Quote from Scawen :

The circles do have an ID, but at the moment they follow a pattern like the route checkers. So you can set the ID but only in a continuous sequence.

That may be convenient but I suppose it could cause issues, when you delete a circle the ones above it drop an ID. Would it be better to drop the route checker style sequence?

By the way, the checkpoints do not have an ID, because that space is used up for the Heading. Checkpoints must be identified in the normal way by X, Y, Zbyte, Index.

AFAIK circles don't have any heading xD

This circle is going to be used only by InSim applications, I think that an ID is way better than coordinates for identification, and having non-consecutive IDs don't cause any problem at all.

Quote from Scawen :

You and Whiskey will be pleased to know that today I'm working on the InSim checkpoints and InSim circles.

Scawen, one last note about this.

Would it be posible to set circleID? This way we could program our app to always treat ID<20 as being in pit for example. And ID>200 as another range, etc. Same behavour as start postition, sequential on creation but customizable.

Maybe you are forcing a profile in the Profiler that overrides you FFB settings?

Quote from sicotange :

OFF-TOPIC:

Thanks to IS_JRR you can easily teleport AI cars. Would it make sense to lift the open config restriction ("AI can't drive on this configuration" message)? In this case the AI car would be spawned with handbrake on and engine turned off.

Quote from cargame.nl :

AI cant drive on open config because it has no path which it can follow.

He just wants to use them as obstacles/decoration. Which may be nice, but not really useful IMO.

Quote from sicotange :

I suggested this recently:

I'm aware of that, that's why I mentioned joker laps.

I know that a circle is not ideal for timing purposes, but my suggestion is a lot more useful than just a new custom split object. We would be able to do whatever we want, not perfect but much better than the actual system allows.

Ideally both things should be implemented, along with my /semaphore command, but for a first new packet I think the new marshall would be best.

This would allow:

- Custom corner cutting checks
- An easy way to do "joker laps" in custom layouts
- Make several races at one track and use this new object as custom splits
- Assigning a pit stop box to each driver and detect if they use the wrong one

And many more things.

Last edited by Whiskey, Wed, 3 Feb 2016 11:50.

Quote from Scawen :

OK, I've done that.

I plan to release an update this evening and it would be great if any of you can check it works with older InSim programs if that is easy.

Scawen, could you take a look at this suggestion? It looks quite easy to implement from my side, would like to know your opinion hehe
https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/89019

I think it may be the right time to implement it, now that we are having a new InSim version.

Currently we hace "Restricted area" (that kicks to spectator) and "Route checker" (that gives you a penalty).

I'd like to have something called "Controlled area" (yellow color), that sends an InSim packet, so the InSim applications can deal on its own with corner cutting and detect cars in special positions.

I'm aware of IS_MCI packet, but as this packet is server sided you have to deal with lag, packet per second update rate and all those nasty things. Having a simple native packet would be much better to server administrators.

Packet structure:
- PLID
- Circle id/number (just as route checker have an index, to know what corner threw the packet).
- Car speed

Last edited by Whiskey, Wed, 3 Feb 2016 11:52.

Couldn't we create a packet sniffer/rely that always outputs IS_MSO / IS_III / IS_ACR as full size so that outdated programs still work?

It is an ugly solution, but avoid the problem of Scawen either breaking compatibility or implementing a dual InSim version with a flag as suggested by someone (was it Cargame?).

Known issue, they'll have to redo the animations to fix it (or change the car, but that would cause incompatibilities). They also have a polygon on the sides of the cockpit that is only visible from one side and small things like headlights not attached to the car xD

Argh, I was wrong. I thought that F10 was a borderless mode, not the real fullscreen. I should've read properly before getting that excited xD

I wasn't aware that Shift+F10 and Shift+F11 behaved different!

F10 "minimizes" if not focused, while F11 is always on screen (but behind taskbar and other windows).

I DO LOVE this difference. Did anyone notice this? I'm not aware of reading about this in any of Scawen's posts.

Quote from SmokeyBanjo :

Runs so smooth now. Need to learn to drive again. Can't wait to get my graphics card now. Then I'll get an S3 licence.

Those weird things you see now are called fps, many people (some of them on mega next-gen consoles) are afraid of them when exposed

Joke aside, people with very bad frame rates usually get used to it and can't understand that their current fps are awful to play any game.

Victor, the "tomorrow" thing is wrong!

https://www.lfs.net/leagues/196/season/396
CityLiga is showing having an event tomorrow, but it is in fact on February 2nd, so it won't be tomorrow for 1 hour (in my timezone).

Despite that error the sorting by date is OK here
https://www.lfs.net/leagues

Quote from McGherkin :

The insim port isn't in the cfg file, it's entered through lfs or by adding a line to autoexec.

Yup, I meant to say OutGauge.

I am far more confident in Scawen not screwing us that in random users I don't know xD

My Fanaled works like a charm. In previous test patches I had a small conversation with Bose because it stopped working if filename was not LFS.net (test patches used to include the current version in file name). If it only break to 2 people, I'm inclined to think that they somehow screwed the cfg file.

McGherkin, did you install the test patch? Do you have a backup of the current official test patch? Anything that could change your setup?

Neither InSim nor OutGauge has changed in these test patches (even K10 won't affect this).
Did you change the name of LFS.exe recently?

Quote from McGherkin :

Bump.

Is it me or does fanaleds not work with LFS at the moment? Tried to join their forums and couldn't recieve the confirmation email so....

G27 LEDs mod doesn't work either.

I don't know what are you doing to your wheels, but you are the second one saying the same about both mods this week. Fanaleds is working on both official and test patches.

Quote from Whiskey :

Quote from marcal_m :

Hey @MadCatX, did you test the mod on 0.6K LFS? I was using Fanaleds for my G27 to use on rFactor, ETS2 and rFactor 2 and it doesn't work on LFS, neither your mod worked for me, can you please help me? I really want this mod to work
EDIT: Sorry for bad english.

Fanaleds works fine with LFS. If it ain't working, and this mod is also having problems, then your InSim port is wrong, check LFS' cfg file.

Ok, thanks for replying, I'll keep asking every now and then for that feature to be implemented xD

Quote from Scawen :

New system to reset a car at a location with or without repair

Scawen, would this improvement allow to do a pit stop changing tire compounds without being forced to repair the car? Or is it totally unrelated to that part of the code?

GAMEpassword and WEBpassword are not the same thing

Indeed. LFS is meant to be played with either mouse or steering wheel. Keyboard and gamepad support is a bit messy.

I believe that if you drive with keyboard you have to press Shift+Arrow to navigate that menu (instead of just using the arrows).

Looks like it's going to be a pile of crap. Just need the reviews to confirm that feeling.

A game released in 2016 that looks the same as RBR...

Quote from repeat83 :

Not range, but array

A range only needs 2 bytes, an array is variable. InSim packet size has its own limitations and Daniel has weighted them before making the suggestion