Searching in All forums
(115 results)
Change to mod submission: Limited slots for unapproved mods
Scawen
Developer
Hello Mod Creators,

We have made an adjustment to the mod system to try to make the system sustainable for a longer time and to be more beneficial to community members. In short, there is now a limit to the number of unapproved mods that each user can submit. High quality mods that reach approved status are not counted in this limit. It is also possible to purchase extra slots if necessary.

Please follow the link for all the information: https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/107406
Scawen
Developer
Thanks for the replies. Yes, by fast forwarding I meant when clicking on the slider. I think this is what CRAAACH means by the "no_gpu_rendering" feature?

Interestingly I think you are both suggesting equally valid but completely different options.

CRAAACH: do send MCI/NLP on clicking slider (or maybe only when sending IS_RIP?) but slow down LFS sufficiently not to flood the buffer.

Racon: avoid sending MCI/NLP on clicking slider.

Although I haven't studied in detail yet, Racon's solution seems easier to implement, is a very good option to have and doesn't really lose anything at this point. So then CRAAACH's solution could be done as a separate option at some point, maybe as a RIPOPT option.
Scawen
Developer
Thanks for the report.

I've had a quick look so far and thought I should ask what behaviour we really want from this, in those two situations.

For example one option would be to disable NLP and MCI when fast forwarding. Is there a reason to receive NLP / MCI packets when fast forwarding a replay?

And when joining a host, I guess it could be disabled until LFS has caught up with real time.


Or a different type of solution, I think it might also be possible for a send buffer (held by LFS internally) to expand massively if the input is so much faster than the output but it seems there should be some kind of limit to this.


I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on that. One thing you might try for a quick solution is using UDP packets for MCI / NLP. But of course I don't know how easy it is to change your program to receive UDP packets instead, or if they are suitable for your purposes.
Scawen
Developer
Hi, is that still happening now?

I think from your location you are redirected to USA server. If that is the case, there is a yellow "Redirect" message one time in the message text.

Maybe for some reason the redirect isn't working for you. In that case it may work if you switch off "Allow regional downloads" in Misc Options. Then it will download from our main server.
Scawen
Developer
Just a couple of suggestions:

Probably total fail but how about "MLV" for "Masse-Leistungs-Verhältnis" https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leistungsgewicht

Or maybe something like L/G or W/kg?

It's on such a small button on the mods screen, it can't be given too much importance.
Scawen
Developer
Quote from Drifteris :Ratings seems to be fine in-game, its only website not showing them correctly. I assume someone raited after reupload so main raiting is back on website except for other ones.

Yes, I confirm the ratings are updated again when clicked. So they are not lost and the only problem is the processed ratings not appearing when the mod is republished after unpublishing.

Quote from RealistAdam :translations

Thank you for trying to help but I can't really take on translation duties. Even though I quickly fixed a typo in the German translation, I can't be responsible for translation updates.

Please can you try to contact the Turkish translators?
You can see them listed here: https://www.lfs.net/lfs_translate/public_translation_viewer.php?lang=Turkish
And maybe you can talk to some of them in the translation section: https://www.lfs.net/forum/28-Language-Packs
Scawen
Developer
Thanks, I agree this shouldn't have happened but I have a hunch why it did. I've made sure this can't happen again right now and I also have a longer term solution to implement today.

My main concern in this case is the loss of ratings but I'll have a look at that too to try and understand it.
Scawen
Developer
Bumping this thread in case anyone who used a pirate server hasn't yet seen it.
Scawen
Developer
All right, I don't see any more comments and can't think of more that needs to be said so I'll close the thread.
Scawen
Developer
Thank you, I've fixed that for the next update.
Scawen
Developer
As I'm aiming for an incompatible version very soon, I've made a note to look at this, probably tomorrow. I can't comment more until I understand how it works in the code.
Scawen
Developer
I'm trying to release 0.7F in a short time with all the updates and it should be incompatible to make sure everyone gets on the new version.

Your request really would set "number of stops" that player has done. I don't see a difficulty adding a packet to set this, in an incompatible version.

I can't see any other thing that is similar, that I should code at the same time. We can set number of laps and a penalty, so I guess the number of pit stops done is the one missing thing.
Scawen
Developer
Hi all,

I will disconnect from this thread now to focus on work.

