Skip to content

Unbelievable results

1246744

Comments

  • benhaha85benhaha85 Posts: 236 ✭✭✭
    TGPD said:

    303 rs wins against 033 rs500
    This must be the one they use in the RQ calculator, god knows how the Green focus is rq22 otherwise :lol:

  • KeatingKeating Posts: 125 ✭✭✭
    Huh? I have no idea why I lost this slalom, my Camaro has higher grip, better acceleration, and is 102kg lighter than the other Camaro.


  • TGPDTGPD Posts: 6,067 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Keating said:
    Huh? I have no idea why I lost this slalom, my Camaro has higher grip, better acceleration, and is 102kg lighter than the other Camaro.


    the Cam Convertible has very good off-the-line acceleration.
  • KeatingKeating Posts: 125 ✭✭✭
    TGPD said:
    Keating said:
    Huh? I have no idea why I lost this slalom, my Camaro has higher grip, better acceleration, and is 102kg lighter than the other Camaro.


    the Cam Convertible has very good off-the-line acceleration.
    True, but shouldn't that not matter in a slalom test?
  • TGPDTGPD Posts: 6,067 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Keating said:
    TGPD said:
    Keating said:
    Huh? I have no idea why I lost this slalom, my Camaro has higher grip, better acceleration, and is 102kg lighter than the other Camaro.


    the Cam Convertible has very good off-the-line acceleration.
    True, but shouldn't that not matter in a slalom test?
    well, it matters a lot... that's why the Twizy F1 is great at it... not lots of handling, no top speed, but great traction from 0-30mph.
  • HeissRodHeissRod Posts: 7,452 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Off-the-line acceleration matters twice on the slalom, as opposed to just once on other tracks.
  • SquadalaSquadala Posts: 201 ✭✭✭
    When you got to fixing, you might to do this one too.
  • HeissRodHeissRod Posts: 7,452 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2019
    Weight is a pretty heavy determining factor for the slalom and the KTM is 300kg heavier stock vs stock.
  • StickyvicarStickyvicar Posts: 2

    exactly the same eh?

  • malsmals Posts: 234 ✭✭✭
    edited April 2019
    DRAW

    Same car, 363 vs 333, twisty road wet, asphalt
    Post edited by mals on
  • jigajiga Posts: 409 ✭✭✭✭
    Ozzman said:
    Makes you wonder whether it's worth maxing cars at all:

    Well, in this case clearly not since 939 is proven the superior tuning.  Wonder if also the case on gravel?  In any case well done that chap for discovering a superior tune.  Need to know:  is it superior on all sand tracks? and; are 929 or 949 better or worse tunings?     hmm, think i have one stock.  i could run some tests
  • OzzmanOzzman Posts: 1,827 ✭✭✭✭✭
    TD42792 said:
    Twinkie said:
    jiga said:
    Ozzman said:
    Makes you wonder whether it's worth maxing cars at all:

    Well, in this case clearly not since 939 is proven the superior tuning.  Wonder if also the case on gravel?  In any case well done that chap for discovering a superior tune.  Need to know:  is it superior on all sand tracks? and; are 929 or 949 better or worse tunings?     hmm, think i have one stock.  i could run some tests
    Would be awesome if u start with 1.0 then 1.1 ... 3.2😅
    Ask and you shall receive (at least first tune stage):

    Hairpin sand - uae 8.4

    1:06:43 silvia 969

    1:06:63 datsun 939 and 909

    1:06:66 datsun 969 and 919

    1:06:69 datsun 929

    Now that's something to investigate @Hutch_Tim. :)
  • Blue2moroBlue2moro Posts: 2,207 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Wasnt expecting this win but I'll take it


  • evilprofesseurevilprofesseur Posts: 1,841 ✭✭✭✭✭
    This doesn't even make sense considering the sierra is maxed
    maybe sierra is missing the suv/pickup hidden hill climb bonus modifier? considering the stats and the whole engine/traction thing I'd expect this one to go to sierra.
  • Hutch_TimHutch_Tim Posts: 672 admin
    Ozzman said:
    TD42792 said:
    Ask and you shall receive (at least first tune stage):

    Hairpin sand - uae 8.4

    1:06:43 silvia 969

    1:06:63 datsun 939 and 909

    1:06:66 datsun 969 and 919

    1:06:69 datsun 929

    Now that's something to investigate @Hutch_Tim. :)
    Yep, I've been looking into this kind of thing a bit.

    We all established that weight makes no difference when accelerating from stationary (both in real life and in-game) a while back. The added weight gives more traction, but this is exactly cancelled out because the extra weight makes it slower to accelerate. I now think that there's a new effect to consider when in motion.

    When you see the orange warning triangle over a car, it means the AI is having to brake to retain traction, and can't accelerate as fast as it would otherwise. Once it picks up enough speed, at some point the amount of power it can put down is then less than the traction limit, so the orange triangle disappears, and it can accelerate as fast as normal. Once a car can accelerate as normal, a lighter car (with the same power) can go faster.

    The complication is this: I think a slightly heavier car has the orange triangle disappear a little sooner. That means it can start accelerating fully a little sooner. Once the lighter car is also able to start accelerating fully, it can of course accelerate faster, and that is usually enough for it to catch up and overtake - but not always.

    In the above case with the Datsun, individual weight upgrades make such tiny differences I suspect the fluctuations in times are due to the above effect playing out differently depending on the exact speed reached at each physics frame (of 0.03s). In one upgrade state perhaps the lighter car can escape the traction limit at x.05s into the race and the heavier car at x.04s, which falls on the same frame due to rounding, so the heavier car doesn't get this escaped-traction-limit-sooner advantage; at another upgrade state perhaps it's x.05s vs x.03s, which now gives the heavier car one frame of escaped-traction-limit-sooner advantage. This then happens repeatedly and differently on each straight of the hairpin.

    So I next need to establish:
    - Is this definitely what's happening in the simulation? 
    - How does this differ from real physics?
    - What should we do about it?

    (Just so you know though, the random braking you see in some parts of the new mountain tracks is a higher priority physics simulation issue to solve).

    This doesn't even make sense considering the sierra is maxed
    This one is a lot simpler - the Raptor has a bigger hill-climb "bonus" than the Sierra. Should they be equal in that regard though?
  • vladimir1989vladimir1989 Posts: 405 ✭✭✭
    Hutch_Tim said:
    Ozzman said:
    TD42792 said:
    Ask and you shall receive (at least first tune stage):

    Hairpin sand - uae 8.4

    1:06:43 silvia 969

    1:06:63 datsun 939 and 909

    1:06:66 datsun 969 and 919

    1:06:69 datsun 929

    Now that's something to investigate @Hutch_Tim. :)
    Yep, I've been looking into this kind of thing a bit.

    We all established that weight makes no difference when accelerating from stationary (both in real life and in-game) a while back. The added weight gives more traction, but this is exactly cancelled out because the extra weight makes it slower to accelerate. I now think that there's a new effect to consider when in motion.

    When you see the orange warning triangle over a car, it means the AI is having to brake to retain traction, and can't accelerate as fast as it would otherwise. Once it picks up enough speed, at some point the amount of power it can put down is then less than the traction limit, so the orange triangle disappears, and it can accelerate as fast as normal. Once a car can accelerate as normal, a lighter car (with the same power) can go faster.

    The complication is this: I think a slightly heavier car has the orange triangle disappear a little sooner. That means it can start accelerating fully a little sooner. Once the lighter car is also able to start accelerating fully, it can of course accelerate faster, and that is usually enough for it to catch up and overtake - but not always.

    In the above case with the Datsun, individual weight upgrades make such tiny differences I suspect the fluctuations in times are due to the above effect playing out differently depending on the exact speed reached at each physics frame (of 0.03s). In one upgrade state perhaps the lighter car can escape the traction limit at x.05s into the race and the heavier car at x.04s, which falls on the same frame due to rounding, so the heavier car doesn't get this escaped-traction-limit-sooner advantage; at another upgrade state perhaps it's x.05s vs x.03s, which now gives the heavier car one frame of escaped-traction-limit-sooner advantage. This then happens repeatedly and differently on each straight of the hairpin.

    So I next need to establish:
    - Is this definitely what's happening in the simulation? 
    - How does this differ from real physics?
    - What should we do about it?

    (Just so you know though, the random braking you see in some parts of the new mountain tracks is a higher priority physics simulation issue to solve).

    This doesn't even make sense considering the sierra is maxed
    This one is a lot simpler - the Raptor has a bigger hill-climb "bonus" than the Sierra. Should they be equal in that regard though?
    Sorry to bother, but regarding the second case, why does the Raptor have a bigger Hill Climb bonus? I mean is there some kind of list of the bonuses, for example: Raptor first, then the G class then the rest? Or is it age based, new cars, then older cars?
  • NinjaDesignzNinjaDesignz Posts: 2,878 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Hutch_Tim said:
    Ozzman said:
    TD42792 said:
    Ask and you shall receive (at least first tune stage):

    Hairpin sand - uae 8.4

    1:06:43 silvia 969

    1:06:63 datsun 939 and 909

    1:06:66 datsun 969 and 919

    1:06:69 datsun 929

    Now that's something to investigate @Hutch_Tim. :)
    Yep, I've been looking into this kind of thing a bit.

    We all established that weight makes no difference when accelerating from stationary (both in real life and in-game) a while back. The added weight gives more traction, but this is exactly cancelled out because the extra weight makes it slower to accelerate. I now think that there's a new effect to consider when in motion.

    When you see the orange warning triangle over a car, it means the AI is having to brake to retain traction, and can't accelerate as fast as it would otherwise. Once it picks up enough speed, at some point the amount of power it can put down is then less than the traction limit, so the orange triangle disappears, and it can accelerate as fast as normal. Once a car can accelerate as normal, a lighter car (with the same power) can go faster.

    The complication is this: I think a slightly heavier car has the orange triangle disappear a little sooner. That means it can start accelerating fully a little sooner. Once the lighter car is also able to start accelerating fully, it can of course accelerate faster, and that is usually enough for it to catch up and overtake - but not always.

    In the above case with the Datsun, individual weight upgrades make such tiny differences I suspect the fluctuations in times are due to the above effect playing out differently depending on the exact speed reached at each physics frame (of 0.03s). In one upgrade state perhaps the lighter car can escape the traction limit at x.05s into the race and the heavier car at x.04s, which falls on the same frame due to rounding, so the heavier car doesn't get this escaped-traction-limit-sooner advantage; at another upgrade state perhaps it's x.05s vs x.03s, which now gives the heavier car one frame of escaped-traction-limit-sooner advantage. This then happens repeatedly and differently on each straight of the hairpin.

    So I next need to establish:
    - Is this definitely what's happening in the simulation? 
    - How does this differ from real physics?
    - What should we do about it?

    (Just so you know though, the random braking you see in some parts of the new mountain tracks is a higher priority physics simulation issue to solve).

    This doesn't even make sense considering the sierra is maxed
    This one is a lot simpler - the Raptor has a bigger hill-climb "bonus" than the Sierra. Should they be equal in that regard though?
    They should have the same bonuses. They're both pickup trucks with offroad tires. I love the raptor in real life but in this game, the truck with better stats should win in this case 
  • Ivo_KamburovIvo_Kamburov Posts: 821 ✭✭✭✭
    Hutch_Tim said:
    Ozzman said:
    TD42792 said:
    Ask and you shall receive (at least first tune stage):

    Hairpin sand - uae 8.4

    1:06:43 silvia 969

    1:06:63 datsun 939 and 909

    1:06:66 datsun 969 and 919

    1:06:69 datsun 929

    Now that's something to investigate @Hutch_Tim. :)
    Yep, I've been looking into this kind of thing a bit.

    We all established that weight makes no difference when accelerating from stationary (both in real life and in-game) a while back. The added weight gives more traction, but this is exactly cancelled out because the extra weight makes it slower to accelerate. I now think that there's a new effect to consider when in motion.

    When you see the orange warning triangle over a car, it means the AI is having to brake to retain traction, and can't accelerate as fast as it would otherwise. Once it picks up enough speed, at some point the amount of power it can put down is then less than the traction limit, so the orange triangle disappears, and it can accelerate as fast as normal. Once a car can accelerate as normal, a lighter car (with the same power) can go faster.

    The complication is this: I think a slightly heavier car has the orange triangle disappear a little sooner. That means it can start accelerating fully a little sooner. Once the lighter car is also able to start accelerating fully, it can of course accelerate faster, and that is usually enough for it to catch up and overtake - but not always.

    In the above case with the Datsun, individual weight upgrades make such tiny differences I suspect the fluctuations in times are due to the above effect playing out differently depending on the exact speed reached at each physics frame (of 0.03s). In one upgrade state perhaps the lighter car can escape the traction limit at x.05s into the race and the heavier car at x.04s, which falls on the same frame due to rounding, so the heavier car doesn't get this escaped-traction-limit-sooner advantage; at another upgrade state perhaps it's x.05s vs x.03s, which now gives the heavier car one frame of escaped-traction-limit-sooner advantage. This then happens repeatedly and differently on each straight of the hairpin.

    So I next need to establish:
    - Is this definitely what's happening in the simulation? 
    - How does this differ from real physics?
    - What should we do about it?

    (Just so you know though, the random braking you see in some parts of the new mountain tracks is a higher priority physics simulation issue to solve).

    This doesn't even make sense considering the sierra is maxed
    This one is a lot simpler - the Raptor has a bigger hill-climb "bonus" than the Sierra. Should they be equal in that regard though?
    They should have the same bonuses. They're both pickup trucks with offroad tires. I love the raptor in real life but in this game, the truck with better stats should win in this case 
    How about creating realistic physics, so that you don't have to rely on bonuses? 
  • NinjaDesignzNinjaDesignz Posts: 2,878 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Hutch_Tim said:
    Ozzman said:
    TD42792 said:
    Ask and you shall receive (at least first tune stage):

    Hairpin sand - uae 8.4

    1:06:43 silvia 969

    1:06:63 datsun 939 and 909

    1:06:66 datsun 969 and 919

    1:06:69 datsun 929

    Now that's something to investigate @Hutch_Tim. :)
    Yep, I've been looking into this kind of thing a bit.

    We all established that weight makes no difference when accelerating from stationary (both in real life and in-game) a while back. The added weight gives more traction, but this is exactly cancelled out because the extra weight makes it slower to accelerate. I now think that there's a new effect to consider when in motion.

    When you see the orange warning triangle over a car, it means the AI is having to brake to retain traction, and can't accelerate as fast as it would otherwise. Once it picks up enough speed, at some point the amount of power it can put down is then less than the traction limit, so the orange triangle disappears, and it can accelerate as fast as normal. Once a car can accelerate as normal, a lighter car (with the same power) can go faster.

    The complication is this: I think a slightly heavier car has the orange triangle disappear a little sooner. That means it can start accelerating fully a little sooner. Once the lighter car is also able to start accelerating fully, it can of course accelerate faster, and that is usually enough for it to catch up and overtake - but not always.

    In the above case with the Datsun, individual weight upgrades make such tiny differences I suspect the fluctuations in times are due to the above effect playing out differently depending on the exact speed reached at each physics frame (of 0.03s). In one upgrade state perhaps the lighter car can escape the traction limit at x.05s into the race and the heavier car at x.04s, which falls on the same frame due to rounding, so the heavier car doesn't get this escaped-traction-limit-sooner advantage; at another upgrade state perhaps it's x.05s vs x.03s, which now gives the heavier car one frame of escaped-traction-limit-sooner advantage. This then happens repeatedly and differently on each straight of the hairpin.

    So I next need to establish:
    - Is this definitely what's happening in the simulation? 
    - How does this differ from real physics?
    - What should we do about it?

    (Just so you know though, the random braking you see in some parts of the new mountain tracks is a higher priority physics simulation issue to solve).

    This doesn't even make sense considering the sierra is maxed
    This one is a lot simpler - the Raptor has a bigger hill-climb "bonus" than the Sierra. Should they be equal in that regard though?
    They should have the same bonuses. They're both pickup trucks with offroad tires. I love the raptor in real life but in this game, the truck with better stats should win in this case 
    How about creating realistic physics, so that you don't have to rely on bonuses? 
    Lol there's not much about this game that has realistic physics in terms of hillclimbs. You ask for what you can under the circumstances. 
  • hifichrishifichris Posts: 560 ✭✭✭
    it's worth the merged epics in !!

  • Ivo_KamburovIvo_Kamburov Posts: 821 ✭✭✭✭

    Is there actually any results that are as expected in the game? I have my doubts.......
    Wow.. I'd have been so mad.  It's even faster by .26 😮
  • Destroyer2k11999Destroyer2k11999 Posts: 1,353 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Is there actually any results that are as expected in the game? I have my doubts.......
    Wow.. I'd have been so mad.  It's even faster by .26 😮
    I bet that has something to do with the whole RWD cars can't put down the power when 0-60 is a certain point bug thats in this game.
Sign In or Register to comment.