I totally agree with your point here, and also with the fact a lot of people seem not to understand the difference between the concept of LFS and its state, and thus flame people who are bored with what LFS is now.
As I said earlier, I am 100% behind the devs, as opposed to people who are only 50% and just criticize LFS for the sake of criticizing. But being at 100% is not accepting what I think is a mistake in the development process. Being at 100% means that sometimes you stand up to point out some things that could be done differently/better, as long as you stay within the borders of reason and usefulness for Live For Speed.
To come back to what farcar said, people who follow blindly the lead of the devs tend to assimilate the people who behave like I do (described in my previous paragraph) with those whiners who bitch about everything.
I, like many people in this thread, allow myself (ourselves) to offer friendly analysis on what we perceive LFS is going toward, and give advices that we guess are appropriate to make it avoid those obstacles.
As if you suspected a friend of yours of doing heroin, would you do nothing saying that it isn't your business and that he will make the right choices because it is his life and he managed his way through it up to now ? Or would you stand up, try to know more, and eventually helping him out ?
This is a similar situation, and I prefer acting the second way. And to thoses who have nothing to do but comment on the itallic words' meaning : yes, I know it isn't the same situation, and that my analogy was limited to the context of doing drugs, and that a program can do drugs, bla bla. Please pass your way unless you have a valuable arguement to be constructive to the debate, I meant it.
I think it has nothing to do with being right handed or left handed, just being used to the position in the car.
I tried a RHD import old supra on a track in France some monthes ago, and I have to say that actually I liked it very much, since I'm right hander, and my right hand is more precise than my left, and I could tackle the line with more precision while letting my left hand to shift (which is not hard to do since you know where are the gears...).
IRL I had a problems with some left hander corners when you have to usually have to use your right hand to shift but in which it is too busy to downshift... It resulted in an awkward cornering trying to slide... the same corners, but right handers, on a RHD wouldn't be a problem for right handers since this arm is overally easier to control...
E-brake forced linked to brake settings
Hey, i think every one else know about that, but isn't it abnormal that when you set the brake force, it also affects the hand brake power ?
Try for instance putting it as low as possible, and you'll see that your wheels will not lock.
I've always heard that the e-brake had nothing to do with the standard brake system, and that it was mostly a drum brake located somewhere on the shaft (please correct me if I'm wrong, which is most likely the case) and not at the wheels.
If it is the case, should that brake have a no possibility of setting or a different bar from the brakes ?
Thanks for your answers
Try for instance putting it as low as possible, and you'll see that your wheels will not lock.
I've always heard that the e-brake had nothing to do with the standard brake system, and that it was mostly a drum brake located somewhere on the shaft (please correct me if I'm wrong, which is most likely the case) and not at the wheels.
If it is the case, should that brake have a no possibility of setting or a different bar from the brakes ?
Thanks for your answers
FINALLY, THIS IS MY FINAL ENTRY!
Here is my entry !
The image is a photo from a qualification run of the BMW in the Formula 1 championship of 2073. The track is the Hima-GP.
Here is what happened from now to then...
When the European Parliament, in 2008, asked the FIA to change the F1 into a sport that was supposed to show the technological advances respectful of the environement, leading to the implementation of the KERS in the 2009 F1 championship, it did not know a series of further laws would lead, appearing periodically for 65 laters, to the new set of rules for the 2073 GP.
First of all, since the F1 was a sport that was too polluting, the drastical Motorsport Emissions Enforcement Act (oftenly refered to as the ME²A) of 2031 led the FIA to ban engines from their sports, since any versions that was not polluting was too expensive to develop. Hence, the F1 went from motors to animal traction as a mean of propulsion. The horse was now what moved the F1 (15 horses maximum per car, so 15 horse power).
Secondly, the EU parliament said that other materials that plasitcs and composits shall be used, since producing them took too many ressources and polluted the earth too much.
