none of the cars can go a full tank on race competitive tyres so they cant use it to their tanks as an advantage, the tyres are the first limit that you hit, not the consumption of fuel. That might have changed with the new tyre changes, softs are useless even for sprint races it seems, mediums look to be the norm now, maybe they can go further, it'll take a while to find out setup-wise what will and wont work.
True, changing conditions would play a huge factor, although you have to wonder how much, afterall unless its random (meaning people dont know the temp and cant act upon it before the start grid) it means someone somewhere decides what gets used, at least as a starting point, a range, or something like that, and it'll only be the happy medium for all cars... which is really what we have right now. It'd be awesome when true environmental factors come into play like time & weather, but im not sure adjustable ambient temps would change much unless people made a concious effort to vary them rather than pick the 'community agreed value' and used that all the time.
I have no idea if LFS simulates air/surface temps, but it'd be nice if the British tracks were colder, Fern Bay was +15'c and Kyoto was +5'c as to reflect their respective geographical locations. But thats all for another discussion in half a dozen years time when were chatting about S3 patches i guess
But I suppose your right, the AWD would plain suck on a level playing field, but at the same time i think it needs to be helped out so it isnt the car nobody drives competitively, which is what the car always has been and always will be until the day extra track variables come into play. To me the FXR was unpopular to race with on X and now with X30 its effectively 10kg heavier in comparison so what hope does it have of becoming wanted? Its the ugly duckling of the GTR class and its got a long wait till that will change on the basis of these changes.
MoE already gives this car 110% points compared to the other GTR cars because its there for all to see how uncompetitive it is, and its just got comparetively slower.
I have no idea if LFS simulates air/surface temps, but it'd be nice if the British tracks were colder, Fern Bay was +15'c and Kyoto was +5'c as to reflect their respective geographical locations. But thats all for another discussion in half a dozen years time when were chatting about S3 patches i guess
But I suppose your right, the AWD would plain suck on a level playing field, but at the same time i think it needs to be helped out so it isnt the car nobody drives competitively, which is what the car always has been and always will be until the day extra track variables come into play. To me the FXR was unpopular to race with on X and now with X30 its effectively 10kg heavier in comparison so what hope does it have of becoming wanted? Its the ugly duckling of the GTR class and its got a long wait till that will change on the basis of these changes.
MoE already gives this car 110% points compared to the other GTR cars because its there for all to see how uncompetitive it is, and its just got comparetively slower.
Why is it narrow minded to have your own opinion of things?
Why is it narrow minded for someone to want something that suits them (and anyone else wanting to take advantage of it) but its not narrow minded to be-little someone because its not what YOU want??
Surely thats narrow mindedness, to not care what others think because it doesnt line up with your own interests.
Personally ive always found the LFSW restrictions pretty stupid. They allow 1024x1024 skins upto 400kb in filesize, and im betting most people can make a 2048x2048 skin of solid quality at 500kb. Now fair enough thats still 100kb more, but were talking about 4 times more pixels, and it certainly isnt the hilariously claimed 10x more mentioned earlier thats for sure.
OX
XX
O= Original 1024, X = extra 1024 width and height
looks to me like its 4x, and in reality its less than 4 and probably closer to 2-2.5 with the way the files are structured to compress data.
Also, in this new patch its nice to be asked if we want the high-res skins and a warning that they cost money, i only realised the other week that i've been paying for all the crappy skins i've downloaded assuming they were on 512 settings. Now, whether ive somehow changed a setting along the way or not i dont know, but its annoying having lost a quid for something unknowingly, and then to add insult its now overwriting them with the crappy 512 versions!! So much for paying for them, does this mean im getting a refund seeing as they're being taken away from me?
Im left with the choice of losing the 1024 skins ive accidently paid to download, or forced to continue paying for them. Surely they shouldnt be overwrote if the skin already exists
Im not fussed over the quid, there's been £12 in there for years and its now down to 10.999999999999997 thanks to premium pubstats and now skins, Im going to have to add at least £3 (in 2025 :razz
for S3 but the fact that having accidently purchased the right to download them, they're now being taken away from me just seems a bit wrong.I think the FZR shouldnt be able to kill itself unless theres a decent amount of abuse handed to it, and it should be weighed down a little in return. It'd work better at endurance level as well as sprint races, which lets be honest is what 95% of the people driving the car are using it for.
They need to be competitive at multiple uses, evenly spread over various tracks but competitive to race together over 6 laps as they are over 6 hours. How you do that i dont know, but if close racing in a multi-car class is the aim, it needs to be looked at from as many angles as possible.
In sprint races tyre wear and fuel econ makes no difference, its down to which car puts its power down the best, handling and ease to drive. The FZR is already easily the fastest, the FXR the slowest. I *hate* rwd cars (with a passion) and i can drive the FZR cautiously round most tracks considerably quicker than i can get the FXR round being as heavy and aggressive as i see fit. I remember spending about 30 laps in the FXR and doing a so-so lap, and within 5 laps i'd gone about 3/4sec faster taking corners with extreme caution, that was round one of the longer Aston tracks, and it just seemed very wrong that someone who couldnt drive rwd cars in comfort could go faster in the FZR over a FXR with such ease and little effort, if i can do that then imagine what a decent (!!) driver can do with the FZR.
In endurance races the bigger picture finally comes into account, then the fuel econ, tyre wear and clutch overheat are something to use as positive/negative reasons to pick a specific car over another. While i dont care for public server racing, it surely should be a balanced playing field there too, just as it should for endurance racing for those who find that aspect appealing. How you make it even on all ground i have no idea and wouldnt envy the task of trying to make it even, but those are my thoughts on it and i think sprint races actually get overlooked because of things that matter in 100+ lap races but make sod all difference in a 10 lap race.
Also, if the XRR effectively gets -30kg (X's +30 removed) and gets the Seq box, while the FXR only gets -20kg and the Seq box, that means the FXR is effectively 10kg heavier as a result of moving from X to X30 at least, Do people actually consider it quicker than the XRR, over any distance, where it needs to lose ground on the other 2 cars? Seems a bit of an odd one to me, i wouldnt have thought anyone would consider this a competitive car for racing in anyway, easier to drive is one thing, but its still considerably slower everywhere anyway and now its lost 10kg over the other 2 it would seem.
They need to be competitive at multiple uses, evenly spread over various tracks but competitive to race together over 6 laps as they are over 6 hours. How you do that i dont know, but if close racing in a multi-car class is the aim, it needs to be looked at from as many angles as possible.
In sprint races tyre wear and fuel econ makes no difference, its down to which car puts its power down the best, handling and ease to drive. The FZR is already easily the fastest, the FXR the slowest. I *hate* rwd cars (with a passion) and i can drive the FZR cautiously round most tracks considerably quicker than i can get the FXR round being as heavy and aggressive as i see fit. I remember spending about 30 laps in the FXR and doing a so-so lap, and within 5 laps i'd gone about 3/4sec faster taking corners with extreme caution, that was round one of the longer Aston tracks, and it just seemed very wrong that someone who couldnt drive rwd cars in comfort could go faster in the FZR over a FXR with such ease and little effort, if i can do that then imagine what a decent (!!) driver can do with the FZR.
In endurance races the bigger picture finally comes into account, then the fuel econ, tyre wear and clutch overheat are something to use as positive/negative reasons to pick a specific car over another. While i dont care for public server racing, it surely should be a balanced playing field there too, just as it should for endurance racing for those who find that aspect appealing. How you make it even on all ground i have no idea and wouldnt envy the task of trying to make it even, but those are my thoughts on it and i think sprint races actually get overlooked because of things that matter in 100+ lap races but make sod all difference in a 10 lap race.
Also, if the XRR effectively gets -30kg (X's +30 removed) and gets the Seq box, while the FXR only gets -20kg and the Seq box, that means the FXR is effectively 10kg heavier as a result of moving from X to X30 at least, Do people actually consider it quicker than the XRR, over any distance, where it needs to lose ground on the other 2 cars? Seems a bit of an odd one to me, i wouldnt have thought anyone would consider this a competitive car for racing in anyway, easier to drive is one thing, but its still considerably slower everywhere anyway and now its lost 10kg over the other 2 it would seem.
Same thing here, AI cars not knowing they're about to run out of fuel and just grind to a halt, also a timed race.
Can only comment on the FZR really at this point, as they ran out about 10min ago, the XRRs are all sitting in various gravel traps and the FXRs are leading the way but will eventually run out of fuel
Im betting it wont take much to fix, probably just an oversight, but at least its getting there.
The fuel calculations at the start were interesting to see, nice knowing they dont just stick 100% fuel in and keep on going and instead devise their own strategy of sorts.
Also, a question about the AI while im thinking about it, half the FZR's which ran out of fuel also picked up a puncture the same lap, and its got me wondering whether they pit for damage & tyres, though im guessing they wont revise the strategy based on their findings (ie flat 60% into their intented stints).
Can only comment on the FZR really at this point, as they ran out about 10min ago, the XRRs are all sitting in various gravel traps and the FXRs are leading the way but will eventually run out of fuel
Im betting it wont take much to fix, probably just an oversight, but at least its getting there.
The fuel calculations at the start were interesting to see, nice knowing they dont just stick 100% fuel in and keep on going and instead devise their own strategy of sorts.
Also, a question about the AI while im thinking about it, half the FZR's which ran out of fuel also picked up a puncture the same lap, and its got me wondering whether they pit for damage & tyres, though im guessing they wont revise the strategy based on their findings (ie flat 60% into their intented stints).
'however publically critisising the league and calling the Admins and team running it Cheaters after one of your drivers was penalised thorugh the correct complaints procedure and also calling us liars is a step to far in my opinion.'
I refered to your cheating by knowingly breaking the rules on numerous occasions, rnds 1 and 3 in particular, then modifying the rules after the event so you could punish rooble. I also refered to this ONLY in my THIRD attempt at posting a reply in regards to the lies you were spreading and then deleting when i tried to correct them. So yes you were blocking my freedom to reply to the thread, but because 1 (the last) contained my opinions on your unsporting manner of running this 'fun' league you claim thats the reason you go around deleting my posts?
Cheat/Cheating:
• to deceive or mislead somebody, especially for personal advantage.
• to break the rules in a game, examination, or contest, in an attempt to gain an unfair advantage.
• a dishonest or unfair trick.
So, with the correct understanding of the term 'cheating', was reversing into 4 cars from a safe location, and driving on regardless of the rules saying you cant and will be DQ'd, your failure to do so, and you being an admin and writing up the rules, you can honestly say they dont comply with the above? Hoiting did the same, drove Rooble off the track after making a stupid move which sent him into the gravel on the exit of the corner and he just drove past in complete ignorance. How is that not breaking the rules and gaining an unfair advantage? Your picking and chosing when to apply the rules, and on who you wish to apply them to, and you do so knowing you've broke the rules far seriously and chose to pretend it didnt happen, with not so much as a 'sorry' in the server or after.
There was no complaints made from round 3, and as per the rules:
4.1 You must protest within 24 hours after the race ended of any incidents which you were personally involved in.
4.2 To log a protest you must post in the UF Owners Club forum under the appeals thread and provide car numbers involved, lap number, time of incident and your point of view of the accident. We also ask that you submit a reply file also. The admin will review this incident and resolve it (including any issuing of penalties) prior to the next round.
Those are the rules, there were no complaints or even an appeals thread, and yet because it harms you, its against series rules, but when its you doing it to others its all harmless fun. You had the cheek to suggest rooble ploughs through people all the time and gets away with it, but the fact that you did actions which should see you banned from the series, thats perfectly ok??
So, do i want to take part in a series where the organisers drive outside their own rules, no. Rules are rules, you not only knowingly broke them at the time, but you allowed it to go unpunished. So, does that make you a cheater? Im afraid it does. If you dont want to be refered to as a cheater, either dont break the rules YOU write or dont make those rules.
As for not knowing you could do the stuff the site is designed to do, why did i take the time to show you how to do it on MSN if you werent supposed to be doing it??
I refered to your cheating by knowingly breaking the rules on numerous occasions, rnds 1 and 3 in particular, then modifying the rules after the event so you could punish rooble. I also refered to this ONLY in my THIRD attempt at posting a reply in regards to the lies you were spreading and then deleting when i tried to correct them. So yes you were blocking my freedom to reply to the thread, but because 1 (the last) contained my opinions on your unsporting manner of running this 'fun' league you claim thats the reason you go around deleting my posts?
Cheat/Cheating:
• to deceive or mislead somebody, especially for personal advantage.
• to break the rules in a game, examination, or contest, in an attempt to gain an unfair advantage.
• a dishonest or unfair trick.
So, with the correct understanding of the term 'cheating', was reversing into 4 cars from a safe location, and driving on regardless of the rules saying you cant and will be DQ'd, your failure to do so, and you being an admin and writing up the rules, you can honestly say they dont comply with the above? Hoiting did the same, drove Rooble off the track after making a stupid move which sent him into the gravel on the exit of the corner and he just drove past in complete ignorance. How is that not breaking the rules and gaining an unfair advantage? Your picking and chosing when to apply the rules, and on who you wish to apply them to, and you do so knowing you've broke the rules far seriously and chose to pretend it didnt happen, with not so much as a 'sorry' in the server or after.
There was no complaints made from round 3, and as per the rules:
4.1 You must protest within 24 hours after the race ended of any incidents which you were personally involved in.
4.2 To log a protest you must post in the UF Owners Club forum under the appeals thread and provide car numbers involved, lap number, time of incident and your point of view of the accident. We also ask that you submit a reply file also. The admin will review this incident and resolve it (including any issuing of penalties) prior to the next round.
Those are the rules, there were no complaints or even an appeals thread, and yet because it harms you, its against series rules, but when its you doing it to others its all harmless fun. You had the cheek to suggest rooble ploughs through people all the time and gets away with it, but the fact that you did actions which should see you banned from the series, thats perfectly ok??
So, do i want to take part in a series where the organisers drive outside their own rules, no. Rules are rules, you not only knowingly broke them at the time, but you allowed it to go unpunished. So, does that make you a cheater? Im afraid it does. If you dont want to be refered to as a cheater, either dont break the rules YOU write or dont make those rules.
As for not knowing you could do the stuff the site is designed to do, why did i take the time to show you how to do it on MSN if you werent supposed to be doing it??
Yeah, i dont see why not
There should be some new test servers going up soon too as things have been nice and stable so far.
There should be some new test servers going up soon too as things have been nice and stable so far.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG