Does sliding the car get punished in Rfactor2

these are just bunch of excuses, the aliens have been exploiting driving and setup for years .....but still these guys need "proof" lol. its literally on YT videos, yet somehow when their favourite sim is under attack they seem to forget how to use YT.

some of these exploits are so bad it doesn't even take an engineering degree to tell its f*cked up lol.

 

I'm not so sure of that.
I was racing in Formula Sim Racing in the Avid Chronic team. I was in tier 3 "Pro" but we all collaborated on setup. Our drivers took 1st and 2nd in the World Championship without any setup exploits. We tested, we used Motec, we optimised.
Up to 10 drivers doing 300 laps each to refine a setup.

 

first of all that is good to hear. but what are the cars you talking about ?
even if you are talking about same cars i'm talking about the problem still stands. these illogical setup providing so much pace even for one lap that is the problem.
I have seen videos where people are detaching arb, running extremely low cambers and low rear wing and yet they have top pace. and track is not monza btw, this is go to setup for gt cars in general REGARDLESS of what track you drive. then fine tune little bit springs.
not to mention these exploits are taking into consideration the slidey nature of rf2 and hence using quite soft rear spring and instead of pairing that with stiffer slow rear bump (which is very basic rule of thumb ) they are going with very low values in rear slow bump damping as well. this car will understeer hard IRL but in RF2 you can force through this.
basically general idea what i get from exploit is ->
that they are making mechanical setup very understeery and then gaining some rotation back with low wing and with low wing less drag.......such car IRL would never have top pace because these setup changes will bring the TOTAL grip level down.

 

Well, I understand where some people come from. I try to not get too heated up, even if some arguments get a little dubious, as I myself have made stupid claims being more on the other side. It also helps to try and stay diplomatic, as people will not want to reason against strong opposition, but I also understand the frustration and that we don't have to spoon feed some people.

I certainly feel disappointed with Rfactor 2 but for me when I am not letting physics brake (in my opinion) it's still the best experience for me and since I play offline I don't care much. Even if I was going MP I wouldn't be so upset, as I like more the experience of racing without the AI really annoying me and getting some people at the grid at my level doing the things right and going agains each other.

 

Even if exploitative way wasn't ever faster, it wouldn't mean there wasn't something wrong in the way some driving styles are allowed in some cars.

I feel this is a good way to explain it too.

 

yea but once you know about these stuff you can't pretend to not know it. for me good chuck of enjoyment in sim comes with building a optimised setup that follows real logic and rest enjoyment is driving itself. for me major fun is lost when issues are in this area.

 

True, I get you. Still, other sims have other problems that annoy me more. IRacing I would like to try again, but not wanting to pay such a fee and I've already invested in RF2 and also in ACC, wich I stopped driving, although ACC is quite good I guess I still prefer to keep me on the limits in RF2 than dealing with some physics issues I have with ACC.

 

One car that is worth checking is Camaro GT3 car, it is entirely different thing to drive that car. Yet very drivable, and very nice to drive fast.

That car could actually put most of pointless discussions at rest.

And yeah, it is all about predictability of slides. But to be more exact. The ability to be precise. Sharp tires will require driver to act in shorter time, reacting in shorter time makes it harder to be precise. I would also add, just to be more clear, predictability not only when slides starts, but even more importantly when they ends.

I continue on this subject, because I like it.

Ever noticed how sometimes cars come back from oversteer and they have this slight swing to opposite direction ? Not actually a tankslapper, but I'd call it "micro tankslapper". It is not significant for performance, and is not dangerous. But with blunted off tires in simulation, it won't happen, as it will be "too hard" to be so unprecise and to straighten steering imperfectly.

One other interesting car handling bit that gets more bold with sharper tire is snap oversteer. Snap oversteer begins with understeer. Sometimes drivers don't realize they have some understeer, and when front tires bite in car can quickly shift into oversteer state. With sharp tires it can happen quickly. With blunt tires, you'd have to be half asleep to loose stability.

Sharper tire also has more exciting sensation of traction when accelerating. As blunted tire has slower transition from full slip to static grip (blunted tire has to have more sliding friction and inevitably less static friction to prevent of doing too fast laptimes, can't rise both), sharp tire can grip in quicker and harder when driver finds the correct throttle position, simply the difference of slip and static grip is bigger. P.S. tires can be configured to have different sharpness laterally and longitudinally.

 

Well, that car I remember being unforgiving at throttle and I kinda stopped using it, but I don't remember well how it was on sliding behavior.

Appreciate what you've just written. I had already saw a somewhat comprehensive video about the subject of different tyres and you bring some great points about snap oversteer. I see it happen in Rfactor2 but it either seems to happen to slowly in transition or too late, where I believe I had already pushed that car to the limit.

Some videos I showed here actually shows that behavior quite well and it's a agressive lap on the edge (wait, it was just yesterday and we had an exchange because of that video ). So yeah, I know cars can be pushed and slide somewhat and rotate more under slip angle, but not rather the same way RF2 allows.

Would be nice if we could tweak and test that kind of things, but studio 397 are off limits and even other cars I am not experienced doing any of that in Rfactor2.

 

I think the point of a simulation is to recreate the real thing as closely as possible (minus the obvious drawbacks or reality, like death). In that respect it's odd to turn off a feature that the car is built around. I don't suppose you would drive around with a flat tire, if that was possible, because four working tires takes away skill?

How you choose to enjoy rFactor is of course entirely up to you. Personally I want things true to reality regardless of the skill involved or not involved.

I have no real knowledge of GT cars. My comment was based on something written in passing by a GT driver, in a debate on some other forum (Codemasters if I remember correctly). He basically mentioned sim racers being silly turning TC off when the cars need it to drive well and rotate properly. My interpretation is that the setup and TC are tuned specifically for that, so not comparable to a more standard application.
I think rally in the mid 2000's is interesting to look at, as they had all kinds of driver aids - TC, ABS, launch control, GPS adjusted ride height, and active differentials. It's especially interesting because rallying would really expose the weaknesses of TC and ABS, yet I doubt those systems were there to slow the car down or make it harder to drive. I think it shows that driver aids can indeed improve the handling of the car and offer performance benefits.

 

Yes, the thing requires slight getting used to, can't just jump in and start oversteering and understeering everywhere like you'd drive your daily car in the snow at 30kph. And thats exactly why such physics aren't "doing it" in the mainstream simulation. Except in iRacing where things are even more brutal than IRL, because you pay money for them for the time you are spending getting used to stuff Gotta appreciate genius of iRacing, they make people work harder more than RL, and they make them pay for that.

 

Reminds me of this scene....

 

But atleast when iracing driver drives a real thing he will feel real car easy. It is like weight lifting, when you start lifting heavy weight lighter weight become easy (even though weight stays the same but your muscle are much stronger, more used to hard stuff....due to heavy weight training)
Here iracing is heavy weight and Real is lightweight.
In RF2 case ->
RF2 is lightweight and Real is heavyweight.

I will always prefer a sim to be a touch harder than IRL because lack of fear, money and death aspect in simulator.

 

That's true, there's the appeal to a lot of sim racers starters to hop in the most unforgiving simulation, and talks about it being so big and being a paid service... It all engulfs it in this closer than any other. Not so much today though, or maybe because now I am so much more into stuff I don't think people still think like I did...

I'll have a run with it. I will leave a video here of me crashing in the end, but driving propperly the Aston Martin GTE. That's why I love RF2 so much, that when driving more "propperly" it doesn't do anything strange and even when going a bit to the edge it will warn you, it's not like those things are just slide happy, but the problem is making it slide is then to easy to control it there (some cars and not a fault of the software itself I am sure).

 

Iracing isn't just unrealistically hard. It's as easy or hard as any as long as you don't overstep the limit more than a tiny bit. When you do overstep it it's not hard either. It's impossible and utterly broken. If rFactor ever took that direction I would uninstall it immediately.

As it happens racing is often done dancing around the limit. When you see really good racing drivers pushing you get all these little transients where the car slides and grips, and the driver correcting it all of the time (unless you're Walter Röhl or Albert Einstein, can't remember which, who's unbelievably smooth). Ayrton Senna is a classic and well known example of that, where the car looks like it floating and dancing around.

Forget about that in iRacing. You go just a fraction over the limit and all control of the car is gone in an instant.

To me, this is what really sets rFactor 2 apart from other sims. It's far ahead of the competition. The cars feel alive and with the great force feedback you can tell exactly what's going on, pushing the limits, balancing the car on the edge. We can of course talk about whether or not the tire behavior is too forgiving, but let's also recognize what's good and not try to push it in the direction of the mess that is IceRacing (yep, there - I said it).

 

Is it possible to slide and drift a car around for 10 minutes? Yes.

Is it possible to excessively slide a car for 10 minutes and run competitive laptimes? No.

What is the definition of "excessively"? Depends.

What is a competitive laptime? Only way to know that, is to get some fast drivers together and have a competition.

 

If you are looking for skill transfer to the real thing, iRacing seems a rather bad idea. I mean, what do you gain from conditioning yourself to a few degrees of oversteer throwing you off the road? If that happens in a real car, are going to put both feet in and brace for impact? It would seem a better idea to get accustomed to real vehicle dynamics, even if they are a bit forgiving. Being harder does not mean better in this regard (skill transfer).
The analogy to weight training is faulty. By doing weight training you can make your muscles grow, making you generally stronger (with neurological adaptation to the exercises as well). Driving skill is mostly neurological and you get a specific adaptation to imposed demands. First and foremost you get better at the specific activity that you're doing. Meaning, you get good at iRacing or rFactor but the bigger the differences between the two are the less skill is transfered. It's not about harder or easier, but how closely related they are.
As a sim racer who wants to improve in the real world it means you get the best skill transfer the closer you are to the real thing. It also means you should probably broaden the repertoire, while staying as close to the real thing as possible, to get a more generalized skill transfer (as opposed to just being good at a particular game). Furthermore it means you will at best gain nothing from things that are messed up or non-existent. Like, for example, saving a "big" slide in iRacing. It's pretty much non-existent. You could do it in rFactor though, and even if it happens to be too easy the movements are the same.

With that said, please don't think any sim can make you a great driver. There's some skill transfer for sure but fooling yourself will get you hurt.

 

Too much this or that is bad in simulation, what mechanisms do we have that helps us evolve without getting unbalanced ?

Consumer market will prevent stuff from being too demanding and too punishing in simulation. It does that with 100% success rate. Watch iRacing going from much too hard to reasonably realistic in a couple years to maintain player numbers, while other simulations will be forced to go from reasonably realistic to way too weak for same reason. Also wait for EA to kick in with their new codemasters equipment, I wonder what they will do, obviously money, but how.

What will prevent stuff from becoming too much weak and fake ? Answer: Improving knowledge and understanding for as many simracers as possible. Well, that probably will make to about 100 of such guys worldwide, and some of them will sell out if they'll have significance. Some will fail at being likable and will be disrespected a lot and ignored. And some will just not give a damn and enjoy their rich knowledge on their own.

 

Has iRacing become reasonably realistic? It's certainly not when you step over the limit. I'm not familiar with it's evolution though, and within the limits I haven't played it enough to know if there are any problems.

In sim racing there seems to be a somewhat positive trend towards more realism nowadays. I don't know how long it will last but this year seems to have seen a big upswing in the sim racing community and higher demand for realism. A good example is Project Cars 3 which abandoned it's roots in sim racing, although you could argue it was far too arcadey, and became a total flop. Codemasters latest Dirt doesn't seem to be doing too well either, and that series was never a sim.
I'm worried about EA though. I've seen nothing good come from them in over a decade. Meanwhile, Dirt Rally has actually been pretty good. Before WRC 9, Dirt Rally 2.0 was the only serious rally game in modern times. It's far from perfect but it seems the ambition has been there to make a reasonably realistic rally game. How long will that last when the suits from EA step in?
I still remember when Richard Burns Rally was new. Played it on an old Microsoft Sidewinder wheel. That game was so challenging you had to go through rally school, with good results, to stand a chance. It's still regarded as the most realistic rally sim ever (with mods). Didn't do too well financially though.

Knowledge and understanding will never work. You would first need a culture that values such things, and the world is moving away from such things.

 

I have to say I am with you on that. Although both forgiving and too hard can be fatal when driving in real life, if they diverge from it. In the case that I think both do, one should be careful and one can apply a lot of what is at sim racing, but if the goal is pushing the car to the limit, maybe try it on a road withou barriers first...