Quote from Racer Y :

Is there a "race track generator" type program? Like what the news media uses for articles is a program called wordsmith. Automated articles formed by the computer using only a few key words and phrases. Is there some sort of software like that out there? Or does every last bit have to be coded? I know there are add-ons for CAD that do that with pipelines and electrical conduit - as well as parking lots.

Well, it's not "random" per se but could interest you.
Take a look.

Very neat idea.

http://store.steampowered.com/app/388980

Quote from MyBoss :

I would gladly take a map pack for lets say, £6. Two/three new tracks with various combos and variations.
That wouldnt require a whole revamp of the simulator (less work), but still adding more quality content and generate both income and activity.

I would think ALOT of people would buy a little map pack if it were available.

Heck, I would gladly pay £12 for 3 new tracks.

All I know is that Bose has done an amazing job, very well done indeed mate.
Next month I"ll be sending a donation your way.

Thanks a lot.

Survey filled.

Quote from Neilser :

It's a while since I last ran my own host, but you aren't exactly inundated with answers so here goes with a couple of suggestions

I suspect (rather than know) that the symptoms you mention in your post a few up the thread are telling us that one of the two protocols is working (e.g. TCP?) and the other isn't. (Or it could be that one or more of the four combinations of protocol/direction is bust, e.g. UDP/outbound.) If I were debugging it myself I'd try two things - firstly install Wireshark and catch the relevant packets & conversations, and secondly to try to connect from a second PC on the same router in case that makes the symptoms any easier to understand/debug.
Good luck!

Thanks dude, I've installed Wireshark and am trying to understand how it works/I can interpret what it's logging...

I just can't wrap my head around this. I used to be able to host servers without an issue in the past.

I've contacted my ISP and made sure that the LFS ports are not blocked in any way as well. No dice yet anyhow...

I think I"ll offer a 10 dollar reward for whoever gets to the bottom of this and allow me to host servers again, maybe I"ll get lucky, I don't know.

Quote from Yisc[NL] :

I had the same problem and asked my brother to look into it (he is the admin of the linux server we have at home).
After some research, he noticed that traffic goes out from your client to the internet, goes through the master server and then back into your home to try and reach the dedicated server.
In the end he made a special route to get it to work (which wasn't straight forward), but I can't tell you the details, because I don't know them.
If you want to host and play at the same time, it's easier to host a server from within the normal client, instead of a dedicated host.

Well thanks... but I just made a test and hosted from the game itself (not the DEDI .exe), asked for a friend to login into the server and he gets the same error I do: "Connect timed out".

Quote from Yisc[NL] :

I had the same problem and asked my brother to look into it (he is the admin of the linux server we have at home).
After some research, he noticed that traffic goes out from your client to the internet, goes through the master server and then back into your home to try and reach the dedicated server.
In the end he made a special route to get it to work (which wasn't straight forward), but I can't tell you the details, because I don't know them.
If you want to host and play at the same time, it's easier to host a server from within the normal client, instead of a dedicated host.

Well thanks... but I just made a test and hosted from the game itself (not the DEDI .exe), asked for a friend to login into the server and he gets the same error I do: "Connect timed out".

Just as a heads up, I'm STILL having the exact same problem.
Fresh Windows 7 64 bits copy, everything unlocked/allowed/forwarded and I still can't connect even to my OWN server on my LOCAL machine.

This is maddening.

I can join fine other servers.
I even tried changing some UDP settings on the network card but to no avail.

This is getting maddening...
I can't even connect to my own local server.

Formatted windows (Win 7 64bits), fresh copy...
All ports forwared on the router and I jus't cant connect to my own server, hosted on my own machine...

All set on Windows Firewall as well.
Still, I get the timed out message.

What now?

Quote from cargame.nl :

Sounds like you did all necassary steps....

You also tried an older version?
https://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=80523

Yeah, I did.
Actually I had an older version (with a GUI, just like this one you linked to) which always worked for me. I started a server and had the same issues I'm having as of now.

So I downloaded the latest dedicated server and the problems are still there.

The version you linked to me seem to be "working" (it says Status: ON LINE - I don't know how much that's worth) but when I try to connect to it (I'm on 0.6E) it says that "Host has a different game code" and then I can't join.

The server (from the link you sent me) keeps saying "Send Track: ipnumber" to a very odd IP address, certainly not mine, starting with 37.242.xxx.x





Edit: Seems to me that short of formatting the HDD and buying a new modem/router I've got yet to try a clean LFS install with a clean dedicated server on top of it. I"ll try that over here now. Will report back.

Edit2: Well, same thing happens with a fresh LFS install/unlock and latest Dcon.exe
Man, that's weird.

Edit3: Did a hard reset on the router, forwarded the right ports all over again and... still the same issue. Turned off the windows firewall, same thing.
I've got no anti virus or anything else that could mess up with this.

Last edited by Meanie, Thu, 20 Feb 2014 00:13.

Guys, help me please.
All the necessary ports on the router (DD-WRT) are open, .exes allowed on the Win7 firewall...

The weird thing is that I used to host servers just fine some time ago.
Had some problems to host other games, opened up the correct ports on the router and they all worked but for LFS something must be missing, I just don't see what!

To Recap things: static IP set on the .cfg file (/ip=mystaticlanip).
Ports 63392 and 29339 open both on UDP and TCP protocols...
Server set to show on master list (/usemaster=yes)
.exes allowed to access the internet on the Win7 Firewall

What else could I be missing?

The server does not show on the master list and I can't access it even from the same machine on which the server is hosted...

When I or anyone try to login the Dcon.exe shows "Guest wants to join" and after a while the client sees "Connect timed out".

If I try to connect it on the same machine via local network using the static LAN ip I get the "ClientConnect: connect failed".

Used a program called "PFPortChecker" to check if the ports are open and both ports are, on both protocols...

This is bugging me a lot.

Don't really know what to do. Any help would be pretty welcome.
Thanks.

I'm definitely not smart enough as I'm having the same issue.
All the necessary ports on the router (DD-WRT) are open, .exes allowed on the Win7 firewall...

The weird thing is that I used to host servers just fine some time ago.
Had some problems to host other games, opened up the correct ports on the router and they all worked but for LFS something must be missing, I just don't see what!

To Recap things: static IP set on the .cfg file (/ip=mystaticlanip).
Ports 63392 and 29339 open both on UDP and TCP protocols...
Server set to show on master list (/usemaster=yes)
.exes allowed to access the internet on the Win7 Firewall

What else could I be missing?

The server does not show on the master list and I can't access it even from the same machine on which the server is hosted...

When I or anyone try to login the Dcon.exe shows "Guest wants to join" and after a while the client sees "Connect timed out".

If I try to connect it on the same machine via local network using the static LAN ip I get the "ClientConnect: connect failed".

Used a program called "PFPortChecker" to check if the ports are open and both ports are, on both protocols...

This is bugging me a lot.

Don't really know what to do. Any help would be pretty welcome.
Thanks.

Hi

I am the proud and very satisfied owned of a triple screen setup as well. It really makes the game(s) a lot better.

Regarding your issues, I can tell you that FL!P has made an ingenious little program. I think it should solve your troubles, dude. Give it a try.

FlipCams it's called.
https://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=25674

I use it there's some 6 years now.

Hats off to the frenchie.

I'm almost sure that they improve on any given combo in time.
Just let them do lots and lots of laps with a good setup.

But yeah, they're pretty slow.

Quote from Keling :

What is the cheapest way of tracking arm movements you guys can think of? We can re-render arms in the VR world if arm tracking is available. Finger-level tracking would be better but not compulsory.

The Leap Motion is pretty amazing for this.

I think that THE FUTURE® of commercial simulation is some kind of VR a la Oculus + real time reading of your entire body with something like the Leap Motion.

With such technologies combined, it would be pretty simple to recreate, very accurately, any kind of virtual cockpit.

Even combining real dials/buttons with virtual ones.

The future gonna be amazing, folks.

Would it be a bad idea?

I for one would be willing to pay handsomely for some new cars and most importantly various tracks. A content pack, you could say.

And that is, to be added on top of S2 and work immediately with our *current* physics. Which is quite good enough at the moment and have been for the past several years...

Am I alone in this willingness?

Content, or at least fictional content (i.e- not licensed/real cars or tracks), shouldn't be more than a matter of paid work for Eric or a 3rd party? Or am I too naive in thinking on those terms?

I know, I also think that the devs are pretty against this kind of thing, from what I could experience here on these last 6-7 years.

But, with kickstarter, the devs could just assign a sum of money and we then would shoot for it. Reaching it, we get the content we so very badly crave for our simulator.

Not reaching it, the money won't be charged from the backers and so, no harm done.


Thoughts?

I sincerely hope that you enjoy your bday, Vic!

Hi Nolan, take a look at this thread.

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=41308

If you don't manage to find it's place, send me a PM (cause I go for weeks not viewing this forum nowadays), I"ll get an e-mail notification of it and I"ll take a picture from the internals of my G25 for you, then you"ll be able for sure to place it correctly.

Cheers

I know that Scawen is trying to reproduce as best as possible in the real time model the reactions of the complex not-real-time tyre simulator that he developed and is a lot more advanced than our current tyre physics engine.

It's all about CPU work-load, it seems.

If that's the case, I don't understand* why LFS code still use just 1 core.
Nowadays 2 cores are pretty much the norm.
With many people with 4 core cpus and even some with 6 cores!




* I understand it would take quite some time to "update" our current lfs code to use multiple cores but it will have to be done at some point, right?
Why not now? Since we're already stalling there's many years and I guess it would help immensely the new real time engine physics code to be viable...

troy: Old tyres have a lot more grip during turns too, it's not only a straight line speed advantage. It's overall "grippier".

rageshgr: Even slick tyres only get better and better with usage...

They don't "wear out" the tyres on the new hotlaps because by doing so, you would lose the perfect SPREAD of optimum temperature (as in, the inner, middle and outer edge and the inside of the tyre too! all in perfect optimum temperature at the same time), which plainly just do not happen ever on a realistic/regular/normal racing situation. Ever.

So yeah, having this unrealistic (I'm not moaning against it at all, even Scawen admitted that this - temperature wise - is a somewhat half cooked solution for the time being) excellent spread of emperature on the tyres is worth a LOT more than a few minutes of the tyres worn out.

You can even notice that the faster you start the lap, the better (and lots of people - using the new starting point option - do just that). Why? Again, because you don't want to lose the perfect temperature spread.

So I don't think it's really comparable.

As I said, ask any endurance team driver about this.
For some reason, older tyres on LFS, are a lot grippier (and therefore, faster) than brand new tyres.

And when I say older tyres, I mean tyres at least after their "half point" lifetime-wise, so to speak. The tyres on LFS are on their best and grippiest behavior just before the tyres go.

Say 10min before they go flat because of lack of rubber on them.
Before they start to "freeze" and whatnot.

With a heavier car (say 30% fuel on a FO8) you will run a lot faster on old tyres but around optimum temperature than a light car with brand new tyres (say, 10% fuel - same car), those last also on optimum temperature.

It's really obvious the difference.
I suggest you to run some long stints and see this for yourself.
I don't think anyone can miss it.

Again, considering the SAME temperature on the tyres:
To have a very old tyre (near it's death point) perform closely to a brand new tyre would be very weird. But even weirder is what we have now, with the older tyre outperforming the brand new tyre!

Any endurance (or anyone really that uses his tyres near the point of plain running out of rubber on them) driver to comment on this?

Quote from DANIEL-CRO :

I dont think that worn tyre have better grip, before in hotlaping drivers used to wear their tyre to heat them up to optimum temperature
If you take a look into some new WRs (with tyre heaters), youll see that no one wear out his tyres, because they are already at optimum temperature, best grip with unweared tyres not to talk that most WRs times are lowered by 0.2 s with new tyre heaters

They don't for 2 reasons:

1) The replays have a limit now, which doesn't allow enough time for them to wear out the tyres as they used to do before.

2) The tyre blankets allow a pretty optimal temperature spread (as in, the optimum temp. on the whole surface of the tyre), so it has a lot more grip than a "regular" tyre (with cambers not allowing for such a spread and some good difference between the inside and surface temperature of the tyre) at optimal temperature for the compound in regular/realistic conditions.

In short, the tyre blankets are quite artificial/unrealistic.
It's not the case that new tyres suddenly have better grip than old tyres.

I'm still pretty sure that worn out tyres have a lot more grip than brand new tyres, comparing them with the same temperature and spread across the tyre surface and it's inner temperature.

Ask any endurance team driver.

I don't know if a worn out tyre on LFS reduces the car top speed...
I'm almost certain that what happens is the exact opposite.

What I'm definitely certain of is that a worn out tyre has a lot more grip than a brand new one. Which is know and well discussed about there's some years now.

I'm just happy that you guys seem to be trying to understand why is that and how to solve it.

Because I've never seen an old racing tyre having more grip than a brand new one.
It's really weird and non intuitive.

A triple screen setup always helps too!

I'm waiting on a update for your wonderful program too, Rotareneg.
If you can help us, please do so.

Thanks!