The online racing simulator
What I'm trying to achieve is to make reasonably sure that when Airio recognizes some open track + layout configuration as a custom track, it will indeed be that one specific custom track, the same one on all Airios. When you have standard AS1 track, the game itself makes sure it is everywhere the same track, using the same parts of the AS site. However, this is more complicated with custom tracks. But still e.g. A11 should be the same under all Airios. But because it uses a layout, that anyone can change, making sure it really is A11 requires sometimes layout adjustments and always layout checks.

True, the path files can to a large extent make sure the "official" custom track lap times are consistent and correct, that WRs stored on AIRW are indeed the correct times. But path files alone cannot make sure the loaded layout conforms to A11 (or whatever) specifications. And I do not think you'll be happy to join a server with A11 (as reported by Airio Servers page), finding out it is actually a different track. Also, I can imagine ways some people may inadvertently or on purpose change the path files, with possible dire results for AIRW data. And moving splits in layouts will always have highly negative results, because split times or WRs are very important for good times reporting.

I'm not sure how much those AIRW data for custom tracks will be used. But there seem to be quite a few people loving all kinds of stats. When I some time ago removed all custom car lap times, because an inconsistency was discovered, I received some really unhappy comments. With the layout checks I'm trying to avoid these possible future problems. I hope this explains why I'm going quite deep into layouts, moving splits a bit sometimes, adding restricted zones at other times, and then checking these major parts of layouts in Airio.
I'm sure you're fully on the ball as usual
Perhaps it would be useful/necessary to only allow explicitly "allowed" hosts to be shown on the Airio Servers page? (Big headache to maintain though, so maybe not worth the pain.)
Airio 2.5.6 with much better custom track support is now almost ready to be released. As I was explaining earlier, for this support it is very important to make sure correct layout is loaded. Correct layout, as recognized by Airio (and later by an intermediate application, if one is ever created) has two qualities: 1) Appropriate name (e.g. AS1Y_A12, which makes A12R track), and 2) all splits (and restricted zones) at the expected predefined absolute locations.

Overall, it would mean Airio does not care if some objects are added or removed from the default LYTs, but split count must not change, splits must not be moved, and predefined restricted zones must not be (re)moved. The default splits and zones must be defined such as to make sure the right sections of an open site have to be always used, even if some/all barriers are removed. I hope this makes sense.

As I was mentioning earlier, I had to adjust a bit some of default LYTs to adhere to the requirements, like moving a split to some other side of an intersection, or adding one more split somewhere, or defining certain restricted zones. This has left me with the appended set of default supported LYTs, that will be recognized and accepted by Airio, forming new custom tracks.

If you have time, please take a look at the layouts, we still have time for updates. However, when Airio 2.5.6 with the LYTs is released, it would not be possible anymore to change freely splits/zones, because that would create incompatibilities. So please review the split/zone positions, because they are most important. Any comments/ideas etc. are most welcome.

Just imagine there are no objects except the splits/zones in a layout and see if there are alternative ways around the open track that could give someone an advantage. If so, we should update the LYT so that this is not possible - by moving a split, adding a split, or adding a restricted zone. I can then update Airio hard-coded values to recognize only the updated LYT as the correct one.

Here's the list of my comments to individual custom tracks that are supported now, where I did some changes:
  • A21, A21R - The split was moved to make sure correct track section is used. But maybe it should be moved still further up (to the north)?
  • A23, A23R - Added one more split line to this relatively long track, again marking a required track section.
  • K32, K32R - Moved one split to another oval section.
  • F25, F25R - Moved one split to the mini-oval (but maybe it should be on the farthest point there?) and added a restricted zone close to the tree island.
  • F21, F21R - Renamed to F51 and F51R to stress the fact it is a rallycross track. (Hm, maybe the split should be actually moved, or better yet, one more added?)
  • F52, F52R - Rallycross Alternate track, going the other way around the tree island, with a restricted zone on the inside.
  • B23, B23R - Major changes here, basically a completely remade layout. It has restricted zones and barriers preventing cars going directly through grass, for 2 reasons: 1) Using grass always invalidates AIRW laps, it is never a proper way to race, and 2) going straight to the big jump may be fun, but then it is not a racing track, it is pure demolition track. If the original layout creators insist on having it open, without zones, then I propose to change this layout name to B24. Note that if you want, you can change anything in the layout, except splits (position, width) and restricted zones (position, diameter).
Finally, here's the list of tracks I'd like to support in the near future. To me, these seem to be usable, interesting and sufficiently different from the existing tracks:
  • F21 - proposed new track instead of rallycross (F51 now), combination of F22 and F13
  • F24
  • K21
  • A16 - ideally I'd love to call this track A14, so that there is A11-A14 and A21-A24
  • A24
And here's the preliminary list of tracks I do not plan to support for various reasons (too jumpy, too similar to existing tracks, too complicated):
  • B21, B22
  • F12, F13, F14
  • F22, F23
  • K33
  • A15
  • A25, A26, A27, A28, A29
Attached files
AirioLYTs.zip - 18.1 KB - 699 views
Quote from EQ Worry :


And here's the preliminary list of tracks I do not plan to support for various reasons (too jumpy, too similar to existing tracks, too complicated):
  • B21, B22
  • F12, F13, F14
  • F22, F23
  • K33
  • A15
  • A25, A26, A27, A28, A29

It is never too jumpy...

Then OTC will not be perfect

F12, K33 are so awesome

But it is okay (and just a plan right? )
A16 South & South Rev - update
I have updated both A16 tracks. I have replaced the keep left/right signs with corner markers, added some additional lines and made some other minor changes. You can see some of them in the attachments.

If you like it, you can include it into the official pack.
Attached images
A16_1.jpg
A16_2.jpg
A16_3.jpg
Attached files
AS1Y_A16_South.lyt - 1.9 KB - 784 views
AS1Y_A16_South Rev.lyt - 2.1 KB - 737 views
Quote from UnknownMaster21 :But it is okay (and just a plan right? )

Right, just a plan. And what is OTC?

Yesterday's additions: K21, F21 (not in official pack, just as FE4, but without FE1 Cadet part and with mini-oval).
Quote from EQ Worry :Right, just a plan. And what is OTC?

Yesterday's additions: K21, F21 (not in official pack, just as FE4, but without FE1 Cadet part and with mini-oval).

OTC = Open Track Configuration
Quote from UnknownMaster21 :OTC = Open Track Configuration

Right!

I've been working on some more tracks, making path files, checking the layouts (adjusting a bit sometimes), adding support into Airio 2.5.6. These new tracks are done now: A16, A24, F15 (F12 + way around the tree island), F24 (minioval). While doing this I've noticed a few troublesome things:

F24R: Why go all around the FE3 track when doing the mini-oval in the opposite direction? I've changed the layouts so that both (F24 and F24R) use FE2X (going to the left from the pits, shortest way to the minioval), indicating the direction to join the oval using some layout objects. B23(R) is done in this way too.

A16R: There's a flaw in the split/finish line placement. From race start to split 1 it is actually faster than from finish to split 1, which is wrong, because then server best lap would always be someone's 1st lap. It is probably needed to make sure that on all tracks cars first cross finish line, then go to split lines and then back to finish line. I'll go through the strange layouts (where start is actually outside the race path) and do some corrections, probably moving splits, even if that means finish is on an opposite side of track...
Quote from EQ Worry :Right!

I've been working on some more tracks, making path files, checking the layouts (adjusting a bit sometimes), adding support into Airio 2.5.6. These new tracks are done now: A16, A24, F15 (F12 + way around the tree island), F24 (minioval). While doing this I've noticed a few troublesome things:

F24R: Why go all around the FE3 track when doing the mini-oval in the opposite direction? I've changed the layouts so that both (F24 and F24R) use FE2X (going to the left from the pits, shortest way to the minioval), indicating the direction to join the oval using some layout objects. B23(R) is done in this way too.

A16R: There's a flaw in the split/finish line placement. From race start to split 1 it is actually faster than from finish to split 1, which is wrong, because then server best lap would always be someone's 1st lap. It is probably needed to make sure that on all tracks cars first cross finish line, then go to split lines and then back to finish line. I'll go through the strange layouts (where start is actually outside the race path) and do some corrections, probably moving splits, even if that means finish is on an opposite side of track...

for F24R... lol

for A16R... Would it be possible to add one more split?
Quote from ATHome :Thanks, but I've found a .psd file with paths that did the job.

Here is my idea what I think will be a nice track based on Aston


Btw, if making this for AS1Y_A17_Sprint 3 (or whatever it would called) , it would use AS1 pit, however, it would be only same situation as in A16 (which means no reverse configuration)

I did not noticed is there kind of this but I give a support for this

I can also make a layout for this track, it should not be hard


EDIT: I just want to add that think about this! 2 hairpins and fast track anyway! I love it even more than Oval :P
Forgot to reply yesterday At least I put my reply in a text document though for future use

Thanks for that Flame, but we'd actually edited that bit in the 2nd picture for A12, just hadn't transferred the armco/tyres etc to A16 Though it had a bit too many objects for my liking, we used the chalk in the first picture, cheers.

EQ, a lot to take in so we'll be going through it all shortly But A21-3 seem fine, and I've attached A11-19 (including renaming 16 to 14 - also moved the splits to the opposite for each direction). Splits seem to be perfect for stopping cutting - and just to confirm, you can tell where the splits/restricted areas are via Airio?

As for B23/R, we realise it's not exactly something you'd hold a MoE race on, but for short fun races it's great and it'll be staying in the pack. Adding massive barrier protrusions from the two most exciting corners spoils it - the jump is even more dangerous from one side and from the other the jump turns it into a gentle hill! The other corner is arguably even more dangerous now with even less space to manoeuvre. Though if you want it to be added as B24 let us know.

Regards the .pth files - a shame you aren't able to do K33 - it's the longest config and I think being used for the 16 hour race - maybe give it a try at some point

KY32 seems fine as well, thanks.
Attached files
OpenTrackLayouts20110713Aston1x.zip - 19.6 KB - 708 views
base layout for A17
On earlier posts what I have showed for a suggest, here is a base layout. Someone else can continue it as I do not have time to make it finished, sorry about that tho


AS1X_A17 (Banana phone map)


EDIT: yes, X and NOT Y
Attached files
AS1X_A17.lyt - 2.2 KB - 763 views
Thanks for the responses and ideas! A17 seems cool, and I do not see why there could not be an R version. There are several tracks already with start outside the racing path and with layout objects to point cars to the right direction at the 1st intersection. True, there can always be confusion, people going shortly the wrong way, but with PTH files there's the wrong way spectate feature, also WRONG WAY message showing in the latest Airio.

Concerning layout edits, I'm afraid we could be soon working in several parallel lines, confusing everyone. As I said already, any changes to the layouts supported by Airio are possible, except adding/removing/moving split lines and removing/moving restricted zones, if defined. LFS patch 0.6A+ is sending complete layout info (all objects) on layout load, so yes, Airio is directly checking the actual split/zones positions, comparing it to internal hard-coded values.

Again, I'm appending all layouts currently supported/recognized by Airio. It is the split/finish/zone positions and dimensions that matter for now, everything else can be changed. But we need to agree on the split/finish/zone positions now, future changes will be nearly impossible.

Unrestricted B23 can never have AIRW best lap times, because going through grass always invalidates the lap. So I guess B24 is the way to go. K33 is certainly doable, I'll try to have a look at it soon.
Hi, maybe I didn't make myself clear enough in the previous post, so I'll explain it again

Basically, I checked the splits, etc. on A11-13, everything seemed fine. I noticed you mentioned A16/R, and how you wanted it as A14, and also Flame's post, so I worked on that on that one, and fixed the "first lap is the fastest" issue as well. I also had a couple of other layouts sitting about that weren't complete, as well as the old A14&15 so I finished those off, much easier just to keep doing the same kind of stuff when you can copy objects across. Then I zipped them up and posted them for you/anyone else - from the 4 you have in your v10 zip, only A13, A12R and obviously A16(now 14) have changed.

If you just want the ones in your zip checked (which I assume is the case) then fine, but I obviously want to make sure all of the layouts are done correctly

As for AS21-4 they look fine in terms of splits, think there was maybe one issue with one of the longer AS2x ones but I'll fix that.

Regards B23 again , surely though, if you have a .pth file and are on the path, whether you hit the grass or not shouldn't matter?

@ UM21 - we've ran out of numbers for AS1x, unless we can do A10, so I'll make this on AS7x soon.

Anyway, checking all the splits on your layouts just now
Quote from boothy :

@ UM21 - we've ran out of numbers for AS1x, unless we can do A10, so I'll make this on AS7x soon.

Anyway, checking all the splits on your layouts just now

lol A71 then, btw the layout is 15% done only because it is only base. However, if you need help by lack of inactive or too less people, count me in, i am not that noob (I might have time for it altough I thought other)
Quote from boothy :Hi, maybe I didn't make myself clear enough in the previous post, so I'll explain it again

Hehe, well, I just want to stay in synch. We need to check the splits of all the layouts supported by Airio. The splits (and if necessary also restricted zones) must be positioned so that no cheats (shorter, faster ways) are possible on the track, even when all barriers are removed. The we're reasonably save with all the custom track lap times. Other objects do not matter now, I believe admins will be adjusting the layouts anyway, both adding and removing objects. However, to be recognized by Airio certain things must NOT change: The layout name (it must be the short version, e.g. AS2Y_A23), split/finish lines, restricted zones.

Today I was re-checking the included files, A11, A12, A13 passed without problems, A14 (former A16) did not pass. I edited this layout, moving the finish lines closer to start and the split lines too, so that the track is more evenly divided. No other changes. If you accept the update, please use this A14(R) in official pack.

Here are the tracks where I do not expect any problems:
A21, A22, A23, A24, B11, F11, F25, K21, K31, K32.

Here are the unresolved things:

B24 - B23 with grass restrictions. If still possible, I'd love to call his B21 instead of B24, because very probably this will be the only BL custom rallyx track directly supported by Airio and AIRW. The current B21 and B22 track are rather useless (my opinion), B23 can never be part of AIRW. If rename is possible, AIRW would support B11 and B21, which looks reasonable.

F15 - like F12 but going around the tree island, driveable (?), can it be part of official pack?

F51 - this was called F21, but I really think it makes more sense to call it F51 instead, also a split added.

F52 - alternate F51, going around the tree island, which seems interesting and challenging.

F21 - a new track replacing the rallyx long (called F51 now), incl. minioval and shorter right part.

F24 - minioval with access from one direction only. Note that even the long access route can be used, the important thing is to keep the split/finish line, oval direction and probably also to make sure first finish line is crossed and then split line in the 1st lap.

Overall, that's 20 custom tracks (all with R config) supported now. Appended are the complete layouts as I have them now.

PS: Sorry for the renames and edits and updates now, it is the most hectic time, but only temporarily. A lot of track to be triple checked now, some changes too, but I hope in the future this will be much simpler.
Attached files
AirioLYTs.zip - 27 KB - 652 views
I was about to post this after my previous one, but forgot :fluffy: Checked the FE layouts and I have some comments:

F15 - must've missed this one, but if you've made a .pth file we'll probably include it, also I'd rather first barrier section went straight so obviously the restricted area needs to be smaller - see attachment
F21 - restricted area in the FE3 straight on jump section - see attachment
F51&2 - should split 2 be reduced in size to only include the pitwall, or should we just add a restricted area in the pitlane (marshal pointing right ofc)?

Regards the mini-oval split, not much you can do I suppose but have it at least halfway up the hill, so yeah fine with that, unless PMD has something to say.

As for A14, fine by me
Quote from boothy :I was about to post this after my previous one, but forgot :fluffy: Checked the FE layouts and I have some comments:

F15 - must've missed this one, but if you've made a .pth file we'll probably include it, also I'd rather first barrier section went straight so obviously the restricted area needs to be smaller - see attachment
F21 - restricted area in the FE3 straight on jump section - see attachment
F51&2 - should split 2 be reduced in size to only include the pitwall, or should we just add a restricted area in the pitlane (marshal pointing right ofc)?

Regards the mini-oval split, not much you can do I suppose but have it at least halfway up the hill, so yeah fine with that, unless PMD has something to say.

As for A14, fine by me

What attachment?

For the FE6 pits? Just block it off with a barrier. Marshalls there are too risky.

Fine by me.
Oh bugger I must've closed the attachment window

Well EQ, for the FE6 pits surely the .pth file would invalidate the lap?
Attached images
f21restrictedzone.jpg
f15restrictedzones.jpg
Wow, really nice!!! )
Haaa, great, I see we're making progress! I'll check the attachments and update the LYT files if needed, then send it again. It is probable though that will have no chance to be online for the next 3 days, so please be patient concerning my responses. If you have on the other hand time to go through the other files, it would be great. When I'm back online, I'd love to release Airio 2.5.6 with all the 20 custom tracks fully supported via AIRW. The test versions so far look good, though Dave of CarGame has a tendency to always find some weak spots. But of course that is good! Concerning FE6 pitlane, if there something to be gained for people using that line?
Yes I remember when we were using it on the Z30 server that some people took to the pitlane as it gave them a better line for the next right hander, so I blocked it off with barriers.

Dave of CG is good but he does seem to have a fetish for putting lots of bales around the outside of corners
I downloaded one but how can i get to use it?
Thanks, i'm noob in this
Quote from chevy2nova66 :I downloaded one but how can i get to use it?
Thanks, i'm noob in this
  1. Download and place the layouts in your LFS/data/layout folder.
  2. Open LFS, and on the track selection screen, hold "CTRL".
  3. Then select the X or Y direction for each track.
"X" stands for the forward direction, while "Y" stands for the reverse direction.


Hope that helps.
Quote from boothy :Yes I remember when we were using it on the Z30 server that some people took to the pitlane as it gave them a better line for the next right hander, so I blocked it off with barriers. ...

OK, I updated the layouts for F15, F21 and F51/2 and I also updated Airio so that it now recognizes them as the correct ones. Appended is the current layout versions that I'm providing with Airio PROS. Anything in the layouts can be changed, except split/finish lines (no additions, removal, movements, updates are allowed) and default restricted zones (you can add new ones, but the existing ones must stay as they are).

One more note, probably too radical now, but maybe worth considering. Airio currently supports 20 new custom tracks (plus all of them with reversed versions). That is A LOT of new tracks with highly unexpected turns (for many). Many of the proposed tracks are also very similar, difference is just in one turn or part, which will no doubt keep confusing people for a long time.

But my point is that on some sites the current custom track numbering is not really helpful. For example when I see AS1 (that is all A1x tracks), I sort of expect a custom track around the AS site center, rather short one. When I see AS2 (A2x) I expect to race in the site left part, while A3x would take me further to the right. With A4/5/6x I would expect very long tracks all around the site. And A7x would hint on a custom track stretching from the middle to the right. I hope you see my point?

At present the custom track numbers are basically random, they were added as new ideas came. I'm really not sure this is such a good idea and I believe trying to adhere to what some people might expect would be much better. I read here that we're running out of A1x numbers, so A7x would be used, again just randomly, the A1x and A7x will bear no information at all concerning probable custom track location/turns.

So, to conclude, concerning the currently supported A1x tracks, A11, A12, A14 are OK. On the other hand A13 should be A71 or something, because it is much closer to AS7 than to AS1. Same applies to A15, A16, they should use AS7 as the base, not AS1. On the other hand the proposed banana track needs to be AS1 and not AS7.

Separating A2x and A3x seems to be also possible, based either on the upper parabolic curve (then A21 and A23 should be A3x in fact) or maybe rather by the bottom site part (then A22, A25, A26 should be based on AS3, while A21, A23, A24 are correctly based on AS2). A27 and A28 need to be something completely else, based on one of AS4/5/6, the one they resemble most closely.

Something very similar should be applied to FE custom tracks, but I guess the changes there are not so drastic. Would the result be worth all the renumbering? Well, as I see it, spreading the custom track names more evenly around the available open sites would be really helpful. It would help the old-timers to recognize open tracks, applying a lot of track knowledge they already have. Also voting would be more reasonable, not e.g. for 7 tracks based on AS1 and 1 track based on AS7, but for 4 tracks based on AS1 and 4 based on AS7.

So, please consider the proposal seriously. I was doing all the track paths, going through layouts a lot, and I still have no idea how most of the tracks look, where should I drive. We need to give people more hints, make the tracks more recognizable, and using names of similar standard tracks seems to be a good option.
Attached files
AirioLYTs.zip - 27 KB - 726 views

FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG