Quote from [Audi TT] :

I was molested by a smurf

Could you have posted all this in one post instead of 2 consecutive posts?

Quote from CodieMorgan :

Could you have posted all this in one post instead of 2 consecutive posts?

I could not. Since the first message I wrote before going to work. At work, the idea was born in which I outlined in my second post written by a mobile phone.

first time i saw this so posting here - tyres usually explode around 200 degrees.
then i locked my wheel while braking the flat spot showed 300 degrees and the tyre was fine so just wondering whats with that

Quote from e.M :

first time i saw this so posting here - tyres usually explode around 200 degrees.
then i locked my wheel while braking the flat spot showed 300 degrees and the tyre was fine so just wondering whats with that

Punctures are determined by average temperature in LFS, aswell as wear (flatspots included). Thats why an average of 225ºC (IIRC) pops the tire, but a spot at 300ºC doesn't.

Yea it was with Z28 too. Will be fun if you brake your BF1 @ about 320km/h to 0 and blocking the tires all the way. Got one of the tires showing 999

Someone post original VOB for FZR please - it seems like mine is corrupted ( and I dont want to redl LFS again )

D;

^ might be the reason im getting JOOSED in Z32??????

Quote from CodieMorgan :

Someone post original VOB for FZR please - it seems like mine is corrupted ( and I dont want to redl LFS again )

D;

^ might be the reason im getting JOOSED in Z32??????

http://lfsdb.500servers.net/lfs/0.5Z28/data/veh/FZ.vob

Ah thanks M8.

Only now did I realize you were A fellow deviant.

Quote from CodieMorgan :

Someone post original VOB for FZR please - it seems like mine is corrupted ( and I dont want to redl LFS again )

D;

^ might be the reason im getting JOOSED in Z32??????

Quote from Flame CZE :

http://lfsdb.500servers.net/lfs/0.5Z28/data/veh/FZ.vob

Beat me.

Just in case, here are the checksums from z28 fz.vob

CRC32: 46692652
MD5: de08d300ecfa441b3aacaafc79268635
SHA-1: 015c423793f5ed1cf2243eb9dc1148ed20abbd3d

I use this tool for checking, but there are others out there.

A quick request: Can checksums be published please? I still don't know how or why I ended up with a broken installation, but being able to check against the checksums would have helped.

Quote from Mr_Lonely :

not only for drifting,

for racers also.. skin wise..

front to rear

side to side..

+1

Yes, I also agree. As silly as it sounds, as someone who does a lot of team skins it would be very useful to be able to color the wheels individually.

Quote from Scawen :

I plan to include the speed humps from Kyoto

Would it be possible to make the widths of the speedhumps be adjustable? EG like using the 'checkpoint width' slider.

Just a suggestion

Edit; Also maybe a choice of severities? so less high bumps for the lowered cars?

Edit2; Scawen, I've noticed mouseclip doesn't work in full screen when dualscreening automatically since the new test patch, instead you must ctrl+c twice (turning off then on) before it works..

This is a bug? It happened when I hooked the red and white barrier, after which tire has played a cruel joke, and I turned. Pay attention to the indicator tires, not enough columns.

Nah, it's just that if the tires are not touching the ground the load bar is equal to zero.

The actual bug LFS has is that some bars still shows a load

Quote from [Audi TT] :

This is a bug? It happened when I hooked the red and white barrier, after which tire has played a cruel joke, and I turned. Pay attention to the indicator tires, not enough columns.

which server this layout is running at ?

I asked for it a few pages before:

Can we have more object types like curbs, 200-150-100-50m signs... just stuff for our new racing tracks

Quote from reason0809 :

which server this layout is running at ?

cargame OT

Quote from Trekkerfahrer :

I asked for it a few pages before:

Can we have more object types like curbs, 200-150-100-50m signs... just stuff for our new racing tracks

I can't add kerbs. I'm not really sure what you mean, that sounds like a track editor kind of thing, the autocross editor is really just about placing objects on top of existing tracks.

In the new system which I expect to release next week, I have included the distance to corner markers (like the ones from Aston) and the long and short speed humps from Kyoto.

I'm not taking any more requests for objects - I've spent long enough collecting them together and updating them for the new unified autocross objects file. They will require an incompatible test patch (which is needed anyway to enable qualifying and random start lights). But first (aiming for this evening) I will release a compatible patch with various fixes, excluding the new autocross objects.

I hope Z33 is the last compatible one. We then need to be in the incompatible stage for the shortest time possible so we can get the official patch out and I can get back to the tyre physics.

Quote from Scawen :

Quote from Trekkerfahrer :

I asked for it a few pages before:

Can we have more object types like curbs, 200-150-100-50m signs... just stuff for our new racing tracks

I can't add kerbs. I'm not really sure what you mean, that sounds like a track editor kind of thing, the autocross editor is really just about placing objects on top of existing tracks.

In the new system which I expect to release next week, I have included the distance to corner markers (like the ones from Aston) and the long and short speed humps from Kyoto.

...

I think what Trekkerfahrer wants are small humps or bumps. When you put them together in a curve you get the kerb. In this way layout designers car create their corners with kerb.

The hump from Kyoto seems to be too high for this.

Not so important at the moment though.

Just as a reminder:
Could we get rid of those few objects at SO (around highway-passage)?

Quote from avetere :

Just as a reminder:
Could we get rid of those few objects at SO (around highway-passage)?

I have had a look at that, because I now have the code to detect and modify the properties of segments. But I don't want to do that one, mainly because of that unconnected road surface (i.e. hole) at the end of that slip road. Also there would be some ugly shadows if I removed some of those segments.

I understand you may say that's not important, you can block off these things and you'd only drive down the road, not up, but today my focus is adding physics detection where there should be some (e.g. around the FE mini-oval) and replacing barriers where they are missing from open configs.

I'm trying to make the open configs less "flaky" so they are more up to professional standard. And that does mean blocking off things where the world of "driving in a virtual world" becomes "driving in an unfinished computer program". You see, opening that part of SO would simply enable another unfinished area. So that comes in the category of something that really needs to be updated with a real track update.

Well since we are getting incompatible test patches anyway, can't Eric update the track?

Quote from Scawen :

You see, opening that part of SO would simply enable another unfinished area. So that comes in the category of something that really needs to be updated with a real track update.

OK. That's quite understandable for the unfinished part (though I obviously hoped for another outcome), but now at least, this issue has been cleared for the moment

But how about the two barriers around that "bridgehead" (see first pic on the right) to enable the other way round up to the highway? that one seems perfectly finished and usable to me ...

No need to comment on that though, I'm perfectly willing to get the anwser as a surprise

Quote from kimd41 :

Well since we are getting incompatible test patches anyway, can't Eric update the track?

Heh, this is like talking to my 5 year old son, who asks so many questions! And here it's not good, because each person who asks a question takes yet another 5 to 10 minutes of my time, so reducing the updates I can put in today's patch. It would be better to accept what I say, because I have thought it through.

This an INTERMEDIATE patch with the same old tyre physics. That means, the old hotlaps are staying valid. It's not a good time to delete all the old hotlaps, when the tyre physics is still the same. So, we are not releasing track updates that would make all the hotlaps go out of sync.

That is quite apart from the fact that Eric is working on S3 content at the moment. I think it is ok for me to say, that he doesn't like being asked to switch from one thing to another. Some people like to switch tasks all the time - I have no choice - but Eric does not like that, he likes to stay focussed on what is is doing. This is sort of "my" patch and I don't think he really wants to be involved. Not that I have asked him - I've already explained above, we don't want to put the hotlaps out of sync. I've gone into a lot of detail how one thing led to another on the road to this patch.

So, please, try to understand, I'm working very hard to try and get a patch out today and I don't want to explain every single decision on every step of the way.

Quote from Scawen :

Heh, this is like talking to my 5 year old son, who asks so many questions!

That´s easy.. Just don´t answer questions, as you did with mine.. ( wind direction and no repair )

Okay okay, no more questions. I promise.