Formula Vee

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Adrianstealth, Jun 14, 2021.

  1. green serpent

    green serpent Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2016
    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    544
    This thread is turning into "another which sim is best" rabbit hole but I just wanted to respond to this.

    I did some searching, and iRacing and ACC both have chassis flex. iracing has physics generated ffb and (I think) ACC does. I assume all sims have 100% accurate newtonian physics (that shouldn't be too hard I hope). And all sims obviously have aerodynamics simulated.

    Some of these things might be a bit more well done than others, but at least they all have them. Acc has pretty advanced tire model but still imperial and not physical (NOT saying that that is worse, just "less dynamic" within the context of this conversation). Iracing has physical tire model.

    So iRacing and rF2 do indeed have similar levels of "dynamicism" with ACC slightly behind. Not making judgments on the implementation of such things and the intagibles, but as far as ticking physics boxes of this feature and that, iRacing and rF2 are on par with each other unless I'm missing something.

    Assuming there is not mistakes in the "basic" stuff, it really comes down to to hardest thing to simulate, how one kind of surface interacts with another kind of surface, i.e tire model.
     
    GertjanD likes this.
  2. Lazza

    Lazza Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    10,480
    Likes Received:
    5,316
    We're starting to really repeat threads dedicated to Skippy and fvee handling, but they should be much harder to drive than the Tatuus - that's basically the point.

    As mantasisg mentioned, very likely you can hit correct lateral and longitudinal g forces with them (let's not enter into the combination, as that then starts the tyre chat for realz), so then any "ice" feeling must be in certain scenarios.

    Then you search for Skippy videos (linked already in the aforementioned threads) and see people losing control while going slowly and with seemingly benign inputs.

    So I think this needs to be kept in context. Your formula experience is apples, these cars are oranges.
     
  3. green serpent

    green serpent Registered

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2016
    Messages:
    569
    Likes Received:
    544
  4. mantasisg

    mantasisg Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    2,598
    Likes Received:
    3,526
    It seems apples and oranges can be even FVee. I think it is because FVee is more like a category of cars, it isn't same car everywhere.

    This was discussed long ago in Reiza DLC thread.

    Look at post #513 driver of Australian FVee shares opinion: https://forum.studio-397.com/index.php?threads/the-reiza-dlc.61402/page-26

    Look at response by Renato from Reiza: https://forum.studio-397.com/index.php?threads/the-reiza-dlc.61402/page-28

    For a convenience I also just copy video that Renato included in his post:


    It definitely can't be real life footage, because as "wise" people say: -harder doesn't mean more realistic.

    Looks like it is sometimes.
     
    green serpent likes this.
  5. leseb64

    leseb64 Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2020
    Messages:
    234
    Likes Received:
    658
    The Vee must be more "slippery" than the barber yes because there is no aero and the tyres are less wide but look they are not slippery on all the corners it behaves more like a kart you can see that the front is looking for constant grip but the rear is quite stable unlike in game where the rear is always in front. ..and the skip is worse, just like iracing changed the behaviour of the skip and others with the new tyres i'm sure if s397 put the same data on the new tyres it would be different and surely more in line with reality!



     
    avenger82 likes this.
  6. mantasisg

    mantasisg Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    2,598
    Likes Received:
    3,526
    @leseb64 You make it obvious you didn't read my post, and it also means you didn't read Renatos post which I linked in my post. Also, you seem to be unaware that FVee is not developed by S397.
     
  7. leseb64

    leseb64 Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2020
    Messages:
    234
    Likes Received:
    658
    I have read and once again you remain locked in your vision of things and you don't want to know anything else...(or do we misunderstand each other?)

    the IRL pilot says exactly what I've been saying all along, I'm comforted!

    "Notice the complete lack of needing to countersteer. The car is very grippy, almost planted and has a very high tolerance level before it steps out of line.

    The one in sim is sideways, everywhere. It has horrible lift off oversteer, the back end steps out at any slow corner, and on acceleration snaps like it has 500bhp going through the tires.

    The car is a very low power, high grip machine designed to get people into racing at a club level. None of these characteristics are matched with this version that has been produced.

    Saying that, it is fun, and looks great - but for all the wrong reasons!"

    Renato tries to justify as best he can...green track, tried such a setting...F-vee brezilian...ok...
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2021
  8. avenger82

    avenger82 Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2016
    Messages:
    768
    Likes Received:
    309
    Sorry for being honest. That's my default reaction to people saying things like "in [my favorite sim] handling feels most natural". Unless you've driven same car IRL on and ideally, over the limit - you don't know if it's natural. Even such RL racing drivers' opinions often vary from it's almost like IRL to it's far from RL when describing same car in a sim. It's often when they go to very specifics then their opinion matters.
    IIRC the person said it felt too bumpy vs RL

    And these two are usually not available to devs or available at basic level such as L/D ratio etc. Tire data even when it's provided is often not trustworthy as explained by Neils Heusinkveld and other devs. Edit: and in case of rF2, empirical curves from manufacturers are very hard to implement correctly to their physical model.

    I told you, they are defined in your controller's .json file i.e.:

    "Jolt magnitude":-2,
    “Jolt magnitude#”:“How strong jolts from other cars (or walls) are. Suggested Range: -2.0 to 2.0.”,
    “Off-road multiplier”:0.3,
    “Off-road multiplier#”:“Temporary test variable to reduce force feedback strength off-road (0.0 = zero FFB, 1.0 = full FFB)”,
    “Other spring coefficient”:0,
    “Other spring coefficient#”:“Static spring effect rate (-1.0 to 1.0) for any other FFB-capable controllers”,
    “Other spring saturation”:0,
    “Other spring saturation#”:“Static spring effect peak force (0.0 to 1.0) for any other FFB-capable controllers”,
    “Rumble strip magnitude”:0,
    “Rumble strip magnitude#”:“How strong the canned rumble strip rumble is. Range 0.0 to 1.0, 0.0 disables effect.”,
    “Rumble strip pull factor”:-1,
    “Rumble strip pull factor#”:“How strongly wheel pulls right/left when running over a rumble strip. Suggested range: -1.5 to 1.5.”,
    “Rumble strip update thresh”:0,
    “Rumble strip update thresh#”:“Amount of change required to update rumble strip effect (0.0 - 1.0)”,
    “Rumble strip wave type”:3,
    “Rumble strip wave type#”:“Type of wave to use for vibe: 0=Sine, 1=Square, 2=Triangle, 3=Sawtooth up, 4=Sawtooth down.”,

    There are some canned effects:
    "Jolt ffb from hitting other cars and walls or armco. (Can be turned off.)

    Also kerb push or pull effects. (Can be turned off)

    Not sure about the grass/sand effects...

    The road noise has some artificial bumps added as well to compensate for not laserscanning... but as stated, not a canned effect.
    "
    https://forum.studio-397.com/index.php?threads/rf2-canned-effects.58931/

    The same could be said by iRacing or ACC fan.
    Don't want to derail the thread but check out Live Track 3.0. Also one example of a feature/gimmick that shows how deep PC2 simulation is: engine power depends on altitude. I don't want to derail the thread further so if you're interested please check out:
    https://www.trueachievements.com/n2...king-project-cars-2-with-slightly-mad-studios
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2021
    GertjanD and TheMenace like this.
  9. avenger82

    avenger82 Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2016
    Messages:
    768
    Likes Received:
    309
    What do you mean strange tire model? Their tire model is empirical and at least in 90% same as in AMS1. But which tire model is real?
    iRacing has unique tire model (not the best one).
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2021
  10. mantasisg

    mantasisg Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    2,598
    Likes Received:
    3,526
    I think we understand each other alright. You might be purely locked in your own narrative yourself, because you notice only arguments that supports your view, but blaming others for what you are guilty for is effective strategy, I have seen that in politics. The key thing right there ,and my argument was that Fvee that competes in Brazil and FVee that competes in Australia are different cars. I don't know, but in my mind this is very easy to understand, as well as it is very easy to notice how real car drives in Brazil series in available footage all over the net.
     
    pkelly likes this.
  11. leseb64

    leseb64 Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2020
    Messages:
    234
    Likes Received:
    658
    that's exactly what you do when you don't agree with us, we don't understand physics...
    what all devs say in general, rather than saying "with my knowledge and understanding of the software this is the best I can do".
    The iracing devs are the kings of this but how do they explain the evolution of the skip barber and other cars over the years? since the beginning it was in line with reality according to them...and it's the same for rf2,ams2,acc etc...

    the rear drive train is very stable, only the understeer and the search for grip at the front is tricky, I will try to go as fast as in the video with the Vee on rf2 & ams2 (although on ams2 I'm sure it's more stable)
     
    ApexModding and TheMenace like this.
  12. mantasisg

    mantasisg Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    2,598
    Likes Received:
    3,526
    Thank you for detailed reply.

    1. First of all, I'd like to say that telling other party in a discussion that their opinion is worthless to you isn't best thing to do. I remain to my position that RL driver opinion is for sure valuable, but it isn't an ultimate thing and you shouldn't downplay pure knowledge and ability to notice things in other ways.

