Released April 2022 Release Candidate Update

AlexHeuskat said:
with the Oreca Test car, at Monza, with the default setting, my car touches the ground most of the time, but not the AI, why ? I thought they have the same setting as me. Is it good if I have most of the time the sparks, or do I need to raise my car ? I have to put +15cm to not touch the ground.
View attachment 44515
Click to expand...
Raise just a little, but stiffen the springs 2 or 3 clicks higher. Downforce is what is pushing the floor down. So fight the downforce with stronger spring settings.
 
AlexHeuskat said:
with the Oreca Test car, at Monza, with the default setting, my car touches the ground most of the time, but not the AI, why ? I thought they have the same setting as me. Is it good if I have most of the time the sparks, or do I need to raise my car ? I have to put +15cm to not touch the ground.
View attachment 44515
Click to expand...
No, the AI don’t as a rule. As far as I understand it from my recent modding work, the vehicle definition includes simplified physics settings (spring rate, ride height multipliers etc.) for the AI.
 
davehenrie said:
Raise just a little, but stiffen the springs 2 or 3 clicks higher. Downforce is what is pushing the floor down. So fight the downforce with stronger spring settings.
Click to expand...
at Daytona, in the long turn, my car scratches with the ground. Even with this setting :

setup.jpg
 
Ride height up, Front and rear. Spring harder. Anti rollbar harder. More packers. Your lose Mitch Speed and Time, when the Car scratch the ground.
 
Just had the strange sound problem again:
2 days no rF2 driven. Started earlier.
Oreca test chosen, Imola.
Training, let's go again, that quiet onboard sound.
Known background noise too loud.
Trackside sound optimal.
rF2 terminated and restarted, onboard sound ok, all one problem.
Sometimes very funny!
Soundblaster Creative AE-5 in the calculator!
Great 5.1 sound when it works the way it's supposed to.
I think there is still a lot of fine work to be done before the May update.
 
AlexHeuskat said:
can you give me a tip ?
Click to expand...

Imagine placing a weight on a spring. Ride Height is, basically, how long the spring is. Spring rate is how stiff the spring is, so higher will hold a given weight higher. Packers limit how far down the spring can move - if the platform you're placing the weight on is wider than the spring itself, packers are like blocks you're placing under that platform that will stop it moving further down (though they're rubber, and not necessarily extremely firm).

Adjusting your 'live' ride height while at speed with downforce may well take more than just changing ride height. The best balance of ride height, spring rate, and packers, will vary between scenarios. There's no single 'best way' so will take experimentation.


One more note: 'slow bump' is a damper setting. Dampers change how quickly the springs can move, but don't change (at all!) where the springs will end up with a given weight.
 
Im absoloutely loving this RC build! Yes I've had some performance issues as many here have mentioned, im very much hoping that thats just an RC thing and will be sorted by next public build. Love the sparks! I have also noticed (as mentioned by others) that when using the Ligier at Spa that my car is leaving a trail of sparks down the straights but the A.I. are not sparking nearly as much as mine, that is even if I force them to use my setup. I wonder if thats because my car takes into account a pre settled on body weight for the driver (therefore closer to ground) and the A.I. cars don't take driver weight into account? I don't know, just an idea, I know of course they run simplified physics (wish we had some sort of option to allow A.I. to use full player physics, no idea if thats possible, but would be great for folks with CPU's that can handle it, illiminate quite a few A.I. probs I bet, but again, I dunno, maybe cause more probs than solves???). Of course if i dont want sparks I can just chuck some packers in there, i just wonder why the A.I. dont have it on same settings as me. Also, I can't hear any sound when the car grounds out?

Have bought Q1 pack, im loving it! Had a great race at Daytona in the GT3's with changing weather! I swear aswell that I now have better grip OFF the rubbered in parts of the track after they've gotten wet, especially notice under breaking and accelerating out of corners, its fantastic! Rain looks amazing, lighting transitions much better!

I love the Indycar! However, unlike the GT3's (in which im equal to at my choosen A.I. skill level in either dry or wet) as soon as its raining they just leave me for dust! (or should that be spray?), They just have grip out of corners and under accelleration that its impossible for me to find (again I wonder if this is simply down to simplified physics A.I. run on), I'll go from 6th place in a field of 30 whilst its dry, then after in the rain I'll struggle to keep in 28th, theres such a big difference, could really do with a wet and dry calibration.

All in all, with the A.I. improvements, wet weather road calculations, adjusted grip, graohics, transitions. Im driving more laps in RF2 than I've done in a long while, hav'nt put it down this week, thats for sure! Bravo S397! Keep the updates (especially A.I.) coming! Cheers!
 
Paul McC said:
Im absoloutely loving this RC build! Yes I've had some performance issues as many here have mentioned, im very much hoping that thats just an RC thing and will be sorted by next public build. Love the sparks! I have also noticed (as mentioned by others) that when using the Ligier at Spa that my car is leaving a trail of sparks down the straights but the A.I. are not sparking nearly as much as mine, that is even if I force them to use my setup. I wonder if thats because my car takes into account a pre settled on body weight for the driver (therefore closer to ground) and the A.I. cars don't take driver weight into account? I don't know, just an idea, I know of course they run simplified physics (wish we had some sort of option to allow A.I. to use full player physics, no idea if thats possible, but would be great for folks with CPU's that can handle it, illiminate quite a few A.I. probs I bet, but again, I dunno, maybe cause more probs than solves???). Of course if i dont want sparks I can just chuck some packers in there, i just wonder why the A.I. dont have it on same settings as me. Also, I can't hear any sound when the car grounds out?
Click to expand...

In order:
  • no, driver weight is included in vehicle mass, so same for all cars.
  • yes, somewhat simplified physics, running at lower frequency, and that usually also means different spring rates and bump rubber rates. They also have fewer active undertray points which could be a big factor with certain cars.
  • AI running player-level physics is unrealistic for more than about 3 AI with current CPUs (multithreading would help, but still not big fields) and wouldn't help with any of the AI issues people are concerned about (actual AI physics rarely gets mentioned, from what I've seen)
  • Bottoming out sound could be the car you're driving drowning out the noise or some bug caused by a combination of settings, hard to say. More specifics might help.
 
This might just be the best release for VR users yet. At least from what I am seing in the G2 Reverb. The exposure is a lot better adjusted now and it is not blinding anymore. Same is for what I guess is/was a shader issue where the windscreen looked like Lego windscreens, just added a blue tint and made liveries on cars look weird as well.
However, it would be nice you have a gamma slider and brightness slider (Example is DCS, it works superbly in VR).
New sound system is also a nice touch, but I am still baffled that there is no "crash" sound when you rub paint with other cars, or crash or similar (RRE is brilliant at that, makes it immersive).
The new track calculations for wet seems good. Not been able to test and compare too much. Feels good.

Look forward to release on stable.
 
Lazza said:
In order:
  • no, driver weight is included in vehicle mass, so same for all cars.
  • yes, somewhat simplified physics, running at lower frequency, and that usually also means different spring rates and bump rubber rates. They also have fewer active undertray points which could be a big factor with certain cars.
  • AI running player-level physics is unrealistic for more than about 3 AI with current CPUs (multithreading would help, but still not big fields) and wouldn't help with any of the AI issues people are concerned about (actual AI physics rarely gets mentioned, from what I've seen)
  • Bottoming out sound could be the car you're driving drowning out the noise or some bug caused by a combination of settings, hard to say. More specifics might help.
Click to expand...
Cheers mate! Ok so RF2 does not take into account any driver weight on even player car whilst driving, thats interesting as I seem to remember some discussion on this regaurding the radicals lateral weight and tire load many moons ago.
I knew the A.I. use simplified physics, but I wonder how ACC gets away with running all cars on same physics, a;though iot does present a much biiger load on CPU than most sims.
In terms of hearing no bottoming out sound, that was whilst driving the new Ligier at Spa
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top