I was wondering, what happens with the world records after a few patches are released? The clutch damage will be introduced for example, which means no more flat shifting. Better overall damage model will be here, which would mean more careful driving and generally, the whole thing (I don't want to call it a game) will be more realistic=more difficult(=more fun though). I presume that drivers will no longer be able to have such good lap times in the future. What do you think? Is this the end of breaking world records? Or should the WR table be reset?
WRs never to be broken again?
IIRC the WRs are reset every time there is a physics incompatible patch.
exactly.
but i somewhat doubt that the leaders will be much different
I would like to stand on that with the full 75kgs of my weight and just mention that I don't think necessarily that "more realistic = more difficult". And now I'll shift my weight to someplace more comfortable.
Eactly
I agree with Xaotik. Easier might be more realistic in some cases. But I think having more oversteer-correction-snap would be more realistic and harder to catch. It's just a bit too gradual in LFS still (although everything is pretty damn good in my experience).
the formulas will be harder when they no longer slide so much imo, and with the suspension damage and clutch damage they'll become even harder to drive fast. also about the sliding theyre too easy to catch, specially the f08
then again what do I know. we'll just have to wait and see
Formula car's aren't hard to catch - LFS is about right in this regard. But all the cars lack the 'snap' as the slide is caught. Cars, open and closed wheel, do slide a lot. It's the better drivers that don't do it as much.
Suspension damage won't make the cars harder to drive at all - you'll just have to be more careful - there is a difference.
Clutch damage isn't very likely (as in it's very rare), and you don't need a clutch to change gear in real life.
Suspension damage won't make the cars harder to drive at all - you'll just have to be more careful - there is a difference.
Clutch damage isn't very likely (as in it's very rare), and you don't need a clutch to change gear in real life.
That jello wobbling feeling they got now is odd at times. The sense it gives me currently is that the contact patch is slowly moving under the wheel as the sidewalls flex into position instead of the other way around; the contact patch gripping suddenly and forcing the sidewalls to flex - which is something I visualize as happening IRL (e.g. not necessarily correct).
What do you mean by that? I bought a G25 wheel just because of the clutch pedal. Maybe you don't need it in GT cars and formulas, but you definetly need it in normal road cars (unless you're using automatic shifting, but who is?)
Actually, optimal tire slip angles vary immensely. Low profile slicks could have say optimal angles o 5-7 degrees whilst tall formula tires the angle can be as much as 13 degrees based on tire test I've seen so far.
As for the topic at hand, when physics modeling gets vastly improved (e.g. the age old turbo issues fixed), some cars would actually end up faster. The downforce cars, on the other hand, that is a much more complex issue if realistic aero behavior starts to get modeled.
The top 2 Formula cars, with their high downforce, simply slide too much ATM. The most obvious case is actually the BF-1, with its amazingly good L/D ratios and balance. IRL, excessive yaw will ruin aero and cause losses in downforce AND L/D ratio. For instance, a CFD study I saw about an Indycar saw a 7% drop in L/D and 5% drop in negative lift with only 3 degrees of yaw away from the path of airflow. Of course, RL is more complex then this, but the same trends for parameters such as negative lift and drag remain.
Th point is, too much yaw is really bad for downforce cars, so significant sliding is a definite no-no.
As for the topic at hand, when physics modeling gets vastly improved (e.g. the age old turbo issues fixed), some cars would actually end up faster. The downforce cars, on the other hand, that is a much more complex issue if realistic aero behavior starts to get modeled.
The top 2 Formula cars, with their high downforce, simply slide too much ATM. The most obvious case is actually the BF-1, with its amazingly good L/D ratios and balance. IRL, excessive yaw will ruin aero and cause losses in downforce AND L/D ratio. For instance, a CFD study I saw about an Indycar saw a 7% drop in L/D and 5% drop in negative lift with only 3 degrees of yaw away from the path of airflow. Of course, RL is more complex then this, but the same trends for parameters such as negative lift and drag remain.
Th point is, too much yaw is really bad for downforce cars, so significant sliding is a definite no-no.
