Sorry, I misunderstood. As Bish says, make sure you're in the right configuration (did you rename the layouts? the links are broken now so I can't test them myself). Failing that I suspect a reinstall would be the next step, just to be sure there's nothing corrupt.
You're not doing anything wrong - some of the bits outside where you're supposed to be don't have a surface to hold you there, and there's some barely-any-grip-and-invisible surfaces underneath other things too.
You have to find which bits you can drive on through trial and error, but one tip is to use the autocross editor to try to place a tyre stack - you can only place (basic) objects on ground that will hold a car, so you can quickly trace the edges.
You have to find which bits you can drive on through trial and error, but one tip is to use the autocross editor to try to place a tyre stack - you can only place (basic) objects on ground that will hold a car, so you can quickly trace the edges.
Scawen has said before that he calculates the size, shape and pressure of the contact patch, then does something on that shape in multiple passes to determine the grip ('brushing', IIRC).
I don't know how many individual points he uses in that stage (or even that he uses representative points at all), but, to address the original question, it's hard to imagine all that thoroughness ends with a model that doesn't respond to a contact patch straddling the boundary between two grip levels.
I don't know how many individual points he uses in that stage (or even that he uses representative points at all), but, to address the original question, it's hard to imagine all that thoroughness ends with a model that doesn't respond to a contact patch straddling the boundary between two grip levels.
I had two dreams as a kid: Rock star guitarist and/or racing driver. I've always played racing games but only ever for entertainment, being poor had ruled out 'serious' motorsport and I was putting my spare time effort into music. One day, after the 2nd band had become all work and no fun, I found LFS and realised that there is such thing as a racing simulator as opposed to racing game, and that it is possible to learn to race without being in a racing car. Whoop whoop, lifelong dream unfaded 
My guitars get a quick noodle every now and then, but as of that day my spare time focus is racing. If I'm not on the track, making a track or coding up an insim then I'm probably planning it for my next bit of spare time. (You'd think PiranMOTO might have had a few more features by now, given this... but a couple of laps is pretty tempting when you can't find the latest bug.)
I've tried other sims, but they all felt off. I can't put my finger on what it was in the closer ones, it could well be confirmation bias, but they just didn't immerse me, I couldn't feel the car with them like I can feel it in LFS.
They're not monthly any more, they're going to be "as and when" now (https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/1948686#post1948686)
My guitars get a quick noodle every now and then, but as of that day my spare time focus is racing. If I'm not on the track, making a track or coding up an insim then I'm probably planning it for my next bit of spare time. (You'd think PiranMOTO might have had a few more features by now, given this... but a couple of laps is pretty tempting when you can't find the latest bug.)
I've tried other sims, but they all felt off. I can't put my finger on what it was in the closer ones, it could well be confirmation bias, but they just didn't immerse me, I couldn't feel the car with them like I can feel it in LFS.
They're not monthly any more, they're going to be "as and when" now (https://www.lfs.net/forum/post/1948686#post1948686)
Have you heard the expression "Quick; cheap; good: Pick two."?
Especially so when we know that that's what they're doing right now
Your idea of a good balance between two specific goals. Scawen's idea of a good balance (let alone which or how many goals he's balancing) may vary
This I would love, almost as much as I'd love to stick a set of knobblies onto a FXR and go churn up a field. RB4 field-hooning is great, but MOAR PWR! and all that. Tyre restriction is not a coding issue, just a matter of preference (Scawen's said before it's for realism, IIRC).
That one's not just about priority, it's to avoid duplicated effort. The current cars have been extensively tweaked/tested to make the way they interact with the old tyre physics better (again, IIRC. I think he said he something along the lines of wallpapering over some tyre physics sins with car model hacks, but I can't find the reference). Long story short: there's more than the usual content development goes into putting cars into current-physics-version LFS, the extra time would be wasted effort if he did it before the physics. I don't fancy your chances of swaying him on this particular issue
Her cuma yeni bir kilit açma anahtarı alırsınız veya geliştiricilere fazladan bir tane istemek için e-posta gönderebilirsiniz.
