Quote from IReallyHateBureaucracy :

That sounds like a good idea. I wonder how they support it, advertising revenue?

From what I read on Wikipedia, it seems they have their own search page that is displayed when you enter something invalid, and that page has ads.

I hope you have all the good luck that's possible for a person to have on your side. I hope you make it through this dangerous time safely.

1st Gen Honda/Acura Integra?

How about we meet on Sundays every week? Sundays should be fairly good for everyone I'd think.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

It's really simple: 10 seconds for the stop, plus 0.370 for every lap of fuel taken on.

I actually think .740 / 2 laps of fuel might be more accurate though (an 11-lap fuel load and a 12-lap fuel load, for example, more often than not seem to take the same amount of time), but I couldn't be bothered to figure out whether a given stop took on odd or even numbers of laps worth of fuel, and which two periods of the race would produce the same figure.

Alright, how'd you figure this out?

South City should have less grip in relation to real life but I can't say I have ever noticed a difference in grip between the tracks in LFS at all.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

OK, I think this is working quite well now.

Pit strategy calculator

I had a question about this calculator. How exactly are you figuring out the pitstop times i.e. how long they take? I saw you said earlier that you used 0.3 seconds per lap of fuel taken on. But I bet you set a minimum amount of time that a pitstop can last, right? How'd you figure that time out? I am asking because I have made my own calculator and was comparing results from yours and mine. They are close, but still not exactly the same. What I did was took an average from the pit times posted by someone (average of all the pittime/laps ) and am using that like this: pittime per lap * number of laps of fuel taken on to figure out time lost per pit stop.

Sure looks like it's dead for now.

Since we are starting to post steam id's, mine's .... with a huge surprise ... OneCrazyDiamond

Yes! Would be great fun.

Quote from bbman :

Why? Who's holding you back to buy one yourself?

Just out of curiousity: Where you choosing the XRR pre-balancing patch as the FZR was just "too lame"?

About that meet: BBT and I got to talk, any clan willing to lend a server?

Maybe I didn't understand your question correctly but I already stated that the server restricts the AWP so no one can buy it. So, the server is "holding me back" from buying one myself.

As for your second question, I have no idea what you mean except that it has something to do with the balancing patch.

Quote from bbman :

It depends... If your opponent has bought the vest and the helmet, you need at least two hits with every other guns than pb mentioned... If he didn't, your right, you'll frag him with one headshot...

I don't agree on the AWP though... It's part of the game, so why don't use it?

How about a LfS-forum CS meet? Could be fun...

Most competitive/fair servers restrict the AWP because it is most definitely unfair.

I used to play it a lot a couple of years ago. Might have to download it again; if I do, I'll let you know. Tis' a great game, especially for free.

Quote from Zachary Zoomy :

labroghini?

You mean Lamborghini by any chance?

Another thing is, if CS:S became a total simulation, it'd require a lot more processing power. If you don't know, CS:S seems to run fine on just about any system, which would change if it included intensive physics. In the end, if it was a sim, I don't think it'd be nearly as popular as it is now.

Quote from mcintyrej :

Beats WOW?

I play CS:S alot, i'm on it now infact. I like Office, surf and AIM maps. Good fun

Edit: I do alot of Gungame too. Deathmatch is the best!

Good point. I am sure WOW does beat it, but who cares.

Koenigsegg of some sort?

I don't think CS:S was ever meant to be a realistic shooter, much less a simulation. And apparently that has worked in their favor since it's the most played multiplayer game!

Does anyone else play Counterstrike: Source? If so, maybe we could all play together sometime. Post up all your steam/css names. If you play some other source mod online, feel free to post about it.

And before anyone asks, I was sparked to make this thread by looking at The General Lee's thread.

Quote from Leifde :

Hm, is anyone else having trouble logging into GPMP? I get a mysql error on primer.php. By the sounds of it my details aren't in the database but I can use the 'Forgot password' bit and I can't create a new account with the same username/team name. Any ideas whats wrong? I'll email if no one has a solution

Can't check right now because of the race tick but I logged in maybe half an hour ago and it was fine then.

Check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hxx2KcPWWZg

Quote from squidhead :

that's still a twinturbo layout... less then 600 bhp for sure...
there are nissans with single turbo conversions running extremely high pressures getting up to 900+BHP on Nissan's ATTESA-ETS 4 wheel drive system (which works miracles on the track) so I guess that any serious Skyline GT-R (the original owner of that engine) could beat the Lada...furthermore, Nissan's wheelbase is longer, and wider, which gives a better, more predictable reactions...

Notice I said "most", not all. How many 900+BHP Skylines do you see running around anyway? Not that many. My point was just that that car will be quite fast due to its power-to-weight ratio (which will be higher than most skylines), and it *should* handle quite nicely as well because it doesn't weigh anything at all.

Quote from hrtburnout :

If you want to use IMG tags, do not link to your hdd but to an image on the intarwebz.

edit: Too late, you edited it

I think it was edited before you even hit 'Submit Reply'

Quote from U4IK ST8 :

Did you even look at the pic? lol

uhh, yeah I did, here take a look at a pic of a GTV: http://www.aroc-usa.org/images ... m_roethemeier_85_gtv6.jpg

Does the back not look similar?

And it had a 3.0L V6 I think.

Alfa Romeo GTV