I'd be very surprized to see any improvements to the damage side of LFS in the next patch. Imho the damages should be the highest priority for LFS atm (proper gearboxes, clutches and engine&drivetrain damage). LFS is so safe atm. - you need to hit the walls really hard to make the car slower. Or tap some other car and the collision detection does the rest :/
And you have the magical F10 display to make you feel even safer
Tires are pretty nice already, just fix the full throttle start issue and it is even better. Not to mention how silly it looks when with turbos you need to floor the throttle about 5 seconds before the start to get a good start.
And you have the magical F10 display to make you feel even safer
Tires are pretty nice already, just fix the full throttle start issue and it is even better. Not to mention how silly it looks when with turbos you need to floor the throttle about 5 seconds before the start to get a good start.
What's the difference in driving getting harder and having to drive more carefully. And what do you mean clutch damage not likely with the flatshifting going on?
Learn to drive then. I routinely shift up and down the gearbox in my MX-5/Miata without using the clutch, and without damaging or wearing anything. So even if your clutch fails, you are okay until you stop. The same applies to cars from the 50s, 60s 70s 80s 90s and 00s, whether they are syncro or dog boxes. The only exceptions, which I can't think of examples for, would be very odd gearboxes, or baulk syncros on 1st gear.
Harder driving is when the tyres lose grip too easily, or if the drop off in grip is unrealistically huge. I.e. normal driving, even well below the limit, is excessively difficult. See S1 for details. However, increasing the risk from hitting a wall doesn't, per se, make driving any harder. For the same effort you will go the same speed.
However, increased risk of damage means that at some corners you'll have to back off a teensy weensy bit just in case - See the last corner at Newbury in nKP (although it's damage is too easy to achieve).
I think you'd have to flat shift for about a month non-stop for clutch wear to become an issue. Engine damage yes. Gearbox damage maybe. Driveshaft problems probably. Clutch damage negligible.
you put it down well trinstan. excactly what i ment by both things, I just used too few a words apparently.
hmm, I don't get why you write "exactly" with a sad face.
Of course the best driver will set new wr's again after the reset.
Its not like they suddenly can't drive because of some adjustments in the physics.
Out of curiosity, why would you want to do this in the first place unless you already know how many RPMs each gear is spinning at given a certain speed?
Poor world records, always broken. I'll fix them one day.
Amusement
I meant exactly
Anyway - as people above says - in the future it will be harder to go on the limits of the car, because with the new damage modelling, and susbension modelling that will come, cuting curbs will be a nightmare. And therfor I hardly belive there will be anyone, or at least not many that can break today`s WR`s.
Partly for fun.
Partly for amusement
Partly to improve my skill behind a wheel, so that if my clutch did fail I could get home, or to the end of the race.
I don't get what you're referring to about clutchless shifts not being necessary if I already know the rpm? I have a big rpm gauge - what is there not to know?
Tempted to have a go at clutchless shifting in my MX now... I drag it out of gear without using the clutch when the car is off load... but never had the guts to bang it into gear without the clutch. Guess I need to grow some balls.
Don't rush it - it has syncros, so the shift is slow.
Driving along.
Apply pressure the gear lever in direction of next gear
Lift throttle, and gear will disengage
As engine revs fall and syncros match gear shaft speeds next gear will slot in.
If it grinds, use the clutch (or you could try blipping a tiny bit to have another go)
Downshifts whilst braking are harder, as you'll have to blip quite accurately. 99% I tend to use the clutch for downshifts, both in the MX and in the F3.
Driving along.
Apply pressure the gear lever in direction of next gear
Lift throttle, and gear will disengage
As engine revs fall and syncros match gear shaft speeds next gear will slot in.
If it grinds, use the clutch (or you could try blipping a tiny bit to have another go)
Downshifts whilst braking are harder, as you'll have to blip quite accurately. 99% I tend to use the clutch for downshifts, both in the MX and in the F3.
Clutchless shifting isn't that difficult at all - going up is definately easier than going down though.
On my bike i very rarely use the clutch to shift up, just unload the box slightly by backing off the throttle and then pop it up into the next gear - but i always use it for downshifting, otherwise the back wheel has a tendency to lock if you bang it down too early.
On my bike i very rarely use the clutch to shift up, just unload the box slightly by backing off the throttle and then pop it up into the next gear - but i always use it for downshifting, otherwise the back wheel has a tendency to lock if you bang it down too early.
Bike gearboxes are very different from road car gearboxes. You have more in common with a race 'box.
1
2
WRs never to be broken again?
(35 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG