you have any idea how complex collision dynamics between spinning objects are? Surely it's not all that simple
or it could be intended to be that way and threfore not a bug at all.
Success Ballast:Yes or No
The name says it all, should we include ballast and use the test patch (consistantly updated to current) or not?
Maximum 20 kilos
Race 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th or below
UF1000 +7 +5 +2 +1 - -1 -3
Maximum 20 kilos
Race 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th or below
UF1000 +7 +5 +2 +1 - -1 -3
Last edited by KeiichiRX7, .
Reason : added table
I HAD looked up youtube videos, but accidentally closed the wrong browser tab.
Anyway these are examples of ovals of various sizes and shapes
Las Vegas International Speedway (infield roadcourse equipped)
California Speedway (infield roadcourse equipped)
Martinsville (short track)
Bristol (short track)
Twin Ring Motegi (oval built over a roadcourse, so the roadcourse passes under the oval)
Pocono (infield roadcourse equipped)
Darlington
Every one of these is different, in size, banking and shape. The Kyoto Oval is more of a superspeedway than a standard oval.
and it's very painful to explain to an FZR driver that they must set thier ballast to 140 kg because they have 40kg in success ballast
When applying ballast to cars, car balancing ballast supercedes driver voluntary ballast.
thus 100K master server assigned ballast on the FZR means that the driver must add 150K of voluntary ballast to add 50K to the predefined 100K.
for a series that uses success ballast, this kinda kills things
thus 100K master server assigned ballast on the FZR means that the driver must add 150K of voluntary ballast to add 50K to the predefined 100K.
for a series that uses success ballast, this kinda kills things
Cue-ball, never thought I would agree with you about anything.
Just take the answer you've got for now, and hope for the best later. He might have something else planned. We might never get what you want, which wouldn't really be so bad as it has been made out to be in this thread. But then again sometimes mom refuses to buy you a toy, because she's already got it wrapped under the tree.
Who knows?
Just take the answer you've got for now, and hope for the best later. He might have something else planned. We might never get what you want, which wouldn't really be so bad as it has been made out to be in this thread. But then again sometimes mom refuses to buy you a toy, because she's already got it wrapped under the tree.
Who knows?
You might want to have your equipment checked too, since you claim to know my own reasons for everything. It's terribly out of calibration!
Quite frankly I havent seen you add anything new to this thread either in the last couple pages, so if you want to champion a cause, feel free.
Some people are however just worth pissing off because they take themselves so seriously.
Quite frankly I havent seen you add anything new to this thread either in the last couple pages, so if you want to champion a cause, feel free.
Some people are however just worth pissing off because they take themselves so seriously.
You know, you hit me right on the head with the stubborn comment. I quite like this thread.
Of course, I didn't retract the statement because the ammendment to it was made in a following post, get with the program. If I'm just a dumb troll you should be able to keep up with me.
The powerpoint presentation is in the works, thanks very much to my own stubbornness.
Wow, you can be an ass even when I agree. Absolutely uncanny.
This thread was fine before someone hit the "New Thread" button. The Test patch forum was closed for a reason. In fact this whole thread has been suggested before if we want to nitpick. Anyone else move to close/delete and call it a wash? j/k
The one that resorted to name-calling hardly gets to call himself mature. Whilst attempting to probe your brain for your thoughts, I found it quite impossible. I suppose a flat line is hard to interpret.
Of course, I didn't retract the statement because the ammendment to it was made in a following post, get with the program. If I'm just a dumb troll you should be able to keep up with me.
The powerpoint presentation is in the works, thanks very much to my own stubbornness.
Wow, you can be an ass even when I agree. Absolutely uncanny.
This thread was fine before someone hit the "New Thread" button. The Test patch forum was closed for a reason. In fact this whole thread has been suggested before if we want to nitpick. Anyone else move to close/delete and call it a wash? j/k
The one that resorted to name-calling hardly gets to call himself mature. Whilst attempting to probe your brain for your thoughts, I found it quite impossible. I suppose a flat line is hard to interpret.
and some of us are a little light on buttons due to logitech's oversight. That's my point. More than one way to skin a cat.
(not me though, DFP user and proud)
(not me though, DFP user and proud)
Everyone has neck muscles, so they are not "special equipment". You just turn your head. Way to state the obvious. However it takes a special action nothing like this in LFS, pushing a button to move your narrower then real FOV, to a position that isn't adjustable. Either that or a track iR. Pitspotter is fine, but sensors for cars coming along side are becoming more and more common on road cars. It's hardly unrealstic to think that these sensors could be combined with the HUD technology in use by a few manufacturers to create a bar on the HUD.
My point is simply that there is more than one way to compenste for the fact that you are not in a real car.
My point is simply that there is more than one way to compenste for the fact that you are not in a real car.
How about "no". I was conversing quite maturely with Blackout.
As for Scawen saying no, one of the posters on the first page had this to say:
looks a lot like someone else agrees with me that he said "no"
As for Scawen saying no, one of the posters on the first page had this to say:
looks a lot like someone else agrees with me that he said "no"
I've been following the thread from the first day. Some things I agree with, others I am completely at odds with.
One thing's been proven at least. Because of the lag and short time that the driver is NOT in control of thier car it SHOULD be at least temporarily held before being released into the control of the driver. Not that Scawen is going to change his mind just because this thread has come to an agreement on how we would do it if we were making our OWN sim.
One thing's been proven at least. Because of the lag and short time that the driver is NOT in control of thier car it SHOULD be at least temporarily held before being released into the control of the driver. Not that Scawen is going to change his mind just because this thread has come to an agreement on how we would do it if we were making our OWN sim.
Without dissimilar view points discussions cannot be had.
Actually, I just wanted answers on that. After I got my answers I moved on. You seem to be the only ones that continue after getting your answers.
Actually, I just wanted answers on that. After I got my answers I moved on. You seem to be the only ones that continue after getting your answers.
Last edited by KeiichiRX7, .
*steve irwin voice*And there goes the angry child storming off to his room
Having an arguement for the sake of it? That's been what this was from the start! Scawen said "NO" and this group ontinued arguing for it like the decision had not been made yet.
Having an arguement for the sake of it? That's been what this was from the start! Scawen said "NO" and this group ontinued arguing for it like the decision had not been made yet.
Reverse grid on Au1
Wouldn't it be really nice to be able to reverse the grid for a course on AU1, for counter clockwise courses?
AU1R maybe? or just a reverse grid option in teh AX layout options
AU1R maybe? or just a reverse grid option in teh AX layout options
My point's been made.
Most people are quite grateful to have the new feature. Not upset with the "Auto Handbrake"
Is it perfect? No it isn't.
Is there anything "wrong" with it as it is? No, there really isn't. Wanna be able to disengage the E-brake manually before the start? Sure, why not.
Should the current functionality be left in there for those that don't have the buttons/axes to spare for an e-brake button/lever? Deffinitely
What's irked me most about this whole thread wasn't the requested feature, it was the complaintive nature of it. The feature is being developed, if it's not perfect so what? It's Scavier's sim project, we paid to be beta testers. If we don't like the way Scawen Roberts wants to program his simulator software, we can all go straight to hell (myself included). The final decision is his, complaining like a child that's been denied the deluxe version of a toy complaining to thier mother. The only opinion that matters is the one of he who holds the final decision, though that opinion might take the thoughts of others into account.
This whole thread is over a moot point. Scawen said in no uncertain terms "NO".
Most people are quite grateful to have the new feature. Not upset with the "Auto Handbrake"
Is it perfect? No it isn't.
Is there anything "wrong" with it as it is? No, there really isn't. Wanna be able to disengage the E-brake manually before the start? Sure, why not.
Should the current functionality be left in there for those that don't have the buttons/axes to spare for an e-brake button/lever? Deffinitely
What's irked me most about this whole thread wasn't the requested feature, it was the complaintive nature of it. The feature is being developed, if it's not perfect so what? It's Scavier's sim project, we paid to be beta testers. If we don't like the way Scawen Roberts wants to program his simulator software, we can all go straight to hell (myself included). The final decision is his, complaining like a child that's been denied the deluxe version of a toy complaining to thier mother. The only opinion that matters is the one of he who holds the final decision, though that opinion might take the thoughts of others into account.
This whole thread is over a moot point. Scawen said in no uncertain terms "NO".
I guess i need to make an edit to the OP. Was made REALLY late, but anway the point was to insert it into the sim very much the way Ghost Car is. Use D3D8 to render the poly's into the environment in the space that an LFS car's cocpit would normally occupy. Such should probably be done via an Insim/outsim/outguage program to switch the dashes according to what car youre driving. user view tracking should probably be pulled from memory rather than Outsim, due to the higher resolution offered of the cars position.
Just think, you could be driving a porsche when you drive your FZ5
Since it was asking for something in the form of an external program, i figured that this belonged in the Unofficial Addon section. Apparently the Mods think otherwise
Just think, you could be driving a porsche when you drive your FZ5
Since it was asking for something in the form of an external program, i figured that this belonged in the Unofficial Addon section. Apparently the Mods think otherwise
Last edited by KeiichiRX7, .
Forgive me if my spelling immediately after climbing out of bed isn't the greatest, but isn't your post off topic as well? Very much a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
As far as responding to his points there really isn't all that much to respond to. He explained himself on the first point. He hasn't noticed the connection between the group and the viewpoint, thus laughing at the viewpoint is laughing at the group. We agree on the 3rd point. And his 4th quote made me chuckle a bit because it isn't a quote at all, but implicative of something that hasn't happened. I have no intention of backing down.
For the most part the people i have talked to (idly, not as part of my survey) have been perfectly happy to have a new feature, rather than irked that it activates thier handbrake.
Admitting an error in proof reading does not equate to retraction.
I was asked for statistics and produced a rough approximation, skewed in fact in favor of you guys, for the sake of arguement. Showing your work hardly makes it a vain pursuit, a mathematics teacher does this every day to explain new concepts to students, as well as how to with given data come to a conclusion.
Your own blind defense of your own stance reminds me very much of oval drivers defending thier kind of racing. So far I've been pretty obliging with my own points and still disagree with yours on the topic.
As for a daily limit of hot air, by that rule shouldn't cue-ball be limited as well? It can't be easy to breathe going on like that.
Now then, time to go earn a living.
As far as responding to his points there really isn't all that much to respond to. He explained himself on the first point. He hasn't noticed the connection between the group and the viewpoint, thus laughing at the viewpoint is laughing at the group. We agree on the 3rd point. And his 4th quote made me chuckle a bit because it isn't a quote at all, but implicative of something that hasn't happened. I have no intention of backing down.
For the most part the people i have talked to (idly, not as part of my survey) have been perfectly happy to have a new feature, rather than irked that it activates thier handbrake.
Admitting an error in proof reading does not equate to retraction.
I was asked for statistics and produced a rough approximation, skewed in fact in favor of you guys, for the sake of arguement. Showing your work hardly makes it a vain pursuit, a mathematics teacher does this every day to explain new concepts to students, as well as how to with given data come to a conclusion.
Your own blind defense of your own stance reminds me very much of oval drivers defending thier kind of racing. So far I've been pretty obliging with my own points and still disagree with yours on the topic.
As for a daily limit of hot air, by that rule shouldn't cue-ball be limited as well? It can't be easy to breathe going on like that.
Now then, time to go earn a living.
Last edited by KeiichiRX7, .
Yeah, i thought this was kind a Kegetys thing, but thought it would be a good thign to bring up
the Nfs3 dashes were really only mentioned because of how simple they are. they would only really be useful in a static forward view
the Nfs3 dashes were really only mentioned because of how simple they are. they would only really be useful in a static forward view
Last edited by KeiichiRX7, .
anyone else apreciate the irony of putting somethign that was never actuayl said or implied in qoutes?
Havent set a date, so it could easily happen after patch X or on another server entirely. possible we could even enlist becky-roses's help to make a skidmarks like program that will let us combine servers as they are viewed from her viewer. teams showing off thier other toys anyone?
1st UF1000 Owners Club Concourse at Blackwood
Anyone interested in holding a concourse to show off the cars entered in the series?
Take the cars out to the BL car park and use autocross objects to set up each team or driver's display, then limit the number of cars on course so that new people cannot join and drive around. The result is a server with a car-show on it, that can be browser with the Shift U function.
might make great use of the new 48 user connection list.
Take the cars out to the BL car park and use autocross objects to set up each team or driver's display, then limit the number of cars on course so that new people cannot join and drive around. The result is a server with a car-show on it, that can be browser with the Shift U function.
might make great use of the new 48 user connection list.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG