Wow! We'll need to run LFS on a supercomputer if that's to work at LFS levels of physics realism.

LFS:Supercomputer Edition

Spacers add extra scrub radius, which could easily muck things up. Anyway, use of spacers isn't standard racing practice for OBVIOUS reasons.

IRL, proper widening requires lengthening of suspension arms and possibly relocaion of links, joints, etc. It's nowhere as easy as typing values into a slider. Besides, such alterations also alter suspension geometry, etc, so it's far from simple.

Agree with Tristan on the FFT (it's what I was trying to say anyway).

As for sound regs, if I remember correctly, a car is road legal as long as maximum noise levels don't exceed 85dB (at least in Australia).

As for sampled sounds, I'm not suggesting that LFS uses them directly and drop the synthesizer. I'm saying do a thorough analysis on real engines sounds and try to figure out what's missing or inaccurate with current LFS engine sounds in order to make LFS more realistic.

As important as sound is, the developers actually NEED to focus on more pressing issues such as aero/turbo modelling, better modelling of non-tarmac(rallycross) surfaces, etc. Sound is a close second priority.

Actually, the road cars aren't the ones that are suffering from TOO seriously unrealistic sound. The worst culprit is the BF1. Its sounds NOTHING like the real thing (besides a few more fundamental frequencies). Yes, I'm familiar with the RL sounds of current F-1 V8s.

BTW, completely unsilenced cars are already dying out on the race tracks as litigation becomes the norm and noise regulations come into place. Besides, mufflerless race-prepped road cars are WAY too unrealistic. Well, the TBOs, LXs, FZ25 and RA are race prepped cars that are still roadable, so mufflerless setups are out of the question.

Just FYI, FFT (Fast-Fourier Transforms) are widely used in top level racecar engineering teams to engine noises and deduct their state of tune. Simply a high tech version of what some special mechanics, technicians and Engineers have done with their own ears and brains for a long time.

BTW, how was the nature of the race circuit, trsitan? I wonder if it's anywhere as twisty as the Monte Carlo stage in WRC. If it is, no wonder your F-3 car is faster. On a twisty mountain pass, insane power levels are pretty irrelevant when it comes to stage times.

There's horsepower, then there's CORNERING horsepower.

So, let's get back on topic. DCCD or no DCCD? How about a poll?

Take a hint from NFS:Porsche Unleashed. Sample real car sounds.

Since we're trying to artificially synthesize engine sounds realistically, we'll just do a Fourier Analysis on the sampled sounds and analyse the entire recorded frequency spectrum to figure out what makes real engines sound the way they do.

Careful Android XP, you're starting to sound older than you you really are...

This thread is like an annoying cockroach that absolutely refuses to die.

Anyway, the last thing we need is an artificial speed up button to make a mockery of proper racing. NOS would be OK if it's LFS: Drag Racing, but not circuit racing, especially on the more technical circuits where the less skilled and silly drivers could easily turn races into DEMOLITION DERBYS.

Actually, the Road Supers deform a bit too much for their intended pupose (Extreme performance STreet Legal tires), though this is a car dependant phenomena in LFS. Some of them are practically jut barely legal semi-slicks. Tires like BFG KD, Yokohama Neova Advan and so on are just examples.

IRL, these tires all have very stiff sidewalls. However, the degree of sidewall flexing is very car dependant, as I've noticed. The best example happens to be on the TBO class. Both FXO and XR GTT can safely run 36+psi while maintaining quick warmup (2+laps for optimal temp) without chronic overheating or sidewall scrapping after repeated lapping. However, the relatively undertired RB4 can't avoid rolling on the sidewall without 40+psi pressures OR running massive (3+degrees!) negative camber. If you check F9 you'll definitely notice that the RB4 practically places no detectable load on the inside edge of the outside tires when running pressures such as 36psi. Unless of course you run -3.5degrees camber, which will kill the inside tread.

The sidewalls of all the slicks seem to behave perfectly realistically (no excess flexing). As for the road super equiped cars, they are fine overall, though it's definitely much more noticable in the relatively narrow or undertired cars. IRL, a compact sedan with OEM all-seasons would practically scrape it's rims on the track if run at the absurdly low OEM (32psi or less) pressures at race speeds seen in LFS.

Point is, LFS sidewall flex isn't too far off RL. Just that the Road Supers could all use slightly stiffer sidewalls.

Last edited by Jamexing, Sat 2 Sep 2006, 11:11.

Unfortunately, I tend not to race too much online due to connection and lag issues (I'm running cable modem). It gets boring when you're the only guy on a track most of the time. It's pointless to finish a race when you're the only guy on track. Besides, I usually end up running alone in a casual manner. The last race I had was FXR vs FXR, though neither of us bothered to finish due to horrid (at least 250ms) lag.

I think the real racing could be in the "private" games, though I haven't a clue of their passwords. If anyone here can direct me to the REAL racing action, I'll be very grateful.

Last edited by Jamexing, Fri 8 Sep 2006, 02:36.

Well, I could easily blow away the "average" (aka not so steady and all over the place) FZR driver with the FXR, but for anyone with a FZR as well tuned and driven as my FXR, I might as well throw in the towel.

Well, unless he somehow crashes off without crashing me off too.

Gee, wish I'll get a 750hp EVO XI. Power.....

Let's get a fully rally-prepped EVO XI with 750hp. Group B power and modern computerised 4WD drivetrain are an unbeatable rally combination. Oh, and do remember to aero prep the car too, such power and speed could use some downforce to keep it ON the ground.

Give me a break, what's wrong with asking for some new content? If his wishes come true, it'll benefit us licensed guys the most anyway.

If it's massively overpowered, then yes, it's an UNFAIR ADVANTAGE.

Agreed, Tristan. It's true that 80s and 90s 4WDs don't get in car torque split adjustments.

Oh, a well caliberated ACD is DEFINITELY superior to any driver adjustable device.

Quote from Becky Rose :

I do agree generally speaking BUT, the LFS team are taking their time on this game, nothing is happening quickly, so we're stuck with an imbalanced car class month on month, and from what i've read, it's been this way since the beginning a few years back.

Sure they dont want to have to repeat work, but it does not take long to make a few changes to the FXO, 20 minutes work, then include that in the next compatable patch - then let the community say "nah you took too much off, up it a little again for the next patch please".

Instead what we have is the subject being deffered until later and general silence on the issue, and that is frustrating.

Totally agree Becky! I just hope no one tries to shoot us 2 down for for stating and meaning the above statements.

4WD slower than 2WD? You must be from the 70's. Last time I checked, a Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution VI outran a Porche Cayman on a twisty road course by 0.3 seconds. The lap times were in the 1:27s. 4WD superiority rears its head even when the car it's on is slightly less powerful and weighs 180lbs more than the MR (mid-engined rear drive) competior.

The real reasons for excluding 4WD form the track is the age old excuese of UNFAIR TECHNOLOGY. Imagine if current F-1 cars could actually USE all their 750hp and not over-rely on TC and aero downforce.

However, I do agree that physics needs finalizing before the really MAJOR changes(sucha as aero) are applied. For now, the least they could do is solve the more obvious and simpler problems such as powerbands and turbo modelling. Once aero is perfected, THEN we can get real serious about class balance. But for now, realistic turbo modelling and powerbands are the least they could do for now. It's just been neglected WAY too long.

Quote from Becky Rose :

I disagree Funnybear, whilst I accept LFS is unfinished, at the same time the devs are taking money and giving us a game - but the gameplay is totally messed up to the point where fixing this should be a high priority.

A game without gameplay is a screenshot generator, and that's exactly what Scawen said LFS isn't.

I toally agree with you, Becky Rose.

I agree with yopu somewhat Funnybear, though most of my proposals actually require a perfected and relatively finalized version of LFs physics. The aero changes could wait, since aero is cmplicated by nature. But some seroiusly obvious but not THAT complex problems have remained unattended for long enough. In fact, I'll choose realistic turbo modelling and powerbands for all turbo cars over the additon of the BF1, if I had a choice. No real point for inclusing such a massively aero denpendant car with current aero when other issues besides aero desperately need solutions.

Well, at least the BF1 gets our developers something to market with.

I agree with almost all the suggestions, though the mod thing could wait .Let's just get all the even more important stuff such as aero physics perfected before we actually start modifying cars.

Once the physics are almost finalized, then I'll welcome all proper race mods. Just don't include the usual street tuner stupidities (heard of the 18 inch Honda Civic Syndrome? Honda Civic + 18 inch wheels + rubberbands +3 inch suspension drop = broken lower wishbones + buckboard ride + no real track performance.

Scrabby, you've perfected my statement to the T.

I'm not trying to make this sound hopeless, but the truth is, class balancing is currently neglected and I don't see a change any time soon.

Last time I suggested upgrading the powerbands of XR GTT and RB4 and a slight tire upgrade for the RB4, I made 2 intersting observations:

1. Based on votes collected, most agree with my reasonable changes.
2. Some love to shoot me down for criticizing LFS's turbo modelling and SEVERE class balance issues. Some seem to think that the RB4 isn't slow enough! Amazing.

The good news is that most agreed mostly with my proposals, since I've tried hard to make them reasonable and truely balance the TBO class PROPERLY while showcasing the fundamental traits of each chassis and drive configuration.

As for the GTR class, there's one way to massively even out all 3 cars without butchering any one of them:

Matching aero packages. Current aero overly favours rear heavy cars while severely punishing front heavy or relatively mass balanced (XR GTR) cars. It's just too rear biased. If the FXO GTR was given the BF1's aero balance, don't be surprised that things actually start to even out.

Well, ATM the BF1 still sounds more like a synthesizer than a real F-1 car. Of course, they'll never sound as exquisite as the old V-10s, but I'll choose the real thing over the LFS synthesizer anytime.

Just get an EVO XI with ACD. Unfortunately, I think I'll only get shot down for suggesting such superior technology.

Well, RL Subaru STis (latest model) do have DCCD (driver controlled center differential), so in car torque split set is anything but sci-fi.

Last edited by Jamexing, Thu 31 Aug 2006, 10:51.

Please, just fix the rallycross tracks and get us some proper 4WD rally machines.