Yes I will update it.
But it is a project also for my university and I have to finish the documentation and so I cannot do such a big change at the moment.

I don´t think he will think about that
The cars were build from real models with those values.
Give them a handicap is the best way. Also the difference in offline <-> online is only temporary because the hotlaps shall be stay compatible

Ah lol had this error many times in older versions of LFS mainly in the debug version of my program.
Never understood it
Those things should been documented

We write in the programmers forum part about the insim changes and maybe the time format changes before X (I think he is going to do it) but that should be the last change.
Thats what my knowledge is :-D

Yes Outsim is only for one (your own) car

Quote from Scawen :

I'm not sure what you mean. You can get the current race time in a SMALL_RTP packet. Hmm, that is in hundredths. Maybe that should be milliseconds as well, I want InSim to be clean and consistent now, and that's why all the changes have been made.

Thanks Scawen good to know and my post you quote was an answer to Soeren because I don´t think adding the current total time to SPX or LAP is necessary. And yes RTP is what he needs, hadn´t it in mind for this.


time in ms:
I would prefer it because you have a faster access and I also have to convert it to milliseconds sometimes. Convert it back to MSHT is the easier part and you mostly only need it for output, so only one time.

I would prefer a requestable package for all players with the current time. (One with all players or one request and some packages.

Thanks and yes for this case my edit

EDIT (also here): Sure has to be 65535

Last edited by CLRS530, Wed, 25 Apr 2007 21:44.

Because I don´t have time to test it now, is the splitnode 2 and 3 in IS_RST 0 if they don´t exist (or better 65536)?
If not can you do this?

I want to describe my problems with the current node system and I see that LFS itselvs has some same problems because the positions are often for one moment wrong:

I use a realtime position calculation.
So I change the lap number and Node with every MCI packet. here is "problem" number one I have to do


to have a constant higher node from start to finish line.

If I need a position I sort the players first with the lap and if thats equal with the Nodes. So here problem number two. Sometimes a lap increase comes before finishLineNode, sometimes on it and another time after the node so a second correction


Thats nearly save for me with the positions but it could have faster the same


I only want to mentione it now, if you don´t want to change it I can deal with it
I want to thank you for the changes you did (for me) they are really helpful

Yes thought about both things also. Maybe you want later add laps like 101, 102... wich isn´t possible to show in InSim this way. Now there is the only time I think to fix those things wich were done to use the same packet size.

You now give the split number out in IS_SPX wich is indeed very good. But its also hard to test really seavly for the split count, so it would be good to have nodeNum and split count and yes also split1node... in this.
But that packet has to be sent also if you join after race start.

Couldn´t the finishlineNode be deleted and change the Node to 0 after start to NumNode (finishLine) or do you use this also in your code?
Thats one thing I never understood and wich is very buggy

Quote from GeForz :

You can connect up 8 Clients on TCP only or on TCP with UDP. (tested)

Nice to read I thought with UDP it´s a general thing

isn´t the player flag in IS_LAP needless? Also penalty in IS_SPX, but maybe you think over it and its good for someone who didn´t save all events and only want to check it.

EDIT2: Sorry but I went through the txt file and write everything I found
Why do you don´t change the MCI packet now use a own word for the lap number?

Last edited by CLRS530, Tue, 24 Apr 2007 18:46.

So if I use TCP and UDP for MCI packets only one Client can connect this way?!?
If it´s right I can´t be ever sure if LFS sockts (UDP or TCP) are full and I could maybe use a differen connection way. (Never thought of that in the current stable version)

EDIT: Scawen couldn´t you change NodeSecs in IS_ISI to NodeMs and in milliseconds? So most times it is needed in a smaller intervall then 1 second and we don´t have to send one more packet.
And can you also send a version packet after IS_ISI? I don´t know what could be against that.

Last edited by CLRS530, Tue, 24 Apr 2007 17:24.

I think the balancing will in the future also be with additonal weight. Because the car was created with realistic values and changing it later isn´t good or everytime wrong .
But the weight will in the future managed from the client and is also availible in singleplayer and hotlaps.

You have to write this into the feature request thread not here.

Quote from Soeren Scharf :

3) I do not see the point with more than one proxy dll. In most cases LFS addons are insim addons. Since there is only one insim application possible at one moment, only one insim application could be active anyway.

A post from Scawen.
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=394977#post394977
We will get TCP instead of UDP for most packets. Also more then one InSim port.
And that in patch X

EDIT:
I´m not complitly sure if more then one InSim connection will come in patch X because Scawen only affirmed the InSim rewrite.

Thats the one insim uses the smallest unit "ms".

My speed shows the speed on the line in all sectors and on the finish line also I have maxspeed.
But I won´t post anything new to this thread because you have your opinions so my word don´t has importantance.
At least I have to live with it or don´t support it, whats at least again bad for me

Whats with a method some or all ego- shooter games I know use (Enemy Territory for example). It has a guid wich is stored locally and have to be saved also on the master server that it don´t has two the same.
If you delete the local file LFS has to send a new one and maybe can delete not used ids after half a year and send a new one for a user who tries to connect with a id wich isn´t availible.

It´s just a short idea from me and I didn´t think in any direction over that problem but the new system should be much easier to use for everyone then the one we have now.

The id could also be a sha key from the username wich makes it unique. The only problem wich have to be managed is that demo racers don´t have such a user name.
Maybe a system to see them with there physical address

I implemented all content of filurs last file (with some small changes (yet)) and also the additional things my program produces.

http://clrs530.redio.de/stats_070416_2026_SO1_race10.xml

The best would be one list with two tabs at the top wich switches between connections and racers

Quote from GieTe-R :

Falstart = Spectate :/ Its a little unreal thing.
I think its can be many better if Driver X who made a falstart got a extra time to his lap time I mean 01:01:01 + hmm some time for a penalty.

00:00:00 Start
Falstart
01:01:01 Final time + 00:30:00 seconds penalty its can be more realistic

Yes but this is a game and if someone will make damage and won´t race clean he has to be stopped.
Such a false start shouldn´t happen.

Yes but LFS is local. I have not really the knowledge how it works.
But I know such a plugin system makes developing much easier because you don´t have network management.
And it´s faster and cleaner, how bad many InSim connections are or not

Yes you are right, but the second argument for such a system would be that it minimizes the (local) network traffic, but I don´t know how heavy it is for windows.

Test it...
It´s an overlay wich shows the results (times) while racing like you know it from F1 in television.
It´s currently only a demo with no real names.

No I mean a takeover in the pit
If the no player has different settings and a different playerflag the IS_PFL should be sent (and I think it currently don´t do)