I'd like to thank Chris again for his well written post which I said I would read again later.

I hope it's OK to say a few parting words. I know TC provides a lot of entertainment within LFS, which is a good part of why I've always done a few things here and there to support cruise servers. I don't believe TC or I can eliminate license sharing but we can be aware of it and reduce it. At least some of us learned a few things in this thread that we were not aware of before.

No doubt I have expressed some things too strongly and interpreted other people's words wrongly as it got too heated in this thread. I hoped after Chris's post that we were moving on, and I still hope that.
Scawen
Developer
Quote from tmehlinger :You're acting like a child, and you're treating your biggest fans and partners like garbage.

That's not true, you are simply not reading my posts as they were intended.

Quote from tmehlinger :It's painful for us to read, and it is embarrassing for you.

I'm not embarrassed. As I've explained many times, asked a few questions, made a single unpopular suggestion and I stated a few facts. There's nothing wrong with that.

Better go back and read the thread again so you can see how it evolved.
Scawen
Developer
Sorry for my previous failed reply when I thought your post was another from Chris.

Quote from mbutcher :I'm sorry, but how else are we meant to interpret

I'm disappointed by the lack of understanding going on now.

Chris wrote a well formed post which I appreciated and thanked him for while explaining a bit more from my side, and I ended with a repeated thank to make sure it wasn't missed.

Then I got back a silly post from Boypower, and one from Chris advising me how to use my own brain. This is ridiculous and antagonistic.

I thought things were getting better after Chris's post where he acknowledged certain issues we have all learned more about on this thread. Learning more is a good thing, I think. So I don't know why argument and jibes continue at this point.
Scawen
Developer
Odd, the last two posts I could say back at you two, exactly the same.

I was trying to discuss things, you were taking it as attack and accusations.

I certainly was falsely accused several times on this thread.

I don't really need a lecture now from you guys, thanks.

Pity you couldn't see what I was saying in my last post but I can't really be bothered to explain now, I'm actually too busy.
Scawen
Developer
Degats: thank you for explanations, understanding and efforts to prevent or reduce license sharing and certain types of trading.

I see you have felt under attack from me, but I'd like to mention that I have felt under attack all year so far, not from TC but generally, as most of the time I have been having to deal with people working out ever more ways to try to circumvent every rule or limit we have, to the point of causing problems with the online experience. I've had some success with that but every time I get near the end, another issue seems to come along.

On this thread I gradually learned more about an account rental problem that we have received information and evidence about, and as I gradually realised how it was unintentionally made possible by the TC system, I asked questions, made an unpopular suggestion about removing the free donation of in-game money, and asked for explanations why that was necessary. At that point I was accused of things like trying to destroy TC and so on, which is silly as I've always supported it. I'm sure I should be allowed to ask questions as anyone else can. I'm not some all-knowing sage, I'm just a person who works hard to understand what is going on, and I'm not afraid to ask questions to increase my knowledge.

Making a suggestion and asking questions is not the same as laying down the law and it would be helpful if it's not interpreted that way, so we can have a discussion and it could lead to fixing or reducing problems.

I don't really have more to say at this point but I'll read your post again later to let it sink in a bit more. Thanks again for looking into the problems and making steps to reduce them.
Scawen
Developer
Quote from Yisc[NL :;2081566"]That's a unique number that cannot be changed in any way.

I'm pretty sure that mac address spoofing is normal.

Anyway, to those who talk about device identification, I'm not really about to give up development again to work out ways of analysing which device we are on in great detail. I'm actually trying to get back to development of what the people actually want, but I have been constantly distracted by hackers the whole year.

Quote from Bradracer :As Chuck mentioned a few pages ago, do we know the scale of the issue or are we just playing a game of virtue-signalling, hypothesising, and finger-pointing?

The instant you say "virtue-signalling" you have lost all credibility and I read no further.

It's funny how may people around here are attributing me with all sorts of stuff I haven't said, and aren't reading what I have actually said.

I realise it's 2024, but there must still be a place for replying to what people actually said, instead of making up stuff you pretend they said, and arguing against that? Or is that too old-fashioned now?
Scawen
Developer
Quote from Degats :TC has *never* sold in-game currency (or items) for real money. Various other cruise servers have in the past (maybe still do?), but TC hasn't.

I never said they had.

Try to keep up and please stop suggesting I've said things that I haven't.

I've pointed out that the ability to freely donate money between players enables a real world trade in your currency. In turn that enables ringmasters to rent LFS licenses in contravention to our license agreement, in order to gain TC credits which they sell for real world money, obtained from richer people that don't want to play your game in the spirit that we assume it was meant.

If you can't understand this, the only explanation is that you don't want to understand. If you do understand but think this is fine, then we have a different point of view that cannot be reconciled.

Quote from Degats :We've always been against it on principle, but there's not really a lot we can do about it - any trading of real money for TC money is happening off-server, between individuals.

Boypower states on TC's behalf that officially you are neutral:
Quote :QUOTE: we allow people to advertise these services on our platforms, including our forum

https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/2081198#post2081198

Quote from Degats :I'm not sure where you got the idea that TC is doing it ourselves.

I haven't thought that or suggested it any any point.
Scawen
Developer
Well what you have, by allowing people to buy game credits, is several things.

Off the top of my head:

1) The ability for people to get 'rich' in game without actually doing the work which I believe you intended as the 'game' of TC. Basically they get the reward without actually playing. I guess that wasn't the original plan, but correct me if I'm wrong.

2) Richer people can buy credits so now they can dish them out and look very generous, compared with the poorer people who actually have to work for it. Here you recreate real-world inequality, oddly as a direct mirror to the real world.

3) This system is supporting and unintentionally encouraging the rental server system where rental ringmasters buy licenses which poorer people use to generate money for the ringmaster. It reminds me of some pretty bad things in the real world. Also it is against our license agreement, but you are basically OK with that.

So after all the support I've given to cruise servers and TC, now the result is you are recreating many ugly aspects of capitalism in a game world and supporting a license rental trade in direct contravention of our license agreement.

I read that this real world money purchase of game credits is a problem for many game developers, and it's a problem that is going to grow for you and us. We receive emails about the problems and contravention of the license agreement from people who have bought their license legitimately, so it is now a distraction for us and hinders development.

So yeah, it's not good. It creates bad feeling as you have allowed a fun game to shift towards real world earning instead of staying on the fun side.
Scawen
Developer
It's an ugly thing you have created.

Imagine a game of monopoly, with one change. People can use their real-world currency to buy monopoly money from the other players.

Now who wins?
Scawen
Developer
Quote from tankslacno :Problem when connecting to a servers on 0.7E7

On 0.7E6, I didn't have any problems with this, but on 0.7E7, I cannot join on several hosts, including my both own hosts (Sport Racing Team Finland and Sport Racing Team Demo). This problem doesn't happen on every host though.

I can try to reproduce this by looking list of hosts and see any host which don't have any drivers on track, but have 1 connected user. When trying to connect to a host, which have that kind of situation, LFS just permanently states I'm in "Queue position 1".

This is not related to E6 or E7, all hosts simply get to that state after 49.7 days.

I have a fix but it's not released.
Scawen
Developer
Editor Patch E6:

Much faster "reduce detail" function
Command /rtex can be used to reload textures
Editor unlock no longer affects LFS unlocks
(S3 number of unlocks now matches S1/S2)

https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/106792
Scawen
Developer
Test Patch E7:

Tightened main model and wheel limits for mod reports
Unlock screen requires "unlock" to keep any changes
(if already unlocked the unlock count is unaffected)
More translation updates. Thank you translators!

https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/106967
Scawen
Developer
Quote from DarkShadow32 :Just another thing that may be worth mentioning:

Don't use the same username and same password that you use for your LFS account on any website that requires you to register when it comes to website from LFS (Not talking about TC OR LFS ITSELF

You should not use your LFS password on the TC server or website either.

Thread: LOGIN DETAILS - use on LFS websites only!

Quote from LFS Terms & Conditions

Quote :3.4 You must not give your username, WEB or GAME password to other LFS users.

There aren't exceptions, including pirates LFSPro and Pereulok or legitimate systems like TC.

Thread: Possible password leak from Pereulok
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG