FFB harshness over kerbs and rumble strips

Ok, so you don't understand how the game knows when you're on a rumble strip, and you're possibly not realising the canned kerb rumble effect is disabled in all steering wheel profiles provided with the game (ie you need to turn them on manually, in the file). That doesn't change reality.

The rest of your post is very general; I can't make any across-the-board statements on rF2 physics, and it would be silly to - the physics is determined by the car files. I can't vouch for their accuracy.

 

I do, I completely fail to see how that would make much difference here. Variable ratio would make the rack slightly heavier if anything on bigger rotations (unless we had power steering, which we don't).

I do, that would cause the centering force of the caster be different on both sides of the car. The felt force on the wheel is just an average of those two.

Both irrelevant to the wheel loosing most FFB on slow corner after some point in the rotation.

 

Nuance? I do understand nuance. But the FFB difference for that chassis file is humongous.

Not in this thread. I was relating to the Caterham one where caster was one of the main topics. Up to the point S397 changed the default value in setup (just to silence criticism IMO, that change was just a plaster on the bigger issue).

You did not answer my other questions.
The way I see it you cannot explain why the chassis makes such a big difference on the FFB. I would really like someone did. Or at least told that there is something wrong.

Right now we have people claiming everything is fine (mostly without DD wheels). People saying that something is wrong (not always understanding things right, but as consumers not liking it).
Meanwhile we have similar cars with drastically different FFB feel. Which cannot be right. Something is off here. And I would really like someone to find out exactly what so maybe it'd be fixed one day.

 

with a good programmer, I'm pretty sure it's easy to add lines/codes, and make a slider for the curb FFB strengh....with the good frequency, we can reduce or raise the FFB for anything.
Honestly, it will be for me a very massive improvement.

 

I was referring to that thread also. You said, here, in a reply to me "all of you were saying that caster is the main responsible". I never mentioned caster in that thread.

You want me to justify how the physics works? For what reason? Because you have proof you should be able to feel x by changing y, without even knowing how much y has changed? What's the basis for the discussion? Is there an end goal? What's the point?

Again, an absolute. Prove your own statement first.

 

If you didn't, sorry. Lots of people did. In any case it's not the most important thing here. Caster was one of the important topics there.

The end goal is to make rf2 better. What I did I made the FFB much different without changing the car physics which all of you (I'm generalizing here I know) claimed in various moments of history on this forum that is impossible.

I don't want you to justify anything. I asked very specific questions which you might have knowledge on. The fact you get defensive is telling for me as well. I don't care who is right or wrong. I just want things to get better. Nothing here was aimed at you. But you are one of the people that very often claims that all is fine with rf2 (more often than not).

I did upload the mod. You can download it and test it yourself. It proves that FFB can be changed drastically without changing the physics of the car. Which was said numerous times here is impossible. That the FFB is calculated from the car's physics and if some car has this and that FFB (bar the general multiplier) than it is what it is for this car.

 

Your very specific questions, I believe, are these (my bolding):

I think you can agree there's a fair amount of supposition here. The second part is hardly even a question at all. You know how the discussions on the Merc and other cars (including the Formula Two when it came out) go?
A: "Hey, this car feels weird, something must be wrong with it"
B: "How do you know it's not how it actually is?"
A: "Well, explain how that's possible then"

You think I'm being defensive, because you think I'm defending rF2. I'm actually pointing out that assuming rF2 is doing something weird (which is what you're alluding to in this thread) because of your expectations (and, perhaps, lack of understanding of physics and experience with suspension geometry) has no justification.

I can't tell you that the files are right, and I don't believe I've ever said so. I can't even be sure the output from those files is accurate. But I bet you're even less sure there's any problem with it.

You're backing up your assertion that rF2 is doing something wrong, with assumptions you have no proof for. Yet you want others to justify their position.

And we're back to, if it feels the same, the physics are the same. Except it doesn't feel the same, because you've got a different balance between cornering force and kerb forces. Due to... physics?

 

Honestly you offend me by comparing my questions to this. I put lots of time to try to narrow it as much as possible. Both in merging the car with Mikee's and driving. I did not enter the thread saying: this is wrong!!!, Fix!!!111eleven.

I don't know how it is supposed to be. I don't know what is right. I know I have 2 cars that drive the same yet produce completely different FFB. This is empirical and you can reproduce it. It's not just feel you try to impose on me as you did in several threads before (like the text with A&B). Now there is a simple mod where one can compare.

The second question (that was not really a question) is very specific. The car behaves this way. Other cars that are very similar do not. You play semantics instead of trying to answer. If you do not know (I know I don't) just say you don't. It's that easy. Instead you produce walls of text on why you won't answer. That's the way to go.

Ok, I'll give you one solid if you are experienced with physics and suspension geometry.
Please explain to me how can the suspension geometry change the FFB by order of magnitude and not change the car handling, behaviour and performance. Other than: physics. Give some specifics. Or just say you don't know. I don't.

 

@Havner if you're not getting the answers you want (or any answers at all), reconsider the question. It's not worth our time to continue this.

 

That's an improvement. Still, simple I don't know would've been shorter.

 

You shouldn't make suppositions. I opened the json file and jolt, rumble etc was on at high settings. As soon as I edited the values, the harshness went a bit.
The physics are what they are I suppose. They do feel similar across all cars in behavior, just the ffb is a total mess on some models. Like the Formula 3 or formula 4 is great. The 2012 f2 is awful.
It's just sloppy consistency across the board.

 

What parameters did you modify ?

 

I've tried your mod and for me the only changes I notice are a continuous strong resistance to wheel rotation and less detail. In other words, it feels dumbed down, closer to driving with only a self-centering force. That's how it feels on my wheel.

Sincerely, I don't think you have done anything drastically different but providing more base resistance and burying all details in it. Sure it might work better on some wheels or for some people that don't like their FFB too dynamic. If you're looking for equal levels of force at any time independently of what the cars is doing, I can understand how this is an improvement for you.

For me, FFB is much better in the original car, and since my wheel is very weak, I set a higher multiplier than it would be possible in other cars before clipping and it gets even more detailed. I don't know how realistic it is but it's more fun, in line with other cars and pretty credible.

I'm not saying your issue isn't real, even if it only affects a few users, but you push it in a very antagonistic way without acknowledging that this isn't a issue for everyone.

 

I can assure you, the rumble effects have one of the parameters (saturation, or... damnit, can't remember the other, I'll blame covid) on 0 in all wheel profiles. That disables the canned rumble effect. If it was on, you turned it on.

*oops, had my effects mixed up. Was thinking of the various effects having a coefficient and saturation. To clarify:

@Gary_S85
The rumble strip effects are all scaled by "Rumble strip magnitude":0, (that's the setting in ALL profiles) This affects the rumble vibration/oscillation (defined by a couple of the other parameters) and the rumble 'pull' effect.

I will say it's easy to imagine these are doing something; you need to test them on a track which has completely smooth rumble strips. There are some rF1-style tracks (or conversions) that allow that test, and there is absolutely zero effect with that magnitude set to 0.

As for your initial statement about these settings implying the FFB isn't purely calculated, the game knows you're on rumble strips - that's how it plays the rumble sound. Adding these effects (which, I'll say again, won't happen unless you make it happen) on top has no bearing on whether the underlying FFB is calculated or canned/tweaked. I will say that we can't know for sure that the FFB is actually a pure result of physics calculations (it seems to match the steering column torque, but that could be where any extra effects are added), but there's also no proof anything is added. People will feel all sorts of things, though - especially with the power of suggestion - and that's fine.

 

I've only scanned this thread very quickly but have you tried changing car setup i.e. ride height, spring rating, dampers etc? I too like you can find some tracks very twitchy in some cars, leading to over reactive FFB. Softening the car setup definitely improves the situation as it would in real life.