As a result, only wood was allowed, as metal would be too heavy. In 2055, the EU parliament stated that to promote fair trade, the chassis and bodywork should be made by native-south-american Jivaro craftsmen.
Thirdly, the EU banned any asphalt track, since the asphalt was degrading the environment, and also because of the global warming, the asphalt would melt during a race, jeopardizing the safety of the horses (and the drivers, but the law only quotes the horse : "Building or using or designing an asphalt track for motorsport purposes is prohibited and can lead to five years of detention and to a fine up to 5000000€ since they are dangerous for the safety of the beasts that tract the cars"). The F1, as all of the other motorsports went from asphalt to dirt tracks.
At the same year of 2062, a couple of month later, the Developing Countries Promotion Act ordered the FIA to only choose developing or poor countries as the hosts of the GPs, since altermondialism is cool, and because the global warming made the temperature rise by 30°F, new destinations, such as Siberia and Himalaya were offered.
Fourth and finally, the EU parliament prohibited the use of horses, and killed all of the horses, cows and porks, since their fart led to a rise of methane in the atmosphere, jeopardizing the global warming stabilization in 2070.
As a result, platypuses were now chosen as the tracting stars of the F1.
The FIA prohibited for the 2073 championship the use of a P10-S9M-1F (10 platypuses, a square cage of nine males at the back and one horny female at the front) since it led to aggressivity among the male, which freed from their cage, fought each other for the female, the winner had an intimate contact with her, and then killed the driver of the F1 with its venomous dart, which tried to put them back in the cage.
Now the pattern is P8-B8F (8 platypuses, 8 females in a brick pattern cage, since the females do not possess darts) attached to the wheels steered by the driver. The brakes are still slowing the wheels down, while the accelerator emits a scary sounds which frightens the females and lead them to go faster.
The F1 is now an endurance race on 500 meters tracks, since it takes 1h30 to complete a lap, and you need to pit at least twice to feed the platypuses. 30 laps are now the common standard, and it takes around 1.5 day to complete the GP.
What you see is the BMW Qualification run, on which they have the pole.
(This is for sure not my final entry, just a funny pic that could be a possible future regarding how, now, the ecologists manage to convince the EU parliament to mess with the motorsports rules
And it is also a scary picture to convince people to mobilize ourselves against ecologists to keep our sane-spirited motorsports ).
Here is my entry !
The image is a photo from a qualification run of the BMW in the Formula 1 championship of 2073. The track is the Hima-GP.
Here is what happened from now to then...
When the European Parliament, in 2008, asked the FIA to change the F1 into a sport that was supposed to show the technological advances respectful of the environement, leading to the implementation of the KERS in the 2009 F1 championship, it did not know a series of further laws would lead, appearing periodically for 65 laters, to the new set of rules for the 2073 GP.
First of all, since the F1 was a sport that was too polluting, the drastical Motorsport Emissions Enforcement Act (oftenly refered to as the ME²A) of 2031 led the FIA to ban engines from their sports, since any versions that was not polluting was too expensive to develop. Hence, the F1 went from motors to animal traction as a mean of propulsion. The horse was now what moved the F1 (15 horses maximum per car, so 15 horse power).
Secondly, the EU parliament said that other materials that plasitcs and composits shall be used, since producing them took too many ressources and polluted the earth too much.
As a result, only wood was allowed, as metal would be too heavy. In 2055, the EU parliament stated that to promote fair trade, the chassis and bodywork should be made by native-south-american Jivaro craftsmen.
Thirdly, the EU banned any asphalt track, since the asphalt was degrading the environment, and also because of the global warming, the asphalt would melt during a race, jeopardizing the safety of the horses (and the drivers, but the law only quotes the horse : "Building or using or designing an asphalt track for motorsport purposes is prohibited and can lead to five years of detention and to a fine up to 5000000€ since they are dangerous for the safety of the beasts that tract the cars"). The F1, as all of the other motorsports went from asphalt to dirt tracks.
At the same year of 2062, a couple of month later, the Developing Countries Promotion Act ordered the FIA to only choose developing or poor countries as the hosts of the GPs, since altermondialism is cool, and because the global warming made the temperature rise by 30°F, new destinations, such as Siberia and Himalaya were offered.
Fourth and finally, the EU parliament prohibited the use of horses, and killed all of the horses, cows and porks, since their fart led to a rise of methane in the atmosphere, jeopardizing the global warming stabilization in 2070.
As a result, platypuses were now chosen as the tracting stars of the F1.
The FIA prohibited for the 2073 championship the use of a P10-S9M-1F (10 platypuses, a square cage of nine males at the back and one horny female at the front) since it led to aggressivity among the male, which freed from their cage, fought each other for the female, the winner had an intimate contact with her, and then killed the driver of the F1 with its venomous dart, which tried to put them back in the cage.
Now the pattern is P8-B8F (8 platypuses, 8 females in a brick pattern cage, since the females do not possess darts) attached to the wheels steered by the driver. The brakes are still slowing the wheels down, while the accelerator emits a scary sounds which frightens the females and lead them to go faster.
The F1 is now an endurance race on 500 meters tracks, since it takes 1h30 to complete a lap, and you need to pit at least twice to feed the platypuses. 30 laps are now the common standard, and it takes around 1.5 day to complete the GP.
What you see is the BMW Qualification run, on which they have the pole.
(This is for sure not my final entry, just a funny pic that could be a possible future regarding how, now, the ecologists manage to convince the EU parliament to mess with the motorsports rules
And it is also a scary picture to convince people to mobilize ourselves against ecologists to keep our sane-spirited motorsports ).
Last edited by Zen321, .
Greetings Texas from Seattle (I am there for a year
)Yeah I know, the only thing is that a poll can not show the real thoughts of people, they just tick what they think it's closest. Basically, we have 1 different opinion per person (pretty much like one different church for each family in the US
)Every thing is in bold in the quote
Last edited by Zen321, .
This is a wrong program code, because this is assuming someone already programmed the three answers to a public annoucement to be those. And as I don't beleive in god (that's why I write his name without capital letters, because he is a mere concept), I don't think such a code exists.
Of course it will make more work for them. But Live For Speed is not their hobby, it is the thing that make them eat, pay their rent, go to clubs etc. You need to have strictness in your work, they have it, that is not the point. More work = more rate of return concerning time/money spent in developping their game, so this is a win-win situation for both. Business is only about win-win situations.
Nope, it isn't possible yet
You can't create tracks, just add objects to existing ones !
Hope it answers
You can't create tracks, just add objects to existing ones !
Hope it answers
0-60 for a car that is quite cheap compared to other cars with the same acceleration is very good
it is limited at 155mph (250 kph) like every other roadable cars, but there is still a way to bypass the limiter (since it is electronic). I would not be surprised if it reached 185, with a 6 speed manual gearbox, because of its 500hp and 661Nm of torque
Which is enough, isn't it ? The only problem about the handling is the weight, around a bit less than 2 tons. The tires are quite large, so putting the power down seems not to be an issue. Without limiter, less weight, and ESP disconnected, meaning GT3 prepared, it can be a really astonishing car.
For track purposes, on wide tracks, with long straights. Otherwise, the NSX would kill it
Or simply a lamborghini AWD because it can put its power easier in exits. But yet, it is a car that should not be disregarded.Well, every car gas it field of performances. The GT-500 would not beat the Elise on a narrow, twisty track, like hillclimb trials, or asphalt mountain rallies. The Honda/Acura NSX was Japan's 90's RWD track queen, built for speed around the track, handling abilities, etc.
So there's no absolute winner in each class, truly. Even the Bugatti Veyron, which is a monster car, would be kicked by an Amemiya RX-7 on the Nurburgring. However, no match for it on an oval track. Each sports car has its pluses and minuses, and while the GT-500 is a very good car in terms of acceleration/top speed, I fear that it's bulkyness and heavy weight would make it a serious competitor on a short track. It's as if you took a RAC (supped up Elise) versus a supped up FZ5.
Oops sorry for forgetting this write this, yeah, the brake bias is at maximum toward the rear, since those karts do not have front brakes.
Thanks for telling me
Help about a go-Kart setup.
Hi there everyone !
May I require your help about a go-kart setup for the MRT (obviously).
I made one that I find really close to what I remember driving it is like. But since it has been a lot of time, it might be really far from what it is IRL.
I need it to be as close to what real life could be, because in may 2010 I have a team competition with my university. A 24h race on a 1200m track with the best laps around 1:02:16 in the race (with not-pros racers).
As I won't be able to train before september 2009 and since my team will be mainly composed of enthusiasts, but who know very few about racing, racing techniques, pit strategy, (etc), I will use the time span I have left to prepare a training plan for them about the basics of race driving, advanced techniques, and also some training sessions on the track we will compete on.
However, since renting is quite expensive and the sponsors won't be able to pay for a training each week end (and since there are around 35 teams, it might be booked a lot), I have done a 1:1 replica of the layout on LFS, which I would like to couple with something as close to the kart we will race with, so that to give them a sens of the pace, the braking points, the inputs management, etc.
http://www.sodikart.com/fr/kar ... n/sodi-kart-rx7,3,97.html
This is the kart we will race on. It is not a proper race kart, it is more like a "high specced" rent kart with soft slicks.
So this is what I did so far on it :
- Decrease the MRT power down to two times the real power of the car (because the MRT is twice as heavy, so I still get a similar power/weight ratio). The kart is around 15hp
- Have stiff suspension coupled with maximum damping (rebound and compression), to simulate the fact that there is no suspension. It's the closest we can get to a real kart. I bet.
- I have put to ARB at front since the cars don't have any. I put 10 of rear ARB to simulate the fact that the rear end is usually stiffer than the front end. (chassis wise).
- Transmission : all gears to the same ratio, with a locked diff (can't remember exactly the Vmax of the kart, though).
- Tires : low pressure on both ends, not the lowest, but close. R1 in front, R2 in the rear to simulate the fact that you rear can break free if you are too hard on the inputs (steer and gas basically), which I didn't get with R1 tires (even with the maximum pressure). This also allows a more equal heat up between front and rear.
- Wheels : No camber since those karts do not have any. Reduced the caster to maximum (since a kart doesn't have a suspension system, the caster induced by the chassis flex should be less than 1°). No toe as well.
- Brakes : 95% brake bias toward the rear since these karts do not have front brakes.
You'll find attached the setup itself. Please try it and provide any comments that will help me to improve it and make it closer to a RL kart.
I would like to avoid the comments like : the MRT IS NOT A KART, because I know it is not.
I would prefer comments based on experience than on theory, as it would greatly help
I will also attach the two layouts of the track (track and rev) for testing purposes if you want, or simply if you wish to have a kart track for LFS Feel free to take and test
Thanks you everyone, you can't how how appreciated your help is.
May I require your help about a go-kart setup for the MRT (obviously).
I made one that I find really close to what I remember driving it is like. But since it has been a lot of time, it might be really far from what it is IRL.
I need it to be as close to what real life could be, because in may 2010 I have a team competition with my university. A 24h race on a 1200m track with the best laps around 1:02:16 in the race (with not-pros racers).
As I won't be able to train before september 2009 and since my team will be mainly composed of enthusiasts, but who know very few about racing, racing techniques, pit strategy, (etc), I will use the time span I have left to prepare a training plan for them about the basics of race driving, advanced techniques, and also some training sessions on the track we will compete on.