Google için özür dilerim türkçe tercüme
Google için özür dilerim türkçe tercüme
Your PFL function looks to be using the flags that were set in the player's previous NPL, not the flags present in the PFL:
You need to use the flags from the PFL directly:
...or update the NPL variables first:
$C = $this->getPlayerByPLID($PFL->PLID);
//..
if ($C->Flags & 8)
You need to use the flags from the PFL directly:
if ($PFL->Flags & 8)
...or update the NPL variables first:
$C = $this->getPlayerByPLID($PFL->PLID);
$C->Flags = $PFL->Flags; // overwrite NPL flags with PFL flags
if ($C->Flags & 8)
I'm an edge case, sure, but I see the things you see between starting LFS and choosing 'multiplayer' about once a month (only when a restart of LFS or the computer is needed).
It would need to be in with the server-list, I would think, in order to be visible most often. Perhaps it could be in both places, or functional in one place with a live preview in the other place. Plenty of options to play with if Scawen likes the general idea, anyway
Sorry, I'd forgotten how this bit worked... it's been a while
You get the player flags in the NPL packet when a player joins the track, and in the PFL packet if those flags change while you're already on track. The format is the same in both places.
If you watch both packets, you should be good
You get the player flags in the NPL packet when a player joins the track, and in the PFL packet if those flags change while you're already on track. The format is the same in both places.
If you watch both packets, you should be good
1601 is 1+64+512+1024, so PIF_SWAPSIDE (1), PIF_HELP_B (64), PIF_AUTOCLUTCH (512) and PIF_MOUSE (1024).
If it's not catching the autoclutch flag from a flags value of 1601, I can only think that you forgot to copy all those defines you listed into your code? (1601 & 512) will be evaluated as true, but (anything & 0) will be false... and an undefined constant will end up being 0.
Yes, that's them. Lots of things to play with
What I'm doing with the '&' is checking to see if that bit is set. So, 'Flags & 8' will be true if the autogears bit is set for that player, and false otherwise.
If your code above is working, then you can replace the message line with this to check:
What I'm doing with the '&' is checking to see if that bit is set. So, 'Flags & 8' will be true if the autogears bit is set for that player, and false otherwise.
If your code above is working, then you can replace the message line with this to check:
<?php
$gears = $clutch = 'No';
if ($C->Flags & PIF_AUTOGEARS)
$gears = 'Yes';
if ($C->Flags & PIF_AUTOCLUTCH)
$clutch = 'Yes';
$this->MessageToAll("Autogears: ".$gears.", Autoclutch: ".$clutch);
?>
If you know how to get at the $Flags variable then it's just the code below, but I'm afraid I'm not familiar with PRISM if you need help getting at it.
$autogears = $Flags & 8;
$autoclutch = $Flags & 512;
Drone-cam drift
Send an '/end', pause for it to end the race (5 or so seconds), then send the '/track X'.
You'll also need to wait a while for the track to load if you want to start the race/qual automatically (or watch for the message 'Track loaded (X)').
If you're loading a layout, you've got an extra layer of waiting (or watching for the same message) between the layout and the race start.
You'll also need to wait a while for the track to load if you want to start the race/qual automatically (or watch for the message 'Track loaded (X)').
If you're loading a layout, you've got an extra layer of waiting (or watching for the same message) between the layout and the race start.
From what I've read about how it works, I would have thought FFB would be better in LFS than others. Myself, I've not been surprised by anything the FFB does in any situation in LFS and I can't say the same for any other sim despite very minimal usage. Too quick to judge soundly, no doubt, and there's nothing specific I can put my finger on, but first impressions and all that
One thing I do miss from a previous, crappy wheel I had was rumble. This was some thrustmaster/ferrari thing with no FFB (bungee cords for an always-on centering force, yay), but had a rumble motor. Made a world of difference when feeling for an apex when you're looking past the exit.
Perhaps there is the possibility of an option to exaggerate the force of FFB when it is changing rapidly, like a force multiplier based on a very short history of change rate. I would guess that would effectively make a rumble-like effect on curbs, but who knows if it would really work like that, or what else it might screw up. Just thinking aloud
Blackrabbi: Have you tried fiddling with the castor angle of your set? You can dial FFB force in and out with setups, but especially castor angle. Higher force might help you feel the bumps.
One thing I do miss from a previous, crappy wheel I had was rumble. This was some thrustmaster/ferrari thing with no FFB (bungee cords for an always-on centering force, yay), but had a rumble motor. Made a world of difference when feeling for an apex when you're looking past the exit.
Perhaps there is the possibility of an option to exaggerate the force of FFB when it is changing rapidly, like a force multiplier based on a very short history of change rate. I would guess that would effectively make a rumble-like effect on curbs, but who knows if it would really work like that, or what else it might screw up. Just thinking aloud
Blackrabbi: Have you tried fiddling with the castor angle of your set? You can dial FFB force in and out with setups, but especially castor angle. Higher force might help you feel the bumps.
Bish: At least 2-wide is in the definition of a racetrack, surely?
PS to all: I tend to forget people can't see wry grins through the internet... I just mean Oulton seems incredibly narrow compared to other tracks. That's not to say it's not worth having - I appreciate that limitations in racing are a personal preference, and variety is always good - just that there are plenty of RL tracks without this baked-in restriction which, IMHO, would serve us better. And at a push, we can narrow tracks with AX objects, but can't usually widen them nicely due to the granularity of the angles available in AX concrete.
PS to all: I tend to forget people can't see wry grins through the internet... I just mean Oulton seems incredibly narrow compared to other tracks. That's not to say it's not worth having - I appreciate that limitations in racing are a personal preference, and variety is always good - just that there are plenty of RL tracks without this baked-in restriction which, IMHO, would serve us better. And at a push, we can narrow tracks with AX objects, but can't usually widen them nicely due to the granularity of the angles available in AX concrete.
If Oulton Park had walled edges instead of grass for runoff, you'd have to fold your wing mirrors in to pass another car...
Much appreciated, thank you
I have a flakey microswitch on my downshift, it fires on and off constantly when held down. Despite much effort at training myself, it takes me a conscious effort to do a 'fast click' (click and release in under 100ms) rather than a 'lazy click' (however long I take when I'm not thinking about it, somewhere between 150 and 200ms). As soon as the racing gets frantic, I slip back to lazy click.
I used 100ms when you first changed the debounce code and that worked perfectly in testing, but as soon as the next banger meet came up I'd double-downshifted by mistake once or twice in each of the first three races. I upped it to 150ms and for the rest of the night I only did it again a few times in ten or so more races. I upped the limit again to 200ms after that and now it's rare for it to happen at all, even when the racing's frantic.
If it was upshift I wouldn't mind, but double-downshift by mistake in a banger oval and your engine is damaged, even if you manage to avoid ending up backwards or getting tagged by the car behind.
I appreciate it's not exactly what the debounce is for, but one unintended repeat signal is as good as any other, no?
I used 100ms when you first changed the debounce code and that worked perfectly in testing, but as soon as the next banger meet came up I'd double-downshifted by mistake once or twice in each of the first three races. I upped it to 150ms and for the rest of the night I only did it again a few times in ten or so more races. I upped the limit again to 200ms after that and now it's rare for it to happen at all, even when the racing's frantic.
If it was upshift I wouldn't mind, but double-downshift by mistake in a banger oval and your engine is damaged, even if you manage to avoid ending up backwards or getting tagged by the car behind.
I appreciate it's not exactly what the debounce is for, but one unintended repeat signal is as good as any other, no?
I'm using it set to 200ms currently. 100ms is fine usually, but in a frantic situation such as banger racing it still catches me out quite a bit.
I'll leave it up while the tracks for the other rounds are on RG
edit: without wind
Last edited by Racon, .
Scawen has said that there won't be any new cars until after the new tyre physics is released (They would need work for the new physics, and he doesn't want to take time out of getting to the physics to do a job that would need to be redone).
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG