Released NEW! Endurance Pack - Now Available!

The LMP2 is the one that got slowed down to accommodate for the GTR imo.
The GTEs seem to be victims of constant failed rebalancing.
I would however not exclude the possibility of the GTEs also falling victim to the attempts to create room for the Senna GTR.
And the LMP2 has apparently been now overslowed.
In the interests of racing this may work just fine, in the interests of "realism" and the right to claim that cars were based on "real life data", well, S397 have abolished that.
 
I think with games there is always the danger that perceived laptimes can be pushed down by 'aliens' and questionable setups/driving, not to mention track layouts (when not scanned in some way) and basic tarmac-to-tyre friction levels. Someone making a mod might be doing laps 1 second off reality and think it's right, then an alien comes along with an updated or newer track layout which differs slightly and lacks a nasty kerb or two and suddenly the car is 4 seconds too fast.

What we probably rely on here is that a studio with manufacturer data will make the cars behave as realistically as possible, and if competition laptimes end up faster then just put that down to reality vs game ('sim' or not), because of the various factors involved (which include specific weather and track conditions on the day, for the real life times). But for something trying to be a simulation that line in the sand needs to be clearly defined, because people are quick to compare game and real-life times and make claims about the realism (or not) without considering the multitude of factors that can affect it.
 
jayarrbee36 said:
With reference to my post here, there's been no reply to that yet, and that's a shame because it would help in giving some context for my thoughts here, but here goes anyway.

Regarding all the Endurance Pack cars most recently updated, I'm afraid I have to ask: why are these cars now so slow?

The majority of my testing so far has been at Le Mans. Let's consider the Oreca 07 first. The fastest real-world lap set by this car is 3:24.842. My best with the previous version of this car (v1.51) was 3:25.596. With the AI at 100%, which I understand is intended to approximate real-world performance, the best AI lap I've seen with v1.51 was 3:25.902. So pretty close to where it should be, imo.
With the latest v1.69, my best is now 3:32.695, and the AI's best is 3:33.372. Which is to say, the car now seems to be way off.

The GTEs have the same problem. Admittedly I've only driven the new Vantage GTE since the latest updates, so no previous version, but my best with that is 3:55.301, where I had managed 3:53.515 with the previous version of the BMW M8. The fastest car in the hands of the AI prior to the most recent update was always the Corvette C7.R, with which I've seen the AI do 3:52.020. With v2.01 of the C7.R the best the AI have achieved is 3:56.482. The best real-world lap of Le Mans in GTE since 2016 is 3:47.504 (admittedly that lap is an outlier, but 3:49s have not been uncommon). So, if anything, it seems the GTEs need to be getting faster, not slower!

The Norma LMP3, which I suspect not coincidentally was the only Endurance Pack car not updated this month, is still right on the money, at least in my experience. This car's real-world best is 3:49.570, and yesterday I did 3:50.247, with the AI slightly ahead on 3:50.192.

So right now, with no solid idea of what the McLaren Senna GTR's performance is supposed to be simulating, I'm concerned that the other LM24 classes may have been slowed to make the (maybe) Hypercar the clear fastest. I'm not saying that is what's happened, just that I'm concerned.

To repeat what I said in the Senna GTR thread, I'd really appreciate some clarification on this.
Click to expand...
You clearly didn't follow rF24 and don't know what these cars were capable of doing. Your best PB in Oreca for example was nearly 8 s off the pace... Let that sink in. If anything new Oreca is way more where it should be. ;)

Same with every other car, GTEs are also capable of going much faster than that. While Senna we got is a fictional proposal of what a Hypercar could be like pace-wise. Right now Senna GTR is capable of only few seconds slower laptimes than old Oreca so it's still slower than previous one and only few seconds faster per lap than new Oreca. :)
 
What I don't get is that if you have a (realistic as possible) physics engine, and you dial in all the LMP2 data you can get or have.
How on earth can you end up with LMP1 (and faster) results ?
I see two problems here:
a) The physics engine has really deep and serious physics flaws which allow to perform unrealistic actions
and/or
b) as you can and will never get 100% all perfect data you have to do estimates.
And these estimates are really awfull wrong

I get that in simracing you are a few sec. faster than real life because of some factors like always perfect grip and stuff.
But with LMP2 stats on LMP1 stats ?
That sounds way too much for just a BOP thing.
 
Stevy said:
What I don't get is that if you have a (realistic as possible) physics engine, and you dial in all the LMP2 data you can get or have.
How on earth can you end up with LMP1 (and faster) results ?
I see two problems here:
a) The physics engine has really deep and serious physics flaws which allow to perform unrealistic actions
and/or
b) as you can and will never get 100% all perfect data you have to do estimates.
And these estimates are really awfull wrong

I get that in simracing you are a few sec. faster than real life because of some factors like always perfect grip and stuff.
But with LMP2 stats on LMP1 stats ?
That sounds way too much for just a BOP thing.
Click to expand...

The consensus is it was done to supplement the lack of LMP1 official content in RF2.
In other words,RF2 LMP2s were made to overperform on purpose.
That's just hearsay,but of course, when pole position for the 24H race on the laser scanned track was a 3:17 high or something, that "rumor" becomes quite believable.
 
Stevy said:
What I don't get is that if you have a (realistic as possible) physics engine, and you dial in all the LMP2 data you can get or have.
How on earth can you end up with LMP1 (and faster) results ?
I see two problems here:
a) The physics engine has really deep and serious physics flaws which allow to perform unrealistic actions
and/or
b) as you can and will never get 100% all perfect data you have to do estimates.
And these estimates are really awfull wrong

I get that in simracing you are a few sec. faster than real life because of some factors like always perfect grip and stuff.
But with LMP2 stats on LMP1 stats ?
That sounds way too much for just a BOP thing.
Click to expand...
It's heavily the b) thing.

It's not even about not getting 100% perfect data but getting any data at all. Sometimes you get a lot of data, sometimes you get almost bare minimum. Things that you could find on google if you tried.

When you have other cars from a series and at least 1 was delivered with extensive data you can extrapolate those values, parameters onto other cars that it is going to compete against. But if you don't have even that and you still have blank spots to fill in the spreadsheet while making those cars you are left with educated guesses and rule of thumb.

When it comes to that it is all down to how extensive is your knowledge and how much experience you have. Having experience allows you to tighten your brackets for possible values and outcomes which is a good thing because you want to have your values closer to what the real one would have been like.

What we are facing here is a problem of double BoP issue. In real life you've got car's with their characteristics that remain unchanged, constant (unless sth is changed or gets damaged). So BoP in real life comes down to evaluating strengths and weaknesses of each car and using that knowledge to adjust restrictors or ballast to hamper/slow down faster cars so that the ones with characteristics that don't allow them to go as fast as their competitors can catch up. But more or less the core characteristics of the car remain the same, at least in the ballpark.

In Sim Racing when you don't have all the data to build the most realistic representation of a car within the simulation, you are left with a problem of double BoP issue. What does it mean? It means that when you build all the cars from 1 series and test them for the first time it can be shock therapy for makers because suddenly cars that race each other in one series are miles off each other's pace and handling.

That's where the problems begin. What do you do? Which ones from the series of cars you made is most realistic? Which should I slow down, which needs to be faster? Adding ballast doesn't fix the issue of the car still being the best handling car from them all and no matter what you do you still end up with a car that is just beyond the rest? So that's when the BoP issue I was talking about creeps in. You don't have all the data to build them as close to reality so you end up tweaking the core physics and characteristics of each car just to bring all of them closer to each other. Bringing them closer can consume you to a point where your end product can be MILES off what a real car would be like to drive but heeey... Laptimes are more or less similar, right?

People complain that cars are horrible to drive and you go back to drawing board with all of them. Maybe you get lucky and you get yet another piece of puzzle for one of the cars that allows you to have at least 1 more thing in the right zone of real values and you play with the rest trying to make the handling right again without making them all too far apart.

Someone could then say: Why not use things that don't mess with core handling as much and make sure it competes well with others. Well.... You could play with power, torque, fuel consumption. But then you have to be SURE that your L/D is spot on. Because playing with drag values and changing power/torque outputs can leave you with a car that seems ok on 1 track with it's top speeds and acceleration and then you take it to another one and find out... MOMMY! This car is 15 km/h faster than others even with higher wing!

Then there is ballast... Well it still affects the car's handling. It's point is to affect the handling as little as possible while making sure it slows down the car enough. Imagine having to punt 150 kg extra weight just to make the car slow enough for the rest of the cars. Then you have to use stronger springs because suddenly this car can't live without bottoming out once in a while in dips or under high loads with low ride height. You may say: Raise the ride height then! Booom... Your aero map is out of place now and whole car develops 100 kg less downforce than previously and whole idea of making the car's performances closer to each other collapses.

As you may see from my looooooooong and possibly slightly boring and jarring story it is extremely difficult to get things right especially when you have other cars to compete against that still need to be competitive, all of them.

I don't envy Marek and Michael but I can only feel sad that 397 sometimes feels like rushing cars that are clearly not even close to being finished in every possible way because many bugs or even performance issues/bad bop are things that can be fixed during properly done development phase that requires lots of testing. Lots of real testing. It takes time but we all know that development can't be endless.. Especially things that are meant to be sold for money and you need that money.
 
@Ronnie
I never rule out me being too slow as being the cause for any problems I'm having in my simracing ;)

So if we've established that the Oreca 07 is now a lot more realistic in terms of overall performance with this latest update, is there a consensus that the Norma M30 is currently much quicker than it should be, just as the Oreca was? The Norma wasn't included in the latest updates so maybe there's something still to come for it.
 
jayarrbee36 said:
@Ronnie
I never rule out me being too slow as being the cause for any problems I'm having in my simracing ;)

So if we've established that the Oreca 07 is now a lot more realistic in terms of overall performance with this latest update, is there a consensus that the Norma M30 is currently much quicker than it should be, just as the Oreca was? The Norma wasn't included in the latest updates so maybe there's something still to come for it.
Click to expand...
I don't think there is anything wrong with Norma. At least I think so. I can admit to not really paying attention to the car in the past. I made few setups for other people who entered some high level competitions but those were quick jobs and I didn't go fully into details. Performance wise I don't see anything wrong with Norma. Maybe that it was a bit too evenly matched by GTE cars back in a day when they were much faster. Now with them being slightly slower than they used to I think at least that is out of the window.

To fully get any reasonable idea if there's something really wrong with a car I would have to spend at least 15-20 h with it. There are cars that I spent 50-150 h with and only then find their unique quirks. It would be unfair of me to slam or praise Norma just yet. The only thing which has rubbed me the wrong way was how stiff, almost wooden it felt. But I know how incredible influence FFB has in getting comfortable with a car. Many times when I worked with someone on a car I felt one car was horrible and after slight modification which mostly affected how FFB felt rather than actual handling of a car, and it became hero from zero. Who knows maybe all that wooden handling that I got from it was just FFB?

Thing is that I have grounds for reasonable suspicion that Norma is closer to the real thing than most cars in rF2 simply from tighter cooperation with a racing team that actually tried the car themselves. Other than that I can't say anything more than that. If we get any updates for Norma it would probably be graphics or sounds (like new shaders or new sound samples). If anything changes physics-wise I would assume it should be minor adjustment. But the truth is I really don't know. I'm just spitting educated guesses here and speculations.
 
Ronnie said:
Thing is that I have grounds for reasonable suspicion that Norma is closer to the real thing than most cars in rF2 simply from tighter cooperation with a racing team that actually tried the car themselves.
Click to expand...
More than that, Norma Automotive is part of Duqueine now, the next-gen LMP3 car will be called a Duqueine. They definitely know the car well!

This is getting a bit confusing now! I think I'm going to have to dig into the setup of the Oreca, see what I can find there :)
 

Little reminder about Norma lmp3. If this car have wrong performance ingame now, well idk, there's no reason to use consumer simulation.
 
League Race after BoP. I dont get it.

upload_2019-8-25_20-41-55.png
 
Don´t you guys think the transmission of the Porsche RSR is too long in Le mans. I barely get into 6th gear...
Same for C7R and Aston.
 
After the last BoP Update, the GTE cars are so oversteery, especially under braking, i don't really know if that is intentional?

Even with VERY understeery setup, brake balance full forward, wing on 6 and TC around 8 in the M8, you get a freaking tailhappy car after 20 Minutes of driving. The Porsche does this even earlier for example. I mean not the normal "tyres fall off, be carefull" oversteery...i mean the "please don't kill me, i'm to young to die" oversteery. Just've done a Road Atlanta 1h race and it was crazy, to be honest, not really in the fun manner.:confused:

As i read here in this thread, they seem to be slower now, okay, i thought, i was even more crappy at Le Mans, than i used to be. :D
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top