@KingOfIce
Win7 64, python 3.7 installed, can run python command from cmd, so everything fine with env variables. strange it got to look for python inside temp folder.
Also at first it asked for api-ms-win-core-path-l1-1-0.dll, so i found it and put in windows\System32 folder.
Glad you are willing to help. I want time difference so bad, and your counterpant LfsLazy shows it only after sector 1, which is lame.
Win7 64, python 3.7 installed, can run python command from cmd, so everything fine with env variables. strange it got to look for python inside temp folder.
Also at first it asked for api-ms-win-core-path-l1-1-0.dll, so i found it and put in windows\System32 folder.
Glad you are willing to help. I want time difference so bad, and your counterpant LfsLazy shows it only after sector 1, which is lame.
Hey guys! Plugin is great, but can it somehow show time difference right after crossing the line and not only after first sector?
cr*p! if its saudi prince ddos can last for years!
Can we at least see an example of this "racism"? Are we suffering for a severe case or some SJW bullc**p?
the real question is, after spending some hours and being this far and knowing spending 3x-4x-5x time on a game will definitely push your results further, is this really what you want to spend time on? Because dedicated practicing would feel more like investment rather than entertainment. In games with larger player base one can find opponents of any level pretty easily and get entertainment right now.
In lfs you should go through ~month of frustration, before you'll likely be 4-6th in PB chart in a race of 12 people. and you will have like 1-2 players of your level to compete with. the 'pros' will have their own race at the same time on the same track, n00bs will have their own in the tail, and crashers will be the cherry on a cake.
And, one more thing. Setup (the right one, for you) matters more than you think. also, if you're playing with the mouse mouse acceleration and sensitivity matters too. Fine-tuning your wheel if you play wheel - matters even more.
In lfs you should go through ~month of frustration, before you'll likely be 4-6th in PB chart in a race of 12 people. and you will have like 1-2 players of your level to compete with. the 'pros' will have their own race at the same time on the same track, n00bs will have their own in the tail, and crashers will be the cherry on a cake.
And, one more thing. Setup (the right one, for you) matters more than you think. also, if you're playing with the mouse mouse acceleration and sensitivity matters too. Fine-tuning your wheel if you play wheel - matters even more.
skill acquisition is actually a very interesting question. especially in computer gaming, where large massifs of data can be collected relatively easly. Can be, but i'm yet to find someone did that 
For example, if researches took hundred of people novice to simracing, make them play lfs one track one car for an hour every day for a month, no quitting allowed. What would be the median? Other distribution functions? Whats the effect of former experience in other activities, like different types of games, real life driving, some physical sports etc.
For example, if researches took hundred of people novice to simracing, make them play lfs one track one car for an hour every day for a month, no quitting allowed. What would be the median? Other distribution functions? Whats the effect of former experience in other activities, like different types of games, real life driving, some physical sports etc.
i understand in multiplayer only some packets are sent within some time intervals, but on user's machine actual simulation is happening, with opponents car as obstacles. I mean, its always server synchronizing to user, making cars jump and jitter. On a client side client car moves smoothly as if it was hotlap just with abruptly moving obstacles of other player's.
Client can alter parameters whatever he wants, but if client is obliged to store his input during the race, which is then sent to the server, server would have: initial car setup, client's input, moving obstacles (other cars) positions which server itself was sending to the client - there is no unknown parameters, we just re-run the sim on the server - and if there is a difference more then 1-2 meter at the end of the race (or we could shrink it to per-lap check) player either sent wrong setup, changed it during the race, altered positions his client was sending or any other trick. Basically the only way to overcome this system (to generate a valid user input which is in sync with all the hacking) would be to write a driving bot faster then native lfs AI, which seems like pretty non-trivial task to put it mildly.
Client can alter parameters whatever he wants, but if client is obliged to store his input during the race, which is then sent to the server, server would have: initial car setup, client's input, moving obstacles (other cars) positions which server itself was sending to the client - there is no unknown parameters, we just re-run the sim on the server - and if there is a difference more then 1-2 meter at the end of the race (or we could shrink it to per-lap check) player either sent wrong setup, changed it during the race, altered positions his client was sending or any other trick. Basically the only way to overcome this system (to generate a valid user input which is in sync with all the hacking) would be to write a driving bot faster then native lfs AI, which seems like pretty non-trivial task to put it mildly.
validity of hotlap replays and multiplayer
i read somewhere replays in lfs is not just some positions stored, but actually a simulation based on recorded user input.
So if i understand this correctly, its a 100% guarantee no cheating was happening if replay is valid and doesnt give any OOS messages, right?
Would it be a bad idea to store kind of multiplayer 'hotlap', parallel offline recording of user input, actual positions and interaction feedback from other players, which then is sent to the server and checked after the race for validity?
Its not a suggestion or request since i understand there are plenty of top-priority things. Just a theoretical fabrications.
So if i understand this correctly, its a 100% guarantee no cheating was happening if replay is valid and doesnt give any OOS messages, right?
Would it be a bad idea to store kind of multiplayer 'hotlap', parallel offline recording of user input, actual positions and interaction feedback from other players, which then is sent to the server and checked after the race for validity?
Its not a suggestion or request since i understand there are plenty of top-priority things. Just a theoretical fabrications.
i don't get people wanting new physics so bad.. It is already better than any other sim.
Speculars (maybe take a look at pbr) and richer lightmaps really will bring new life to the graphical part.
Speculars (maybe take a look at pbr) and richer lightmaps really will bring new life to the graphical part.
Is LFS just a hobby project for its creators?
Is LFS just a hobby project for its creators? Its a pity if it is...
I have no experience with real life sport cars, but damn, lfs is the only simulator you feel like you driving a heavy piece of metal on a rubber. It totally looks and feels like an honest finite element simulation, but by some magic performs x10000 faster. I understand its an approximation with like a dozen force vectors, but damn, isnt it a know-how that should have ended up in some big-ass game with plenty of real tracks and millions players? SAD
I have no experience with real life sport cars, but damn, lfs is the only simulator you feel like you driving a heavy piece of metal on a rubber. It totally looks and feels like an honest finite element simulation, but by some magic performs x10000 faster. I understand its an approximation with like a dozen force vectors, but damn, isnt it a know-how that should have ended up in some big-ass game with plenty of real tracks and millions players? SAD
oh, i've got where some misunderstanding might come from. Thats historic blackwood, there is no chicane, we both driving a STRAIGHT line from the first screenshots.
well, i do not come here with the attitude "people faster than me, so they must be cheaters". Just some simple questionable statements. Exit at higher speed, straight line, etc. What can be done wrong? I know im bad at arcing, but straight line.. c'mon.
Though im completely satisfied with the answer that setup matters more than i thought.
Edit: btw, just checked, pro AI doing 1:16:something this track. Also thats my best result (probably my "something" > than AI's but still ). So basically humans pulling 1:13 lap after lap performing much better than a robot. Faith in humanity regained
Though im completely satisfied with the answer that setup matters more than i thought.
Edit: btw, just checked, pro AI doing 1:16:something this track. Also thats my best result (probably my "something" > than AI's but still
). So basically humans pulling 1:13 lap after lap performing much better than a robot. Faith in humanity regained
Last edited by justadroover, .
well, its very subtle and i admit it barely distinguishable. Almost all top guys shows this behavior, so its either setup or...
We both already was moving straight for some meters before the segment start point, i have 6km\h greater speed, but he has a better exit? really?
yeah, had a good exit but.. 6 kph slower. and im counting when we both already started a straight line.
Either car setup REALLY gives huge advantage or...
...servers are ridden with cheaters. Barely noticeable, but gives them 2-3 sec on a lap.
I started this straight segment with 110, reached 214 max.
other guy, started 104, reached 218 at the same point of track.
SETUP or HACK? BEGINNERS - BE AWARE.
P.S. Just like bodybuilding: no one use steroids, but everyone's juiced )) a miracle
I started this straight segment with 110, reached 214 max.
other guy, started 104, reached 218 at the same point of track.
SETUP or HACK? BEGINNERS - BE AWARE.
P.S. Just like bodybuilding: no one use steroids, but everyone's juiced )) a miracle
Last edited by justadroover, .
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG