Have you tried http://www.kegetys.net/SoftTH/

It is discussed here http://www.lfsforum.net/showth ... 847&highlight=softTHG
and is what I use to get LFS on 3 screens.

I don't know how it gets on with Vista though.

Maxim

Quote from aroX123 :

Sometimes its fun with many updates, but i agree this one, these small updates could be to a big one

There is only one big update. These are test patches for you to download if you are interested in helping with testing. If you just want one big patch then stop downloading the test patches and stay away from this part of the forum.

Maxim

I have just re-read the iVibe site and I don't think it is capable of acheiving what I hoped for.

"Each tactile feedback device has within it a tactile feedback actuator, which consists of a very powerful motor that throws around a weight that has been optimized for its mass and shape, thereby yielding the maximum angular momentum potential possible for the power and efficiency characteristics of the motor we use. In simpler terms, this means the combination motor and weight inside our tactile feedback actuators is the perfect solution for making the precise type of vibration we require.

When our tactile feedback actuators do their thing, they perform physical work that creates physical vibration. This type of vibration is vastly superior to a loud speaker that tries to vibrate you with sound waves. You'll know what we mean when you try the system!"

Sounds lime it is only capable of generating vibrations not producing constant pressure on say the left side to simulate a right turn. Given it is limited to creating vibrations only might explain why it is not suitable for LFS?

Maxim

I think you might be right and perhaps indicates they miss one of the reasons why the ivibe seat would sell to the LFS crowd as a serious SIM? Seems to me the iVibe could be considered the poor man's motion simulator if implemented correctly? The effects would be subtle but still add to the immersion factor. At least that's why I am interested. Effects triggered by off road excursions really hold no appeal to me. If you can feed the suspension forces to the four corners of the seat which seems easily achievable then it would seem to be well on the way to fulfilling this goal. Maybe I have just missed something though?

Fingers crossed that they are still on holiday and that your services come cheaply enough for them to consider.

Maxim

Quote from Woz :

From what I understand the actuators can actually deal with vector details, they say as much on their site. If this is the case then they could give slight motion queues if done subtly enough.

Anyway, I have contacted them again and offered my services to create the drivers they want for LFS. I will update this thread if/when I hear back.

I hope they take you up on your offer. It is puzzling to me why they wouldn't release a version that doesn't respond to track surface but does respond to all other inputs which seems to be easily achievable. Other than rally cross the lack of off road sensations seems to be a very minor advantage. To be honest I would probably buy one if it only responded to the g forces for left and right and braking and acceleration. Responding to rumble strips is a bonus and all this seems like an easy job given the info available from LFS at the moment.

Maxim

The ghost car mod has never been updated to make it compatible with the current version of insim. It is not possible to get it working with LFS any more unless you use an old version of LFS.

Maxim

Quote from unseen :

I wish Scawen would stop wasting time working on that stupid racing game and get back to the nightly LFS_Restart releases.

If you look at AS National public races you will find 70%+ of the field (and usually more) will be FXR's. Even though the FZR, when driven well, is clearly faster. In league races I am sure the mix is very different where the drivers tend to be more interested in outright speed compared to ease of driving.

I am not sure you can ever address this so if you balance, or at least close their lap times towards each other, public races will probably become 90%+ FXR. If you give the RWD an advantage enough to see them used more in public races, league races will become all FZR.

Before we can really balance them we would need to agree on what type of races we were trying to achieve the balance in. I don't think we could ever get agreement on this. Won't it will come down to making the imbalances within tolerable margins more than any real balance. In my mind the goal is to make sure you never see one car dominate the grid.

Maxim

the thread about software THG is here:

http://www.lfsforum.net/showth ... 847&highlight=softTHG

Maxim

Quote from rjm1982 :

No, its not.

It affects downforce in a serious way, and just as importantly, it affects visibility for the driver...neither are trivial..

In real life maybe but as far as I know the aero model is not affected by damage at the moment.

Modelling this would also require modelling the engine underneath as it would become visible once bent up. I am sure once Scawen turns his attention to the damage model it will be considered.

Trouble with a good visible damage model is it tends to encourage the wreckers so, although I would like to see it sometime, I don't mind it being at the bottom of the S3 updates.

Maxim

Edit: Too late - dawesdust_12 types faster

To answer Q3

3) Tell us why LFS is the best or most realistic sim

I would say I could live with many of the SIMs out there and I was heavily into GPL before switching to LFS. What ultimately attracts me to LFS is the fact that as long as I drive the more popular combinations, I can always find an online race. None of the other SIMs seem to offer that. What clearer indication can there be about why LFS is the best online racing sim than the fact that since LFS was released (someone can confirm how long this has been) that it can still boast the number of online players 24hours a day that it does? It doesn't matter how good the AI are in a a game, racing against them all week for a league race never matches the feeling of racing real people.

Maxim

Quote from DarinSRT :

More great info KartRacer! THanks !

I loaded up the demo and went through a bunch of the training stuff.. Took me a few to get my TSW set up.. I really want to check this out with Force Feedback.

Anyway.. I recall trying a very early version of LFS and had trouble setting up my wheel so I didn't get far.

Now that I have, I can see why you all feel these are the most realistic physics. The cars react like they should from what I can tell so far and Im just in the demo.

Off to do more testing..

Resist, resist..... You are about to loose all free time you thought you had.

Maxim

Quote from HVS5b :

Can someone tell me why improving the AI is so important?

I presume they are popular in single player mode of for beefing up race numbers in multi-player mode?

I much prefer to race real people or HL, maybe used the AI for competition half a dozen times or so.

Are they really that popular or have I missed the point

Maybe the online demo options could be seriously cut back so people stop staying with demo mode and make a contribution towards the cost of its development? LFS needs to showcase it abilities which at the minute requires online racing. Giving good AI the requirement to allow big field online racing in demo mode would be reduced. Just my opinion, nothing I have seen from Scawen suggests this is in their minds.

Maxim

Quote from lawdog :

No, I deserve a license because I just turned a 1:43.44. I knew my honesty would pay off in good lap time karma!

Well done Lawdog . Well inside the target.

I just hope you make the cut as the permanent system is getting close now which will require a total race time to qualify so I guess Birder may decide not to bother with updating the temporary licence list. I wasn't at the test though so I am not sure how much work is involved in finishing it so you may be lucky.

Maxim

far too honest for your own good.:bounce8:

You will be more than welcome to the licensed servers when you make the time

Maxim

Quote from StableX :

so I have the RAR... where do I put the bin and src folders?

Could do with a readme for this if possible for the noobs like me!

Just put the contents of the bin folder where you want to run the program from. It doesn't need to be in any special place. For what it is worth I created an "LFS Relax" sub folder in the LFS folder and run it from there.

Maxim

Great addition Gai-Luron

Thanks for all your continued hard work. I like the new info available in the lastest release.

Maxim

Quote from drinklime :

OMG... your LWFF still works ?! :jawdrop::wow:

And still as smooth as the day it received the ball bearing upgrade I prefer subtle force feedback so that may contribute to its longevity. I fear the day it calls it quits. I don't use the peddals though hence they are propped up at the side.

Quote from BullHorn :

Wow, that looks cool. Reminds me of a guy that used like 16 screens for playing Flight Simulator. :P

You're using such a setup, but why don't you have a G25?

I will forgive the "why don't you have a G25?" question down to you being too young to remember the legend that is the LWFF

Maxim

Actually the reduction by 10kg for FZR and XRR was something I mentioned in the thread based on AS3 usage on Conedodgers CD2. Admittedly I only mentioned that a 10kg reduction for the FZR could perhaps be justified from the stats gathered on CD2. The reduction of FZR ballast was as a result of car usage though rather than lap times as on AS3 the FZR does enjoy a healthy advantage over 10 laps.

I am surprised that an endurance race results supports the reduction of the XRR ballast given the responses I received from the endurance fans when I suggested it based on the results of sprint racing on CD2. Their views that the XRR would clean up over longer distances doesn't seem to be supported by your findings even when the track choice is factored in to the equation.

It is nice to get another factually based view though so thanks for posting N I K I

Maxim

Quote from Lotesdelere :

You're talking from a short races point of view. I'm sure, and I know, that many teams will use the XRR for endurance races because of less tyres wear and less fuel consumption.
In expert hands, the FZR and the XRR can compete in short races. Check the top times on our servers, there is not a huge difference, and we are talking about aliens times. But the FZR is already obsolete for long races.
And frankly I'm seeing more and more FXR's these days (because it's easy to drive and forgiving) than FZR's and XRR's.

Maxim I know you're a XRR fanatic, but even if the XRR was the faster GTR I wouldn't drive it.
Because it's ugly and because it's a turbo car.
The FZR is the most beautifull car in LFS to me, the only one of the big GTR's which does NOT have a turbo and at the end it's the most brilliant car in LFS.
Yes, it's a personal opinion :P

I think in expert hands the XRR can cling on just behind but it is still 0.5 seconds off the pace which won't disappear with just 10kg off. Like you say though one circuit short distances but that is all I have to compare with sadly.

No argument from me that the FZR is the best looking of the GTRs. Like you won't leave it regardless of the speed, neither have I abandoned the XRR even though it has all the short coming you mention. I originally thought the gap between the FZR and FXR was still too big. Looking at the useage levels though someone could probably make a case to widen it by removing 10kg from the FZR but I will leave that one for someone else. I have given all the stats I have so people can make their own assessments. I hope we don't have to wait for the endurance series to finish before making an adjustment but it will be interesting to see those results.

Maxim

Possibly but are we expecting any major physics changes with Y? I thought it was mainly about AI and interiors? I try not to worry about what is coming next and just enjoy it when it comes so it is possible I have missed the probable contents.

I am not too concerned with removing the lag as that is part of why I drive it. Each car has its unique quality and we should really drive them for that reason and not have to factor in the fact certain cars will never win if one of the quicker people turn up in the FZR. Only speed will tempt the FXR drivers away from that car as it is much friendlier to drive. At the moment they just go to the FZR and the XRR doesn't seem to figure. I also think we may be loosing sight of just how little weight 10kg is compared to the racing weight of the car. My best guess is only 0.2seconds and I can't really see it making the FZR obsolete. If Scawen removes it and suddenly no-one drives the FZR he can add some back. Ballast adjustments can go both ways after all.

Maxim

Quote from srdsprinter :

Take a look at the weight change with gas in/out.

It is so easy for you....

:ashamed:

Maxim

I don't think the XRR can be made attractive to the FXR driver if they drive that car in preference to the FZR at the moment.

But what would it take to make the current drivers of the FZR to seriously think that the choice between the XRR and FZR comes down to how the cars handle rather than lap times? At the moment I still feel people drive the FZR because it is clearly the fastest once you have broken the learning curve. As it stands none are tempted to use the XRR except as an experiment or for a brief change. Are the FZR drivers here really saying that they would consider they have no option but to jump ship to the XRR if 10kg was removed from it's ballast?

I am sure they is a real difference in driver's attitudes who drive the 3 cars (huge generalisation here ) FZR drivers drive it mainly because it is the best, XRR drivers like the challenge and FXR drivers like the forgiving nature of their car. I would just like to see the XRR have a bit more of a chance, maybe even the fastest in some situations, to make some of the FZR drivers jump ship so the racing is more varied.

Maxim

Quote from srdsprinter :

I'd have to say over a long race, fuel burn rate does in fact matter.

If FZR has to use 65% fuel over a run that the XRR only needs 45%, then FZR has an additional 20kg pentalty at least initially.

Each pit stop then requires 20% more fuel fill, which takes additional time (i have no idea the fuel fill rate?).

I am going to show my ignorance here but do we know that they have the same size fuel tanks? i.e. does 100% FZR = 100% XRR. I just wonder because it might be they burn fuel (weight) at the same speed but the FZR has a smaller tank? I doubt it if the FZR is NA against the turbo FXR and XRR but I don't remember seeing anywhere that 100% = 100kg of fuel.

Maxim

Quote from Fischfix :

on ovals the xrr is the fastest car when it comes to longer races, in shorter races it is as fast as the fzr. but the fzr has the advantage at starts. so putting another 10kg off will make the xrr by far the fastest car on this track.

global car balancing does not make sense at all. it should be a server-side option and server admins should be able to choose according to the track they are running, if they want to balance out the cars.

everything else is just a waste of time.

On ovals the weight doesn't make a lot of difference does it? I haven't tried an oval but the weight would seem to affect braking and acceleration and low speed cornering more than high speed corners. I doubt 10kg will make that much difference but how does the current XRR speed compare to pre patch X lap times? 10kg would be approximately 1/3 of the difference.

Personnally I can't see a problem with it becoming the fastest car on ovals anyway. One of the cars is going to be slightly faster and the fact it isn't one car on all circuits at all distances means a balance has been reached doesn't it?

Maxim