Quote from Dethred :

In real life the average driver losing control from going around a turn will not be able to gain control, and if they do it will be sloppy.

In real live, the average driver will loose control because the average driver will panic and slam the brakes on rather than doing a correct countersteer and throttling the car back under control. So far in the LX6 I briefly drove, I was still able to spin the car out. But under much smaller loss of control, where I would spin with no recovery in patch P/Q, I was able to correctly countersteer and work the throttle to regain control.

Quote from JTbo :

You need to understand that it is not black and white world, fanboys here think that if someone say that there is further developing for example in tires that anyone who say it is whiner and not liking lfs, but you know it is not that way, I like a lot from lfs still I say that tire physics have not addressed biggest issue yet, also I feel that tires are now more arcade feeling, but it does not mean that I don't like lfs.

With the title of the thread, "Physics still FUBAR", I don't think the discussion started with someone saying that "there is further developing" to do. It certainly sounds like whining and complaining to me.

what would you know about F1 cars i mean its not like you ever drivin one
your post is weak and i think you should go play something like Need for speed that would suit your style.
i think the patch is a great big step forward into LFS Future and iam more
than happy with what they have done with the patch good job DEV keep up the good work look forward to S3 :-)
Best Racing sim ive played in 7 years.

Last year at france, in qualifying a Minardi did a nice drft, forgot who the driver was.

Or schumacher at bahrain quali few (?) years ago in the slow corner where you brake and turn in at the same time (we need few more those in LFS )

Quote from Dygear :

Last year at france, in qualifying a Minardi did a nice drft, forgot who the driver was.

Must've been a dutch driver, and you can't really use those as an example of proper driving

Physics have improved in the way the car behaves more predictable while cornering. Braking and turning in is still a bit dodgy, but once your settled in the corner, it's a lot better. I'd even go as far as to say I couldn't enjoy the LX6 in Q, because it was so tail happy, and with S I might consider making it my new favorite car, because now the slides and power oversteer happen when I'd expect them to.

the fact that people can point to specific instances of 'f1 drifting' would seem to imply it's not particularly commonplace Seems much more normal to see a spin, whereas in lfs it's more normal (for me) to pull off a big slide and recover.
I love the game, and this doesn't particularly worry me, but it is a fair point imho.

Quote from Dethred :

Again, this is a step in the right direction, I was simply expecting more. It seems each attempt at updating the physics goes like this:

1.) Devs claim seriously upgraded physics
2.) Players claim they are perfect
3.) Players begin realizing they are not.
4.) Devs release a new patch with upgraded physics
5.) Players say they are perfect.
6.) Players slowly realize problems with the physics
7.) Devs work on it further. etc.

I have seen this cycle happen 3-4 separate times since the early demo days.

"welcome to the world of software development!"

... and that was the sound of a nail being hit on the head

That process listed in Dethred's quote sure sounds a lot better than something like: "devs claim upgraded physics, players claim they are perfect, players begin realising they're not, devs don't listen to players, game does not progress at all, players play something else, devs go on the dole".

This patch is a definite improvement. I don't think anyone could realistically expect everything to have been perfected in a single patch. Most people seem to like these improvements and appreciate the devs' work, and will play LFS happily until a new patch is needed.

I think Dethred's phrase "...this is a step in the right direction, I was simply expecting more..." says it all really. If we load ourselves up with high expectations then we're more likely to be disappointed. I'm not having a go at you Dethred, but what you said is exactly the point with software patches. All I wanted was a tyre improvement and an aero improvement, not perfection. What I got was a tyre improvement, an aero improvement, an F1 car and some other cool stuff. So I'm satisfied.

For now

Well, I'm just glad that this version of vBulletin finally has an ignore feature so I never have to read one of Dethred's posts ever again.

Sheesh, even arch lfs-basher BMX32 is loving the new patch.

Quote from colcob :

Well, I'm just glad that this version of vBulletin finally has an ignore feature so I never have to read one of Dethred's posts ever again.

Sheesh, even arch lfs-basher BMX32 is loving the new patch.

LOL-- Now that's funny.. I never bashed LFS. I always say I like it, but I didn't like a few of the characteristics of the physics.. and then of course people would argue about it with me..

No sim is perfect (maybe RBR has come the closest?), but LFS has definitely improved a lot now.. It is definitely fun as hell now, and that crazy "going loose and staying loose" bug is gone in most cars and you feel more connected to the car. The Force feedback alone is worth the price.

Here's my take on the soft physics...

I think a lot of it has to do with how close to the limit you are in the first place. I did a couple of hours last night at KYGPlong in the FZR ... and at first the physics did seem "softer" as if I didn't need to be as accurate when on the limit ... and being able to maintain and recover big drifts more easily etc.

But after updating my set, and then getting my times down by another 3 seconds -- which was the new limit for me and these physics -- I was again having to be super accurate when on the limit.

The thing is the F1 guys are driving so quick (extreme loads through ALL stages of the corner AND perfectly balanced loads front/back ) that having the car step out is usually fatal.

HOWEVER ... I bet if you got them to do some testing, lapping at a slower pace, they would be able to induce and maintain the drifts you are talking about (or at least comparable).

See what you think of the drifting when you've taken your times down by a few seconds and you're really operating at your maximum through all stages of the turn. I think you'll find it starts to feel more real.

Just my thoughts...

Ben

PS. A real life example: I raced GP125's (bikes) when I was in my teens. If you've ever seen GP125's you'll know that they don't lend themselves to drifting (thin tyres, light weight, stiff suspension ... nothing like 500's or superbikes) ... HOWEVER, when I was first learning I got into some BIG front end drifts on a number of occassion. 4th/5th gear ... the type where the bars start to turn to lock for a good few seconds ... really scrubing the front until you wash off enough speed for it to correct.

This had nothing to do with any talent on my part, it was simply that the bike wasn't balanced correctly. So although the front was pushed over the limit, it was done at sub maximum lean angles and with traction to spare at the rear. The result is a drift that I could maintain ... AND on machinery that you would not normally see drifting.

Fact is, as I got quicker and was loading the bike more evenly, with higher speeds and lean angles through all parts of the turn, drifts like that became impossible. At truly maximum loads there's simply no way you can take a big step over the limit without it costing in a big way -- either you spin (or low/high side) or you run so wide you go off, or lose excessive time.

If you're able to maintain the racing line whilst in a drift, it would suggest to me that the car wasn't fully loaded and balanced before you went into the drift.

Some food for thought perhaps

my 0,2 €... the tires might not be perfect or as perfect as some have expected, but , they just feel "right" to me..the car is more predictable now and it certainly a positive thing no matter what... and for some unhappy dudes here , dont forget it's still labeled "ALPHA"...

I agreee with BenH on this, start running times faster and I think you will notice the "ohh Crap" feeling a bit more, I know I do.

No I don't think it's perfect, but it feels alot better, much closer to how it feels in my car when I am pushing it, with roughly the same feeling in the wheel. I like Nk, but I think they have a ways to go before they are close to LFS IMO.

just another nice little drift:
http://rapidshare.de/files/505 ... Villeneuve_Slide.avi.html


Oh, it's a sauber! Coincindence?

If one thinks the physics are "FUBAR," then any post complaining about it is per se pointless bashing spam.

:feedtroll

...agreed, especially when the thread then starts diverting into a contest about who knows the most about F1 racing...illepall

Well since FUBAR means F'd up beyond all repair... then that is really stupid, because obviously they are far from that.. If anything they need small tweaks still- FAR from FUBAR.

Quote from BWX232 :

No sim is perfect (maybe RBR has come the closest?)

Ditto! Of course there's pretty long fault list in RBR too (too light mass in the cars, tarmac behaviour and "wheels are spinning ON/OFF" weirdness especially on tarmac) but you can't really argue about RBR's greatness because there's no other games that you could compare it. Or maybe LFS's RB4 on rally tracks comes to closest, but even that feels so "Sega Rally" after RBR.

Quote from Dethred :

You're right, F1 is easy, so easy I can drift an F1 car. Please take your argument, or lack thereof, somewhere else. This thread is for intelligent criticism....

If you honestly think your initial thread is one of scientific approach and rational criticism I honestly urge you to have a brain check.

Basically what you are saying is that you don't believe a F1 car should behave that way, while some other people believe it should, however there was no sign of real substance that you raised to support your thesis, other than "you don't think it's right"

Now I have no problem with people being disatisfied with LFS however putting it in improvement suggestion forum and saying it's a FUBAR is just off unless you come prepared with some solid support.

If you really do think you have a valid point then i think your logic has gone FUBAR.

I think the reason why this sometimes happens in the BF1 is because of sideways aero not being simulate - think about it. When you corner technically you have a different coeficient of drag and a different frontal area. This should push you back in line when you are drifting like that but it is a VERY difficult thing to simulate, possibly the best way to do it being to only simulate the effect of frontal area increase.

I can't imagine that though, to push the car back in line means you are having more drag at the rear than the front, hence the rear gets pushed faster than the front back in line, that's not a theory that I can recall I have ever heard of.

Put it this way, you should have more drag at the back than you currently have.

Quote from axus :

When you corner technically you have a different coeficient of drag and a different frontal area.

Exactly, so the faster you are going, it is also harder to oversteer.

This applies to all cars, because all cars have LOTS of drag when sideways. Either that, or this is due to the tires

Quote from wheel4hummer :

Exactly, so when you start sliding sideways, you have drag which helps keep the car from spinning. It's hard to explain what I mean. But, the faster you are going, it is harder to oversteer and easier to recover*.

*What I mean, by easier to recover is that you wouldn't have to turn the steering wheel as much.

This applies to all cars, because all cars have LOTS of drag when sideways.

Yes, but this doesn't happen in LFS so adding this would decrease slides at high speed. As for the recovery, sometimes the actual slide is caused by diff settings and these diff settings also help bring it back. Its hard to explain but a deep technical analysis would show this I think.

In real life the yaw angle in a slide makes the wings extremely inefficient, and they lose masses of downforce, especially at the rear. Thus the drivers drive on the limit of traction, not the limit of sliding off the track.

LFS just isn't complex enough YET to model this, the undertray effects, ground effect of the front wing etc. The lack of sliding in an F1 car is nothing to do with the drag at theback pushing it into line again...