The online racing simulator
Suggested improvements log [READ before making a new thread]
(847 posts, started )
I am pretty sure this has been suggested before, but couldnt find it in the suggestion log. With the connections we have today, Im sure LFS could handle bigger fields, of say at least 30 cars.
Quote from BurnOut69 :I am pretty sure this has been suggested before, but couldnt find it in the suggestion log. With the connections we have today, Im sure LFS could handle bigger fields, of say at least 30 cars.

I would think so too. But the limit may not be bandwidth related at all. The best thing would be to have unlimited slots to choose from (:tilt

As obvious it is, more slots is not on the list, but will be added soon
Would you add the GTS class (three cars with fwd, 4wd and rwd, around 350hp and 1000kg)? It's been discussed in the RB4's future thread.
Quote from NaBUru38 :Would you add the GTS class (three cars with fwd, 4wd and rwd, around 350hp and 1000kg)? It's been discussed in the RB4's future thread.

Well, the whole thing about the GTS class is...mostly your idea and I have decided not to add all possible choises of different cars and tracks in this list. Though the cars could be good thing to have, you could easily choose couple of cars with similar specs from the "cars to have in S3"-threads.

I think the point of the thread was to make up new versions of RB4, and as a such a mention of RB4 rally at least needs a (...)mark.

But I sleep first
My Improvement Suggestions
MY first Improvement Suggestion is for developers start guiving us some news about how things going.

SITREP (Situation Report) is defined as "an update to an existing report, issued as conditions change or events begin to unfold.

WY? because this is a paying game , and from 25th, 2005 20:00 we only got patchs for stupid bugs and more languages. well that sucks.


2º please clear all bugs out, i dont have to write here because i bet they all were posted allready, but 1 anoying bug that is here from 1.0 beta is the wired crashes at 1km\h that makes you fly away at 300 km\h .

3º F1 car, truck,some classic cars like a porche 911 turbo from 1974,or and many mustang 1970 whith v8 as many other 70's great cars that make a good model for a race car.
Speed tracks, stunt tracks, many more objects for editor,would love to see huge ramp.

4º Ooptions for servers(no damadge on cars, low , medium, real) for stunt tracks this would be nice.
Difrent types of rules for Flags, as many as in real races(car\track demand)

5º my 1 sugestion 1000 times

ps:congrats for the awards
FoxT9 - you bought the licence, you MUST have known the development procedure. But I look forward to playing your racing sim next week, it's be brilliant. I'll give you $1 to pay for all the track and car licences. Oh, and if there is ONE bug I will kill you.
Quote from tristancliffe :FoxT9 - you bought the licence, you MUST have known the development procedure. But I look forward to playing your racing sim next week, it's be brilliant. I'll give you $1 to pay for all the track and car licences. Oh, and if there is ONE bug I will kill you.

my english is not very good but i think i didnt say any thing meaning that think devs are not doing a good job or that i doing a sim, So i realy dont understand. I see you are expert on posts , Posts: 2,608 , its alot, bad that you didnt learn yet when to not reply useless BS.
Quote from FoxT9 :...
text
...

1: This thread is not the place for that. Check the correct threads and post there

2,3: already on the list

4: flag rules should upgrade, yes. Turning off the damage is something I think is against the developers' will. And the majority of players accept this. No driving aids is the slogan of LFS - you do the driving.

5: check my 1st answer 1000 times

Hmm, time to check for new stuff...
Stunt\Wrecking track
So where should I open a new thread for Improvement Suggestion to dev's guive us some news ?

I agree that damadge should be as real as posibel , but my susggestion its for option on servers and if stunt or wrecking track is availabel, just for fun.

In the 1.0 demo players were wrecking each other for hours of fun , but when it was a race every one was 'whith some expetions' was a CRC racer.

So i realy insist on this susggestion, there should be a track for stunts and wrecking whith optional difrent damadge for servers .


hey by the way great job Hyperactive
Support for 6DOF for TrackIR.
Quote from Björn :Support for 6DOF for TrackIR.

What kind of support would it need? It doesn't work at all now?
Sure it does. But only pitch and yaw (turn head up-down and left-right for you non-flyers).
With six degrees of freedom you can move your head sideways and up or down (think raising yourself up to look over a crest).
Hyperactive, please put and this on the list.

RGDS
Virtual Mirror
Great Job! What do you think about adding a virtual mirror to show the image reflected at the driver's opposite side mirror????
i wouldnt mind seeing flip up head lights, if someone said that then you rock lol, and maybe the option for Sleepy Eyes! OH YEAH! maybe an option were you can do your own body kit, and add a wing and stuff, mabe a store? that give you free parts lol nah maybe not, but i wouldnt mind seeing a thing wre you can make your car a bit faster.

better turbo sound would be greate!
Why make the cars faster? We all have the same cars, so it makes little different in the end.

And if you mean use credits to buy stuff, imagine how you'd feel if you never win races because all the good guys have the good cars and therefore win all the time? How are newbies meant to ever catch up? It just wouldn't work, be fair or be fun.

However, NFS:MW is a great game if you like mindless bling (or don't know any better), and there you DO get to trick your car out with polypropylene to make it weigh more and less less aerodynamic, and be slower in the turns too.
I would like to see support for the upcoming PhysX card...

Sure, its a tall order but it is interesting what it can bring to the table.
- Proper smoke rendering (smoke spewing out of the wheel arches upon spinning out)
- Deformable terrain (was already mentioned)
- Proper swaying grass (pointless, but pretty :P )
- Bits of the car flying of realistically in a crash

And lastly it would make this game truly stand out among the pack... no other racing game has support for this (yet).

For people that dont know about this : http://www.ageia.com/

Oh and thanks for making such an awesome game LFS team

EDIT: ahh, the "speeling" :P
Quote from Wmc90 :And lastly it would make this game truly stand out among the pack... no other racing game has support for this (yet).

for a good reason ... you can either use that card for some more eye candy (eg the realistic smoke ... but even that might have a major impact on gameplay) which is more or less pointless with lfs' current very dated graphics engine

or you could use it to speed up the physics engine (which means better framerates for a small group of players (who probably have the fastest pcs in the community anyway) at the expense of many sleepless nights for scawen (like he doesnt have those anyway atm ))
or maybe add more elements to it which has several impacts on the game
you either split the community in half with 2 different physics engines available for those with a ppu and for those without
or the ppu becomes a requirement effectively driving out all the poorer floks with older pcs (and those who play with a laptop)
Quote from Shotglass :
or maybe add more elements to it which has several impacts on the game
you either split the community in half with 2 different physics engines available for those with a ppu and for those without
or the ppu becomes a requirement effectively driving out all the poorer floks with older pcs (and those who play with a laptop)

That is very true, but generally the card is just for the pointless eye candeh

And i just want realistic burnouts really :P

The thing is you can still add things like bits flying off the car without the PPU, just with it it will run a litte bit nicer and a little bit smoother (whilst still have the same effects on gameplay... generally)

EDIT: oh yeah.. and LFS doesnt look that bad with its current engine.
ok lets post a suggestion that might cause a flame war on realism but anyway ...

we all know s2s new suspension model quite well and from a physicsgeeks standpoint im amazed and i can spend hours watching the suspension do its work in shift-L ... but frankly as a driver i cant really appreciate the benefits of the suspension model so maybe just maybe it might be a good idea to enable changing the suspension type in the setup at least as long as s2 is still in its alpha stage

i know its not necessarily 100% realistic to change the whole suspnesion geometry of a car within seconds and you might come up with rather weird combinations (formula mc pherson anyone ?) but it might be a good way to demonstrate how well the model works and also to find bugs that arent as apparent when you go to a car with more differences than just the suspension geometry (i believe the same trail of thought really brought the incompleteness of the diff model to broad daylight)
Quote :However, NFS:MW is a great game if you like mindless bling (or don't know any better), and there you DO get to trick your car out with polypropylene to make it weigh more and less less aerodynamic, and be slower in the turns too.

If u wanted mega bling bling NFSU2 is perfect. The cars looked like rocketships
Quote from Shotglass :ok lets post a suggestion that might cause a flame war on realism but anyway ...

we all know s2s new suspension model quite well and from a physicsgeeks standpoint im amazed and i can spend hours watching the suspension do its work in shift-L ... but frankly as a driver i cant really appreciate the benefits of the suspension model so maybe just maybe it might be a good idea to enable changing the suspension type in the setup at least as long as s2 is still in its alpha stage
...

I think it's better to have the suspension types "preselected" as they are now, because if you were able to change suspension types there would probably be just one type which people would use. It would also require Scawen to give the each suspensions per car the needed specs and technical "numbers" to make them usable.

It's hard to comment your suggestion because it just sounds a bit odd to me...
well the whole point of the suggestion is evaluating how well the new suspension models work and having a large number of people (some of which are educated in mechanical engineering and good at crunching numbers) checking the data they get for correctness

if we wouldnt have the possibility to evaluate the diffs more closely with the options of an open and a locked diff colcob would probably never have been able to adequately proof that the current model lacks preload (of course scawen already knows that but i think it can be seen as a proof of concept)
So in similar fashion we could be able to setup wing angles of the non-aero cars to test and research the aero model...Or ... (just an opinion )

I see your point but it seems that more people would want to limit the setup options. It would be very unrealistic and I bet Scawen can do some research on the suspension models by himself

And I don't think there is anything to learn when comparing the mcpherson suspension system to solid axles in LFS, for example. They are two different suspension systems and behave differently on different situation

Suggested improvements log [READ before making a new thread]
(847 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG