I am sure these could be archived down to 5-8 using intelligent packing and grouping of things that just kept on being repeated
You're twisting his words too: They exist and are not marginal within competitive simracing. No one said to stop all development. Making physics high priority wouldn't stop 3D artists(who make cars and tracks), graphics and UI development.
ACC surpassed rF2 in terms of handling realism. At least according to drivers who race such cars IRL. But yeah of course the scope (number of cars) in ACC is way less so it's much easier to tune everything.
I laughed on this, sincerely, because this is exactly what makes aircraft pilots fly inverted and plunge into the sea. Instrumental data are invaluable tools, but they don't bother you, Don Chisciotte.
There is some telemetry data written for DLC cars, but even in RL there is no data for many aspects like tires. Ideally we would need to have a pro driver, experienced in racing same car IRL and in rF2 on the same laser scanned track with similar conditions. Also setup should be realistic(closest to real life counterpart). If sector and overall laptimes after the update are much closer to RL, and the driver says it handles and behaves more realistically it would be a good proof.
Instrumental tools by which you mean blocked channel ? encrypted data ? If you are such an expert in that stuff and believe RF2 physics needs some fixing why don't you help ? Instead of getting in way and doing nothing. Some of you guys are nuisance. Defending the unrealistic state of RF2 and at the same time saying "we never said RF2 is perfect" or "we also want better physics" EITHER help or shut up.(This is not only for you but also some other fellows who keep repeating the circle, just because in RF2 forum you get back up by other RF2 defenders doesn't mean you are right.)
You are not helpful too, because you don't want to investigate the problem you found. I understand not everyone has been taught to use the scientific method to investigate and interpret the world. There are plenty of Available telemetry channels before worrying about protected ones. And again, I welcome improvements, but I can't care less about those leagues full of understeering aliens. I don't care enough as my main concern is to cut 2 seconds from my lap times. My fun in rf2 is driving.... I know, there are user of this forum that apparently stopped using the game they talked about long ago....
I'm way more helpful than you. You are quite frankly jumping on everyone who is pointing a finger on RF2. Atleast me->> * Is testing the setup/physics and sharing my results *Sharing some of the unrealistic driving examples *Giving my opinion on what could be wrong either car or core physics itself
And it's been explained several times allready that your way of "testing" the physics, same has the "testing" as in the video has nothing to do with scientific problem solving. You posted what? Two screenshots showing how you enter a turn. Log a few hundred consistent laps and we might have something to talk about, but what's been proposed so far is ridiciolous. Just as a litte headsup, as statistical meassurement is something that I have to work with alot: you need atleast 100 repetitions of the same experiment to get anywhere near to something that someone could call reliable statistical results with a somewhat decent confidence and error meassurement. Ever heard of the law of large numbers?
I've I've been away from this thread for a few days, and surprise surprise, I come here to catch up and can't even finish reading all posts because your sarcastic comments keep triggering me. Like I said earlier, if you can't take opposing views to yours and accept them, even try to see other people's side, PLEASE stop trying to argue just for the sake of arguing. It's been said many times, there are areas which are WAY more important than physics atm, not only in the eyes of most of us but also the devs, and most of us have argued, and even proved, that your "proof" is no proof at all. Have a little intelectual humility and accept it. If you can work with it and do some actual testing to provide some actual, use able feedback, go for it! But when you can't back it, please refrain from the sarcasm. Sorry about the rant, but it's been over 20 pages of this
It's funny, I've been playing this game for what, nearly ten years? And I never, EVER, managed to come to conclusive proof of any "exploit" apart from the lowest tire pressures thing. And I've been playing it competitively most of the time even winning a few races here and there. Am I living under a rock and don't know it? Maybe I'm just ignorant
Since you don't agree with him, you mist be ignorant, and because you are ignorant, you don't know what you are talking about, and because you don't know what you're talking about, you are not allowed to comment here in his world In other words, don't bother being triggered by him and just enjoy the funny remarks he makes.
The problem is that people keep trying to get him to see others points of view, and were All wasting time on that. This topic could be 5 pages long and have a lot more feedback if it wasn't for his sarcastic remarks. He is now also insulting everyone who holds our point of view, so I had to say something
Not just screenshots but 2 videos as well. hard to miss them really because they are in the same post. And you did anything useful ? Also it is well used exploits in rf2, still need more evidence ?
I didn't find the exploits they are being used by alien long time before. Yet i still need to find you a proof ? amazing.
I'm gonna add some feedback on the detach arb theory. A few days ago I was testing a new car and setting it up and I decided to remove the rear arb to test this. The car felt like sh*t, but it was actually faster and more stable! Now I couldve done two things. 1) I couldve assumed "physics broken pls fix" or 2) I could try to understand it, and test new theories, as per the scientific method... So I did. So I hypothesised it was down to balance. Aka the balance shift rearward what's what made things better, and not removing the arb itself. So I tested this by upping the front arb and taking it to the track, 2 clicks at a time. It got even better, even if just slightly (were now talking half a tenth* gains) xuntill eventually it got worse. So I backed out the front arb to last "better" result, and I started upping BOTH arbs by same a mount, thus making the car stiffer but keeping the balance. Can you guys guess what happened? Yeah, I managed to up the rear arb by 5 clicks, and gained over three tenths by doing that. So now we have no proof to support the "detach arb" "hack", but we DO* have proof against it. Also proof of improper testing
You do yes! If it's as well know and documented as you say, it should be easy to find proof! I just can't find it because I'm ignorant.
You can't find it because you don't want to. you are not as unbiased as you are showing yourself. Ofcourse this being RF2 forum you will be rewarded by being biased.