    2. Great now, we have an opinion that RL driver thought something was too bumpy comparing to RL. Maybe he is correct, I don't know. If he is, it could be too stiff car, tires or road surface. It is much less likely to be core simulation issue, unless this pattern could be found with all vehicles, and all tracks, which I am sure it wouldn't, because I know you can make a car in rF2 that will float like a dream over most bumps at high speeds.

    3. Yes indeed data might come harder perhaps, I don't know. But my idea wasn't about data acquiring and how easy it is to plug it in. It is about what simulation is offering in the first place, how intuitive and flexible it is, how much effective and directly describing reality variables are, how many real effects are simulated... Things like that are more above importance of data. What Neils Heusinkveld says is just related about what he enjoys working with more, and where he is able to get better results. If I have worked with some particular models and excelled so greatly at them, I wouldn't want to switch to different ones, especially if I was fully satisfied already. IMO it is a shame, I think guy like Niels would quickly learn rF2 modeling very well, well perhaps ttool, I don't know much about ttool, but real time values of tires I find to be superb to work with.

    4. Thanks for showing these canned effects. Yes perhaps it is true, but it doesn't look like anything sinful.

    5. Yes exactly, same could be said by any simulation fan, and it would be true. In all proper sims FFB should be based on physics. I was saying it exactly like that. Better physics will always output better FFB. More average physics - more average FFB.

    6. I really wish those things would come to rF2. That is awesome stuff. But to begin with it must be the basics that are simulated well, and there are just few issues around basics in rF2, few of them are debatable, while foundations are very good.
     
  13. mantasisg

    mantasisg Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    2,598
    Likes Received:
    3,526
    Well.. what can you do when you don't agree ? You try to prove yourself as long as you believe yourself. Sometimes people need to agree to disagree and leave it for the time.

    Trusting developers is a difficult thing. The yare also humans and can do mistakes, be wrong... however, most of them will be inclined to be liked by most people, satisfy most peoples wishes. Wishes and needs might not always be the same. Gamers are like women, you need to feed them with information that they wish to hear, not that they need to hear. Same with physics, the evolution of every simracing product in mass market will always be inclined towards becoming more likely easier than more difficult. iRacing is at wonderful spot at this, they begun with overly demanding physics in many cars, and they can keep on making it easier - becoming more likeable by more people, and also becoming more realistic at the same time. Simulation developers who already start at more likely easier, or just about realistic level of difficulty are in much less favorable position as people demand "improvements" and updates, and improvements are almost always expected to be making something feel better, driving better, driving faster, being more controllable, being easier overall - what if the set point was already decently realistic ? Without being fully critical, it is easy to degrade, especially when there are temptations which are very easy to achieve.

    Which developer would you think develop a product, and then immediately agree with bunch of random people that it is not realistic ? That either have to be not confident and incompetent developer that doubts of is his work a lot already, or it has to be a dev that knows himself he did something wrong, or it has to be a developer with weak principles and is ready to go wherever others like him more. In my opinion a developer who doesn't rush to change stuff quickly, is most likely more honest, and has better virtues which are necessary for doing something like replicating reality and then presenting it as fair imitation. It makes sense for a good developer who makes simulations not to change something till he himself becomes totally certain if change needs to be done.

    I watched little of the video you provided, nice one indeed. Great driving, I would suggest that this is rather skillful driver (just like me :D just joking, probably better). Even in limited amount of watching I have noticed that he does tons of corrections, was catching the car a lot as rear end was definitely loosing traction at places.
     
    Nieubermesch and Sim_Player like this.
  14. avenger82

    avenger82 Registered

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2016
    Messages:
    768
    Likes Received:
    309
    I never said that ultimate thing. I even said their opinion about same car's realism varies a lot implying it's not ultimate assessment

    You're sure? Maybe not all but perhaps most of cars feel (too) bumpy? At least in comparison to other major sims. I know those other major sims might be all wrong and rF2 is perfect, but I have some doubts.
    And I suspect you can make most cars less bumpy by different setup , but that a compromise.

    I'm not sure if I fully understand, but anyway I suspect you believe rf2 is over and above other major sims in these aspects? But I'm sure you know for good simulation you need real detailed data and a way to translate it to the physics engine. If you have wrong data or wrongly translated/implemented, then best physics engine would be worthless.

    .
     
  15. leseb64

    leseb64 Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2020
    Messages:
    234
    Likes Received:
    658
    So if you listen to you all the devs are sold to people who prefer the "easy" so the devs don't evolve their physical knowledge and the physical engines don't evolve in fact it's the devs who make the cars easier to please the population...OMG what you must not read...
    I stop here, it's getting really nonsensical ...

    Edit: I'm still in my ingame tests, I'm getting closer and closer to the speed of the Vee on sao-paulo with rf2, I've changed my way of driving to get there but it must be largely possible and surely a good rf2 driver will go even faster!
    on the other hand nothing to do with the skippy on lime rock park i am very far from doing like the irl videos..but i continue
    on AMS2 I just did 2 laps and I'm 5s faster the Vee has nothing to do with rF2 it's more fun and I really feel like I'm driving a car on the ams2 one no it's really flavorless (for me)
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2021
  16. mantasisg

    mantasisg Registered

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2016
    Messages:
    2,598
    Likes Received:
    3,526
    @avenger82 I wouldn't call a car setup to suit better your needs a compromise, it is a compromise if you make it worse at some other aspect, but it isn't so all the time. And besides setup there are things in the parameters in cars physics that aren't adjustable in setup, which can make a lot of difference to how cars drive over bumps. Most likely it would be just because the way something is built, rather than some weird software glitch that makes cars bumpy.... over bumps.... Anyway, it is fair to have doubts...

    As for data, I agree that data is great. But you can do a lot of interpretations without data at all and still get reasonably realistic, and almost certainly even for official content in all sims there are plenty of guesstimations made, and skilled physics makers certainly can make good guesses. I also think truly good physics maker would rather do guessing, than use data that is too difficult to interpret or wouldn't seem to be reliable and accurate, which I suppose happens too. The progress of making cars physics is complex, there are a lot of nodes that interacts with one another, there should be tolerances, we should tolerate cars seeming bit off, but they shouldn't be way off. Unfortunately me or you, could possibly be way off by our expectations and how we perceive reality (very easily). For example underestimating or overestimating skills and effort of RL drivers, or our own skills and effort.

    @leseb64 Well....yeah. Exactly. Just devs don't have to sacrifice their own knowledge and don't have to stop evolving physics engines. It is enough just to tweak few little values and thats it - everyone becomes great driver, or car is undrivable. Just few parameters changed a bit can make this difference in simulation. Data or no data available, changes can be made to give everybody what they want. In general I think driving fast should never be hard, but driving very fast should be very hard in majority of cars, some less and some more. Unfortunately in simulation people drives faster than they should, or than they would IRL.
     
  17. lagg

    lagg Registered

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    2,861
    Likes Received:
    1,836
    I don't know anything about the Formula Vee or Skip Barber but i've been listening the same things from the beginning of both cars.
    Opposite opinions about them.
    That reminds me what happens with Formula 1 cars.
    A lot of people try them and says that those cars are imposible to drive, but the existing F1 leagues say the opposite.
    I think that certain cars are difficult to drive, if you don't understand how to drive them. Once you understand the behaviour, it becomes easier until you drive it naturally.
    I don't know if this can be the same with the Formula Vee and Skip barber.
     
    Sim_Player likes this.
  18. leseb64

    leseb64 Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2020
    Messages:
    234
    Likes Received:
    658
    yes the players drive faster than irl but it's not necessarily the devs fault or because they make it easier, we're in rigs at home in the warmth of our home, our lives are not in question unlike on a real track, Look at the IRL GT3 and GTE cars, the pros go very fast and the cars are stuck to the ground, it's not the fault of the devs and personally I can't go as fast on rf2 as the IRL drivers, but I'm not an alien, we're not in the 60's anymore with cars that are very sensitive to slippage, since the 90's the cars have evolved a lot in terms of aero, suspension, tyres, etc., they stick to the ground, even if you don't like it!
    I don't think the devs are guilty of cheating to please the majority of players either on rf2 acc or iracing...

    the new tatuus F3 is not stuck to the ground it is demanding and very fun, the bmw DTM and the F1 pro also when you attack hard they are tricky and you go very fast to the fault surely the most demanding cars of rf2!
     
  19. leseb64

    leseb64 Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2020
    Messages:
    234
    Likes Received:
    658
    you really think you're teaching me something here? I drive enough irl to know how a car with a rear engine and even a front engine works...
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2021
    TheMenace likes this.
  20. leseb64

    leseb64 Registered

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2020
    Messages:
    234
    Likes Received:
    658
    I'm not a driver but I've had my licence for 28 years and I drive a lot of sports cars and I'm lucky enough to be able to afford a few laps of the circuit each year so yes I have a little experience!
    and you don't share your opinion with me but you clearly tell me to go and learn from your articles...
     
    TheMenace likes this.

Share This Page