Hey man. I which I had someone told me this when I was starting sim racing back in 2003. Here it goes:
- First rule is to give the tyres the most grip they can possibly have before starting to chase after car balance. You do this by adjusting Camber, pressures, spring softness. Check tyre loads and temperatures when test driving (dont worry about lap times yet). If doing a right corner, the left front must have the same temps across in-mid-out and same loads in-mid-out = good traction.
- Second rule is to never change car balance by directly removing grip from the tyres either front or rear (dont touch cambers, pressures, and keep the springs as soft as you can get away with).
- Third rule is to give the car the lowest possible center of gravity by adjusting ride height and preventing body lateral Roll (stiffen the ARB's, more on these later).
- Fourth rule is: every setup setting will have a secondary effect else where in the car! This means that every setting has two or more effects on the car. Every adjustment will be a compromise. And a fast car is a car with the correct compromises and this varies with each track!
- Fifth rule is: To win you need to keep the car on-track at all times. Tweak your dampers (shocks) according to the track kerbs if you need to cross them to go fast. If they are very high, soften the bump and rebound. If they are low kerbs, harden the bump and rebound because having them hard will limit car pitch (rule4!) (Pitch is weight transfer front to back and vice-versa. High pitch movements will cause either understeer or oversteer when accelerating or breaking).
- Sixth rule is, you are here to go fast around a track and for that you need a car that complies and matches the track layout and your driving style (if you need to make the car slower to go faster, you need to change your style).
This is called changing the car balance and its basically fixing either understeer in entry-mid-outer corner or oversteer in entry-mid-outer corner. Those corners will be tight, long, short etc. Tweak the balance for the most common type of corner you have in the track. Remember rule 2!
So, now you have a car with perfect individual tyre grip, but the car understeers/oversteers. How to fix it? Remember rule 2 and 4! use the secondary effect of altering car height to shift the center of mass to the front or rear! make the front higher than the rear to fix some oversteer by bringing the center of mass backwards, and the opposite to fix understeer. If this harmless tweak didn't help, learn about TOE-in/TOE-out. Positive TOE in the rears will help oversteer! negative TOE in the fronts will help understeer, and so will negative toe in the rear. Altering TOE will have secondary effects. Rule 4! Tyre temperature and wear can go higher, and high-speed stability (wobbling) can occur.
If you still have understeer/oversteer, you will need to understand Anti-roll-bars here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFGkZNrNTIE
Once you understand what ARBs do, they are the next setting to alter! But ARBs are also full of compromises (rule4!). So understand that video and remember what they are. They can fix many balance problems. If you dont have anti-roll bars in the car, rule4 and 5!
There are many settings that are equally harmless to the tyre grip but have to be used together with driving technique, such as differential preloads, brake bias. Use them.
If all else fails, you will need to break rule 1 and 2. You will need to drop tyre grip in either the fronts or rears to fix the balance. This is still acceptable because the objective is to go fast, and for that you need balance, even at the expense of some tyre grip.
The S2 release was the most exciting thing I have ever witnessed in the internet on par with UT2003. That's the origin of my avatar. Pressing F5 until the finger bled waiting the S2 to go live.
You could leave Vsync on, but cap the framerate at 59 or 60hz. This will impede vsync from buffering another frame before displaying the image on screen (it cuts 16.6ms of latency). It becomes very acceptable
I presume nobody has this saved on the deep confines of their pre-historic HDD's sitting rusty on an attic alongside boxes filled with gaming magazines, and state of the art components such as Radeon's X1950's, Athlons 64s, 17" CRT's, perhaps?
I agree. And AC developers didn't start with that many resources. Assetto only got big in the last year or two. It sold enough in the beginning to fund the licensing of many cars/ tracks, visuals sounds, and even resources to develop/publish on Console.
LFS needs money to evolve. Steam would bring fresh money. Word of mouth did its course, and searching for LFS keywords on racing forums no longer brings any hit
But you have to understand that value is attached to cost, and most of us got their value back many times over the course of 5 years since it released (when it peaked). For the consumer the game ran its course. For the developer at this point in time, he should be on its 3rd of 4th generation of the game.
Interesting to see that one of the heavy hitters of today, Assetto Corsa, compared to LFS has a horsesh*t multiplayer environment and an even worse netcode. It wasn't until last week that finally, finally the collisions were sort of fixed, finally allowing some close racing on a racing game!
Until some member presented Kunos with server/client telemetry demonstrating the horrible netcode, the developers stance was: "everything is fine, the problem is that you don't understand physics"..
Thats why i think that Scawen might still have a chance to revive LFS.
Put it on steam, collect some money, invest on visuals/sounds/content/mods, and it might take off.
whats the current state? everything worked last time i picked the game some 5 years ago. Honest question.
consumers trash broken games ratings on steam (deservingly so!), but not perfectly functional games. Not liking the graphics/sounds hardly warrants that kind of review, least of all on Indy titles like this one certainly classifies as.
With an audience of 10 million active users, is hard to understand why "any" game chooses to not be there at all.
I would understand the hesitance on selling the game in there if the game was flawed, risking bad ratings and public perception.
But this game is virtually perfect in its functionality.
With Steam providing to the developers 10 million users who look for and trust the ratings system, if you find yourself in the position of having an insanely polished product, you are not maximizing your chances staying out of it.
I can relate to Scawen point of view but also have to agree that one should adapt the business to how the consumer wants its games delivered.
One could say that for a game to live, its needs audience and todays audience is younger and steam addicted.
But the biggest problem LFS faces is not its delivery method nor is it an obscure problem unique to LFS. Every community outgrows games whose content remains stagnant, even AAA budgeted games with all their graphical novelty and prowess will suffer a quick death if stagnant.
The visual and auditory aspects of the game could have been mitigated if the content kept coming. Now, it lost the popularity train and the dated visual/auditory it presents it self with have become a huge obstacle bringing new plays in.
The best of my wishes would be to have a larger company buy LFS technology and give it new life. It would be a monster of a sim. Either that, or having the original team upping their game.
Hibernating since 2008/9, waiting for an incentive the play any sim racer since the plague first appeared on LFS, at the end of its golden years.
I dabbed into LFS from time to time, refreshing the server screen risking the diseases that killed it. Dangerous times those were.
And the years passed. Sometimes was summer, sometimes christmas. Populated racing servers in the middle of the plague started to become less and less.
Outside of it, none came close to the golden years.
Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way.
Do not go gentle into that good night,
Rage, rage against the Cruise servers