Thanks for the test!

I wonder if anyone uses a Vive Pro 2?

vRenegade reported an issue here that caused the image to be skewed when your head is tilted.

I hope that is now fixed in test patch F6, which you can try here: https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/110607

Thanks for your patience!

I have finally done something about this, as I have been in the development version dealing with VR and projection matrices recently.

The new option is available for testing in the test patch forum, which I have left hidden for now to try and avoid distraction from people making random off-topic requests.
https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/110607

I will be happy to know if the VR support is fixed when you are able to test it.

Last edited by Scawen, Thu 20 Feb 2025, 17:34. Reason : typos

The new option is available for testing in the test patch forum, which I have left hidden for now.
https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/110607

The trouble with test patch threads is too many people get a strange idea in their head that it is a general off topic request thread. But I'm far too busy on the development version, and cannot be distracted. If I get off topic requests on that thread, I will close it.

I will be happy to hear about any problems with the new option, or the VR update.

WARNING: THIS IS A TEST

THIS DOES NOT CONTAIN NEW TYRE PHYSICS OR THE NEW GRAPHICS SYSTEM

PLEASE TEST BEFORE YOU POST

PLEASE... NO OFF TOPIC FEATURE REQUESTS!


Hello Racers,

Here is a new test patch: 0.7F6

Please read the list of changes below.

0.7F6 is COMPATIBLE with 0.7F

- You CAN connect online with 0.7F
- You CAN play single player replays from 0.7F

You should back up or rename your LFS.exe from version F so you can revert to it if necessary.


Changes in F6:

Force feedback:

Some steering wheels have a bug in their drivers, that cause them to seen as "First person controller" devices.
In this case, LFS does not know they are a steering wheel, so it does not enable the steering wheel bump stops.
There is a new option, in "Axes / FF" section to Enable steering wheel bump stops.
Do not use this if your controller is not a steering wheel.

VR:

It is possible for some VR headsets to have a FOV aspect ratio that is different from their pixel aspect ratio.
Until now, LFS did not deal with that case correctly, and this was apparent with the HTC Vive Pro 2.
Now, LFS uses the left, right, up, down FOV values more directly which should solve the problem.


Changes in F5:

InSim:

System to allow AI drivers to be directly controlled by a local InSim program.
Discussed here: https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/2114897#post2114897

AI drivers:

AI can now spawn in a config with an AI path even if knw has not been generated
FIX: AI now spawn in game with full fuel load if there is no path (or no knw)
FIX: Rare crash in AI code after another car spawned outside path


INSTALLATION:

Live for Speed LFS 0.7F must already be installed!

- Rename your old LFS.exe
- Copy the LFS.exe from this patch zip into your LFS folder

NOTE: You can see if the patch is correctly installed when you run LFS.
Check the version number at the bottom of the entry screen.


DOWNLOAD:

IF YOU ALREADY HAVE 0.7F:
PATCH 0.7F TO 0.7F6 (ZIP)
https://www.lfs.net/file_lfs.p ... e=LFS_PATCH_7F_TO_7F6.zip (1.1 MB)

Last edited by Scawen, Thu 20 Feb 2025, 16:29.

I hope to release a test patch this afternoon. In the development version I've been fixing various issues to get to the release and one thing was about Z buffers, according to a recent recommendation by Bokujishin which took me into the projection matrix. I had been doing other VR fixes recently, including something about lighting exposure, which I have recently updated for the regular monitor version too. I'll probably do a report about some of the updates, but haven't been in a mind to slow down.

Now with VR and projection matrix in my mind, I was reminded of a bug report by vRenegade and I've been looking at that.

So hopefully this afternoon I can release a VR fix and an option for user to override the controller device type.

There is now a manual temporary signup closure.

You can see how it looks on one of my test seasons: https://www.lfs.net/leagues/22/season/1218

(it says "Signup temporarily closed" and you can still click to see the signed up racers)

The option is activated on "Edit season" page as seen in the screenshot.

I've realised duplicate number detection is a bit complicated as it needs to retrieve quite a bit of info and search through it and present error messages to the user, preventing them submitting their updates. It's more complicated than you might expect because of the fully customisable entry fields. I might try something simpler like highlighting duplicate numbers in red, just when the page is displayed. Something to make it easier for admins without doing the full job. It might even be better that way, in case a new user selected a number that is really reserved for someone else like last year's winner, etc.

OK CSV improved as requested.

If you click Get CSV on my test page you will see:

1) First row is column titles (as specified by admin)
2) The column after user name is Country

Admin should not add "Country" when setting up the signup required fields. It automatically appears in the CSV after the user name.

These quick weekend updates are all I can really do at this time. Improvements that are harder to implement will have to wait for the future.

I'll be doing another push on the Retro tyre model at the start of the working week, moving towards the big release.

Of course, this test patch can be easily updated at any time if simple updates / bug fixes / documentation corrections are needed.

Quote from iamproplayer7 :

First of all, yes - there is problem in my own script/framework and i'm very sorry that i made you waste so much valuable time...

No problem at all, I only wrote a few sentences and briefly looked at the output in my InSim test program.

Good to hear you identified the issue.

Quote from iamproplayer7 :

- add direction to IS_AII like CompCar struct has.

At least this one should be easy if you have an atan2 function.

Direction = atan2f(-Vel.x, Vel.y); // in radians

Checked again and steering does work in F3.

In my test program I have:


Full left lock would be the result of sending zero in the Value field.

This is the LFS Programmer Forum.

In most cases it is probably best to not comment if you aren't a programmer. Otherwise I would have posted in General LFS Discussion or Test Patch forum.

I don't go and post my opinions in the quantum physics forums because I probably don't know what the **** I am talking about.

Thanks for the feedback and bug reports. I've done most of them and will release an update today.

Quote from Bokujishin :

Input 254 does not seem to do anything right now, all controls stay in their...

My test seems fine.
- set steering : ok
- set throttle : ok
- send a 254 : steering returns to centre / throttle returns to zero

I might change it to allow multiple values to be set at once in a variable sized IS_AIC (probably would change the zero byte to PLID and then allow multiple 4-byte blocks of "byte Spare/byte Input/word Value"

Quote from MizzMaster :

Is there a way to engage starter motor in case gas engine stops? If not, Input...

Yes, I do this all the time when testing at layout square. You set CS_IGNITION to 1

EDIT: A new update is available below: https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/2114731#post2114731


OK, here is the test patch. The only new thing is AI control and data reporting through InSim.

docs/InSim.txt is included with this new section:


Download: [ download removed - F3 is now available ]

Last edited by Scawen, Fri 24 Jan 2025, 16:49.

EDIT: A first test is now available below: https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/2114646#post2114646


Hello programmers.

There is a mod waiting for publishing, for the purpose of being "driven" by AI, but all it would actually do is drive along uncontrolled. But I don't really want to support such a bodge mod that bypasses all realism purely so it pulls away all by itself.

But I don't want to prevent something that could be fun so I've come up with a simple idea for just a few hours of work, to allow InSim to control a local car, in a very crude way. I've done a proof of concept and can now drive an AI car from an external program. Actually it disables the AI completely and you just set values, like Steer, throttle, brake, shift, etc.

EDIT: This is only for local AI. It would be far more complicated to do it from the server - that would require new multiplayer packets and I'm not getting into that.

EDIT2: To be clear, it can work for AI that are online, but the InSim must be connected to a local computer that has its own AI on it, and those are the only AI that can be controlled by this new simple packet.

I want to confirm if this could be useful.

It's just like this:

struct IS_AIC // AI Control
{
byte Size; // 8
byte Type; // ISP_AIC
byte ReqI; // 0
byte Zero;

byte PLID; // Unique ID of AI player to control
byte Input; // Select input value to set
word Value; // Value to set
};

// Input values from from CS_NUM in Inputs.h
// Special values

// 254 - reset all
// 255 - stop control

enum
{
CS_MSX,
CS_THROTTLE,
CS_BRAKE,
CS_CHUP,
CS_CHDN,
CS_IGNITION,
CS_EXTRALIGHT,
CS_HEADLIGHTS,
CS_SIREN,
CS_HORN,
CS_FLASH,
CS_CLUTCH,
CS_HANDBRAKE,
CS_INDICATORS,
CS_GEAR,
CS_LOOK,
CS_PITSPEED,
CS_TCDISABLE,
CS_FOGREAR,
CS_FOGFRONT,
CS_NUM
};

I think you might need some minimal feedback from the car, via a request info packet, and it could tell you some things like the lights and ignition status. I suppose you can get speed / position, etc from other packets like MCI? Or maybe you need something like an MCI for one car, which you can receive on request for a local AI, and maybe it has a little more date in it?

I want to keep it simple as I don't want this to go on more than this afternoon as I have other things that I am working on.

Last edited by Scawen, Thu 23 Jan 2025, 18:23.

Quote from versiu :

I just can't get why almost everydev koded this the same way. It's unlogical way to simulate engine...

That's because...
1) The flawed model is simple to code
2) It is actually 'logical' (although not physical)

I'm interested to try this, even the 'fake' version (making throttle response more realistic without doing a full engine simulation).

My understanding of the physical reason for this is that the diameter of the fully open butterfly valve is chosen to allow sufficient airflow at the engine's maximum power rpm. At low rpm the engine draws in air at a much slower rate so there isn't much resistance and so at low rpm it makes barely any difference whether the butterfly valves are fully open or half open. At low rpm when air flow is low, what makes the difference is whether the valves are a tiny bit open or slightly more open.

These days I'm sure it is more complicated as there is throttle mapping. So there is not a linear mapping between pedal and rotation of the butterfly valves. I don't know yet how the throttle mapping might be varied at different rpm. I'd be interested in that (but it doesn't affect the ability to try a test).

Also to note, not exactly the subject of this thread but even in a traditional engine without throttle mapping, and even at max power rpm, our model is also wrong, because the throttle response is linear, but that doesn't match the characteristic of butterfly valves which produce an S-shaped flow-vs-resistance characteristic. I'm sure that S-shape would be straightened by the throttle mapping (but just to repeat, I know that is not really the topic of this thread).

I do have higher priorities at the moment though, like trying to get to a state where we can do that release. This post is more to acknowledge that I'm interested in this subject, for those who didn't know that already.

I'm working on other things now but please do tell me whenever you think of any more features that could help, or anything good about forum-based signups that still isn't covered by the updated system.

I've allowed public access to the "Get CSV" function as well so people can see how that works without needing to set up a test league.

The signup system now has support for skins.

If the administrator includes a field named "Skin" and a racer enters the name of a skin that has been uploaded, the skin is displayed on the signup page. A skin pack zip of all the skins can also be downloaded.

Signups test page: https://www.lfs.net/leagues/22/season/1219/signup/view
Forum thread: https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/2114364#post2114364

Skin packs are now available. I think maybe it should only be for administrators but I have enabled it on the public page for now so you can see and test it. https://www.lfs.net/leagues/22/season/1219/signup/view

Thanks for the suggestion.

I think it may be possible to detect if the administrator has entered a field named 'Skin' which could then could be used as a special case to provide a download link for the skin and hopefully some info about which res is available.

I've added "Skin" field to my test season and maybe tomorrow I can try to make use of it.

Screenshots in first post updated to show page updates including avatars, flags and info links.

For now, you can visit the signups page of my test league: https://www.lfs.net/leagues/22/season/1219/signup/view

Last edited by Scawen, Fri 17 Jan 2025, 15:10.

Nice bug finding again.

About the important one:

First time I've seen this code, but what happened: it stored the servers in the correct order but extracted from the database in a basically random order. At the same time, passwords were extracted preserving their order, so in fact if you had more than one host with different passwords, the passwords could be assigned to the wrong host.

I've changed the code to reassemble the list of servers in the order they were stored, so this should fix the problem. I recreated your test in my Round signup season and the bug appears fixed. Also my fake passwords have remained with the correct hosts, if I look in Edit Season.

As mentioned, the signups can be seen by anyone, so could be linked from a forum discussion thread.

Examples: (the required fields per entry are all editable)

1) Here is a list of signups for a test season in which you can enter as a single racer (1 per team).
https://www.lfs.net/leagues/22/season/1219/signup/view

2) Here is a list of signups for a test season in which you can sign up in teams of up to 4 racers per team:
https://www.lfs.net/leagues/22/season/1218/signup/view

3) Here is a list of signups for a test season in which you can sign up for individual rounds:
https://www.lfs.net/leagues/22/season/1223/round/1/signup/view

I hope all the time zone stuff works properly, it's always confusing to implement and made my day's task a lot harder. Especially when we are dealing with things displayed near day and month boundaries, and must be placed and displayed in the correct day slot, and the viewer can be in any time zone, at any time, and select any month or week to view.

I'd obviously like to know if there are any errors with time zones.

A simple test is if someone could compare the in-game event browser with the website calendar and make sure it looks correct. Hovering over the event time should show the UTC time, in case that is useful.

One test I should do is set my timezone to somewhere far from UTC and confirm that some events fall into a different day or month on the calendar because of the time zone of the observer. But I'm a bit tired now, probably will test tomorrow.

I don't plan to do any more on this stuff for now except for any fixes. Really it was some holiday work but has gone on 4 extra days and we all know what I really have to work on now.

I hope the calendar and league section improvements are helpful.

I can't see any glitches on our performance graph, and a network test now shows very little packet loss, so I wonder if the problem has been resolved?

The graph looks clean from around 18:00 UTC on Saturday (7 December).