However, since renting is quite expensive and the sponsors won't be able to pay for a training each week end (and since there are around 35 teams, it might be booked a lot), I have done a 1:1 replica of the layout on LFS, which I would like to couple with something as close to the kart we will race with, so that to give them a sens of the pace, the braking points, the inputs management, etc.
http://www.sodikart.com/fr/kar ... n/sodi-kart-rx7,3,97.html
This is the kart we will race on. It is not a proper race kart, it is more like a "high specced" rent kart with soft slicks.
So this is what I did so far on it :
- Decrease the MRT power down to two times the real power of the car (because the MRT is twice as heavy, so I still get a similar power/weight ratio). The kart is around 15hp
- Have stiff suspension coupled with maximum damping (rebound and compression), to simulate the fact that there is no suspension. It's the closest we can get to a real kart. I bet.
- I have put to ARB at front since the cars don't have any. I put 10 of rear ARB to simulate the fact that the rear end is usually stiffer than the front end. (chassis wise).
- Transmission : all gears to the same ratio, with a locked diff (can't remember exactly the Vmax of the kart, though).
- Tires : low pressure on both ends, not the lowest, but close. R1 in front, R2 in the rear to simulate the fact that you rear can break free if you are too hard on the inputs (steer and gas basically), which I didn't get with R1 tires (even with the maximum pressure). This also allows a more equal heat up between front and rear.
- Wheels : No camber since those karts do not have any. Reduced the caster to maximum (since a kart doesn't have a suspension system, the caster induced by the chassis flex should be less than 1°). No toe as well.
- Brakes : 95% brake bias toward the rear since these karts do not have front brakes.
You'll find attached the setup itself. Please try it and provide any comments that will help me to improve it and make it closer to a RL kart.
I would like to avoid the comments like : the MRT IS NOT A KART, because I know it is not.
I would prefer comments based on experience than on theory, as it would greatly help
I will also attach the two layouts of the track (track and rev) for testing purposes if you want, or simply if you wish to have a kart track for LFS
Feel free to take and test Thanks you everyone, you can't how how appreciated your help is.
Last edited by Zen321, .
1. No communication = risk of nothing going on.
And you can't tell me I'm wrong. Just check the www.lfs.net homepage. There are news every 6 monthes (except for the Scirocco). No communication can clearly indicated that : either there is nothing going on / either there are really bad news and people shouldn't be told about to preserve the LFS income. We do not ask for much. We do ask for a periodic information (could be every month, or every month and a half, I would not like to have the devs do a daily newsletter and it would turn their work into more of a reality show than a gaming development).
Plus, the communication could boost the developpers productivity ? How ? This is simple : tell everyone you're almost finished with the detachable parts model and you will receive more than 200 posts like "Keep up the good work !", "Go Scavier Go !" or "Scawen, please make love with me !" in less than an hour. Of course, some people will bitch about the fact that it isn't released yet, but it is better to have 90% of support than 90% of opposition. C'est bon pour le moral. (saying my home language words in italic like in the books is simply orgasmic). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twDhig0L97Q
2. Live For Speed's updates take long to come.
It is true, but we can't deny that they are well appreciated. As time goes by, Scavier will attack itself to feature that are harder to program. But what is feelable is that most of the time, the improvement in each patch are mostly coding improvement, and not really content (in sense of cars/tracks/etc). Which can lead us to think that Eric is barely working. Since this number two is the number of perhapses, I will risk one : Perhaps Eric is hardcore working to have the S3 content amazingly rich. If it is the case, that would go back to point 1 : a bit of teasing like "Hey community, I have done 75% of the S3 content, but I won't give you any information about it untill it is released in a couple of monthes or by fall 2009" would be greatly appreciated, create a positive stress among the community, more talking, more interest from potential S2 buyers --> More cash.
People are negatively stressed, because slower updates lead them to think that S2 is starting to stagnate.
3. We are right to suggest the increase in the labour force.
Because with the simple equation : Labour Force = X(Content) + Y(Physics) - Z(Individual Profit). If we double the labour force, we will have : 2(Labour Force) = 2X(Content) + 2Y(Physics) - 2Z (Individual Profit). I have to say that X, Y and Z are likely to be between 0 and 1 or an exponential number so that X = r(e^x), Y = t(e^y) and Z = u(e^z).
r and t are coefficient in the importance given to that field, and x and y are the productivity in each field. About Z, it isn't like this, but it was fun to write it like this.
The only thing in that model is that there are only 2 variables that affect the sales : Content and Physics.
So if Sales = A(Content) + B(Physics) + C(Content x Physics)
(A is the coefficient of people who buy LFS for the content, B for the physics and C for both of them, so basically A are long-time demoers that buy S1 or S2, B are demoers, and C are people who bought LFS after a small tryout in demo).
If the Labour Force increase, you will have more subscribers because of improved physics and diversified content (which will reach a broader market share). And Live For Speed would have better financial ressources. Of course, it won't if the labour costs more than it produces, but there is no model who can calculate this.
So either you think in term of costs, either you think in terms of future earnings. This will be the difference between a good ressource manager and a good development manager. Either you stabilize your earnings/expenditure ratio, either you invest more (time + money), to improve your earnings in the future.
Since Scawen, Eric and Viktor are development managers from day 1 (LFS was extremely risky and would cost a lot of time/money), they should not become ressource managers, which will lead to the great stagnation of LFS, but as opposed to that : invest more, like they did in day 1, to improve the quality of their baby.
-------------
Just to reply to the rant against old time players. You are wrong. You are wrong, because you are deeply wrong. You are deeply wrong because you are extremely wrong. And you are extremely wrong but you contradict yourself in your own post. I know it's hard to focus for posts that long, but if you manage well, you can pretend to beat me in the "long'arse posts" community year end award. (Which isn't yet running, but I hope people will recognize my dedication).
You say : why should they care about old timers, because they don't give any money in the present for the devs. They actually do care about old timers, because the newcomers do not seem to bring them enough money.
Why ? Simply look at the Scirocco, which is a clear example showing that they were paid really well by VW to include it in. If their subscription cash pool was sufficient enough, they would have chosen a car that reflected better the spirit of Live For Speed, such as the Race About : independent, performant, sexy, future-oriented.
I am not ranting against the Scirocco, and I even think that having a 2000ish mass production turbo FWD with TC will be fun to test spin.
It just shows that they wanted big cash, and they also pleased people waiting for new content. It proves that they care at least as well about the old timers than about the new comers.
----------
I posted the link to the video for some specific reasons and not a random creol music video :
1) It is a very good illustration of my point : more communication = more support = more productivity. From 1:05 to 2:00, a guy cuts fruits. It seems really painfull. However, people come to support him because they know that he is doing it to please them. So, they come support him, and he cuts fruits faster. And someone even comes after to help him. Without communication, it would take more than a minute to cut enough fruits, he would be pissed, not enjoy the party and people would not be as impressed when he brings a whole tray of fruits, than they were when they were waiting for him to cut them, because they knew he was.
2) It is a sheer music that will reduce the tension here and increase the friendliness of the people !
Hehe it was a bad troll for the cc, because it's just that I'm in Seattle for a year since september and I since don't understand a thing about your measurement system
ci are better for you because you are used to them I agree with the fact that we have two many quadripede engines (I4), and for people who say that american cars are worthless in 'european style' races, I would suggest they take some lessons about the results of the Ford GT-40 in the Le Mans races back in the 60's (4 consecutive victories : from 1966 to 1969).
I am not sure if an american car would instantly win against a japanese car. Let's have for example the new GT-500 against an NSX...
@ f4sttr@ck : you can't really compare a Viper SRT or a ZR1 to a Toyota Tacoma or a Ford F150
I won't dare to explain why, because I hope you can tell the difference, don't you ? American cars were really awesome back in the 60's-70's, before they realized that a big engine and a blower was not fuel efficient, which was the time they stopped the muscles and started developping cow cars (big, slow, very squarish in design). After came the SUV craze, and I personally can't find a performance oriented SUV that would be interesting to race, produced in the US (let's say, racing with a 6k pounds V8 SUC isn't that a blast...). Maybe the Cayenne S Gemballa would be more appropriate
cc means cubic centimers
ci were a useless invention, and it is much more useful to convert cc in liters (it makes more sense as well since 1L = 1000cc or 1cd and since 1kilo of water = 1L, it is easy to convert between volume, mass, etc) <-- that was my 0.01€ troll I would love to see a supercharger in LFS, see how it handles
However, if trucks are "fun" to drive, they would be less fun for racing. I have never seen a track race with ram SRT-10, and these kind of trucks would be too big for the LFS tracks. They might be interesting for long endurance rallies like the Paris-dakar, but since it is too big to model France and northern Africa, I am afraid that they won't show up in LFS really soon...
Yes, why not have racing lawnmoyers like they have in UK and in the USA...
Variety is a good thing, but I am not sure that having a too eclectic choice of cars would help.
We have those already (the XRR, FZR and FXR are road tuners if you put other tires on them, and the XRR and FZR and kinda the highest tuning here, since they managed to pull 2 times more power than the stock version, without any significant upgrade of the engine block (bigger turbo mainly))
The RAC is a concept car.
You are right we need those. Some 300hp, light and AWD versions of the road cars can't be bad (at least allow the hybrids/knobbleys on the baby-GTR and the GTR cars would be a great addition). We also need rally tracks with those... Sprint cars are something one should not let aside as well.
Pardon my scepticism here, but I won't see the point of having trucks in LFS. It might be fun, but it won't, in my opinion, improve the quality of the game itself. Supercars MIGHT be a good addition, since it could also create a new GT class (GT3 or GT, can't remember which GT is the one where only a lil bit of upgrades is allowed to the car, I think it is GT3). Otherwise, it would be pointless, except maybe for cruising...
We don't, bradj234 does.
As you can see, he says that "Because We Are Anti 'Ricers' Means That We Can't Manage To Drift A Car In Real Life Or In Live For Speed"
Then, when nobody said that drift=rice, he, the clueless one, said it
Also because a MPR saves the position of the car and its characteristices (speed, and forces), while a SPR "plays the game" on its own (the SPR saves the inputs, and the physics engine make the car performs as if someone was driving).
And dependind on the packet's frequency, you can have some weird things happening in MPR, such as a car getting body damage before a collision, or your car sliding/drifting here while you did not do it online.
And dependind on the packet's frequency, you can have some weird things happening in MPR, such as a car getting body damage before a collision, or your car sliding/drifting here while you did not do it online.
+1.
Less than 60% is dangerous in a RWD, not at the beginning of a race, but when you are in the last laps, your overheated tires could easily break traction if your balance is too much to the rear.
It is a fact that you will turn less when braking+steering instead of steering. It is a concept that is hard to understand at the beginning (you usually think that because you slow down your steering radius will decrease, resulting in a better turning capability, just like I did). However, after learning a bit more about the traction circle, you will see that it is more a question of which g-forces are applied to the tires.
Tires possesses what is called a "traction circle" (which is more like an oval). It is curve (not a function), on a X & Y graph (X symbolizes the longitudinal G-force and Y the lateral) which shows the critical amount of the combination of X & Y forces (one can be 0) that a tire can hold.
As you can see on this graph, the more you brake, the less lateral acceleration a tire is able to support. (if you brake and give -0.5g of X force, you can turn more to be at the traction circle / however if you give -0.75g, you see that you can turn less to stay within the traction circle). This explains why you will always have lower abilities to turn when you brake.
Trail braking does not require a constant brake power when cornering, but as the contrary, trail braking means gradually releasing the brakes while steering at the same time. This allows the tires to help turning, while also giving a slight oversteer, always beneficial in entries.
So I would suggest you keep a brake balance between 60(FWD) and 72 (RWD depending on the type of car, weight bias, power, etc) and improve your skills, because this will mean more stability and faster times around the track
Good luck !
Thank you very much for the fix, sometimes words escape my surveillance system
Word, and I would like to add :
I would also like to quote bradj*insert random numbers here*
I suggest you learn more about racing, since you seem to be confused by stating that track racing = drag racing.
It is more difficult to drive as fast as you can in a corner than to drift it 20 mph slower with a perfect angle.
Plus, as you said, anyone can drive in a straight line. I would like to add : some cars faster than others. There are no skills required in a straight line, just money (look at the wangan craze in Japan).
And ricing is nothing related to drifting. It is just for the show to have some huge bodykits and a spoiler, but it doesn't do anything for the car. I saw my dad drift a Mercedes 190E W124 (old one) around a roundabout. May I have to say that with its mere 120 hp (yet with a high torque), softerish suspension, heavy weight and big length, and stock everything (not alloy wheels nor the factory sport spoiler), it has nothing to do with rice and yet it can hold a drift...
I suggest you stop playing NFS. Because one day I might come with my miata in NFSU2, with a stock bodykit, stock rims, stock everything except some engine and the suspension/tires (tuned after learning the tuning in LFS), beat the crap out of your fully tuned Nismo JDM Yoko Bilstein Brembo Evostar Lexus IS300
This thread is the most bumped thread ever :
2005-2006-2007-2008
2005-2006-2007-2008
My bad zeugnimod, I think I have mistaken you for another guy. I will edit my previous post right away
Don't expect an answer from S14 as you seem to keep RANDOMLY putting words in capital letters.
I did not find the list of things you could do. You seem to have no clue, and been brainwashed by the cruise authorities (maybe they promised to allow you drive the FOX if you were defending them ?
).Speaking of things to do, where are the acheivements you speak about ? Cruising slowly with the UF1 at 40mph though a track to get bonus, for 12.000.000 laps, to gather enough money to buy the dreaded FZR? And then pop up in joy. (Pretty much like this video : http://www.kamazutra.be/video-106.wow.html Nothing sexual here, just a guy reaching level 60 in WoW). Then asking ourself : what's next ? The guy can't drive the FZR, as he is used to the UF1, and be passed by a guy in the XRG... lame.
Meanwhile, for the same amount of time spent on a cruise server, you could have started hotlapping with the FZR for no time investment, and with the same amount of time, you might have gotten a WR by now...
As I said before, the graphics-addicted are not the market LFS aims for. Live For Speed aims for racing enthusiasts. That is why if Live For Speed improved drastically its graphics engine, it would not change much the increase in subscribers nor would it make the racers happy, because it is a "formal" upgrade, not a "fondamental" upgrade.
It is true that when you change the packaging of a product, it creates some enthusiams, but when people realize that they are not that happier with the package (everywhere in the world but the US
), they come back in the same state they were in.The fondamental upgrades Live For Speed needs are physics and content. The physics are pretty decent now, but adding new content would definetely buy the devs some more time to work on the physics. For instance, an original venue (narrow, twisty track/kart track/etc), with the car that is the best for it (LMP or WRC or go-kart), would make racers focus on it, and not on the lack of development.
Maybe it has never changed, but why shouldn't it ? If you read carefully my post about the lifespan of a firm/product, you'll see that change isn't only beneficial, it is mandatory for the healthy life of a firm/product. LFS gets changes pretty often and this results with a boost of subscriptions that day. However, if the change was made about the team (like an increase in number), this would work as an investment : Scavier might sacrifice a bit of its quality of work environment, but on the other hand, LFS would develop faster and Scavier will acheive faster their goals and their dream to make LFS the best racing simulator ever.
Last edited by Zen321, .
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG