Splošna debata - iRacing

[markop 702]

Tukaj je Vaša možnost, da si povrnete investicijo v IR: 

 

Uredil September 8, 2017 - markop

[markop 702]

Če se komu lušta imam server 2 uri - P911 @Snetterton.

[edgeslo 1 162]

Do 1:15 je brez veze....

 

 

[markop 702]

Gume, gume, gume....

[edgeslo 1 162]

Black gold  Za moje pojme dost pošteno pove kako je na stvari.

Sej nekje vmes rečeda je pač dost zaj**** naredit res čisto repliko fizike, ker pač tle na riti nič ne čutiš  

[markop 702]

Sej, ce vozi IR tudi nekaj pomeni. Gume rabijo step-up. Ta segment prekomernega pregrevanja pri bremzanju morejo postimat že 1x.

[vajtos 227]

Torej more slipery doesnt mean more realistic sem razbral iz tega intervjuja

[edgeslo 1 162]

Prav tako pa ne gripa kolikor hočeš

 

[vajtos 227]

Tudi res . Ampak za porša pravi da je v RL manj slipery kot v iracing-u. Drugače pa je res dober povedal, da ni iracing popoln.

[markop 702]

Samo v IR ni čisto tako, kot on pravi.

Pi bremzah je rekel, da vP911 moraš "slam" po bremzi in pol počasi popuščat. V IR je točno tako in nič drugače. Če gledaš tutoriale od VRS ravno to skozi poudarjajo. In tudi iz njihove telemetrije je točno to videt. Je pa res, da pri IR greš maks nekje 75% da ne blokirajo (ni tako 60% kot ravi on). V RL pa 100%. Samo tudi to je vprašljivo, saj tam lahko nastaviš zadevo v IR pa ne. Spet ima prav, ko pravi,da jih pregreješ in pol understeera.

Kar je pa Nicki povedal glede aero setupa, ga je nek tip demantiral in mu rekel, da se vidi, da je dirkač in ne mehanik. Koliko je to res pa je druga stvar.

Sej popolnega sima očitno ni. IR ni izjema. Glede gum je zanimivo, da je Myers zadnjič izjavil, da jih zaradi modela gim pride obiskat "major" proizvajalec. Go figure...   Popoln sim bo, ko bo RL izginil in bodo samo še simi. Pol se ne bomo več pogovarjali kaj je dobro simulirano in kaj ne  

Uredil September 11, 2017 - markop

[vajtos 227]

Pa ja sej težko verjet kaj je res kaj ni. Mah sam da se dober pelje pa je  Je pa Ferrari GT3 zlo fajn za pelat med drugim  

[markop 702]

Meni tudi zelo tale cavallino GT3. Pa skozi pravim, da je FFB ok, da je težava drugje 

Upam, da se pri IR malo zbudijo, ko jih kdo tako javno okrca. Se mi zdi, da mit Dave K. dela več škode, kot koristi. Mi je znana ta situacija, ko se nek samooklicani guu neka vsede in prepreči razvoj za 10 let. Pol pride nek mlad z novimi idejami in naredi kvantni skok.

Uredil September 11, 2017 - markop

[vajtos 227]

Naslednja stvar ki me zanima je rallyX. Me zanima kako se bo to peljalo  

[markop 702]

 

Nekaj zanimivh izjav na temo tega posnetka in same fizike IR:

Quote

David Tucker:

The problem with brakes is mostly a hardware issue (or interface issue). Everyone has wildly different pedals but somehow we have to map a plastic pedal with a paperclip for a spring to the same range as a pro pedal set that can take 200 ft/lb of force. On top of that all we get from the pedals is a number that ranges from 0-100 with no indication of how hard you are actually pushing on the pedals (or even if pressure is what is being measured). 

Internally we have to decide what 100% represents, so the car engineers pick a master cylinder pressure that is sufficiently higher than what they estimate it will take to lock up your brakes in all situations, but no so high that you can only use 10% of your brake pedal. This is problematic for a few reasons, it is somewhat arbitrary, and real pedals don't have an upper bound on pressure. 

The problem is then that the mechanical feel of the pedals don't just magically line up with the simulated force at the master cylinder. If you have advanced enough pedals and the patience to carefully calibrate them you can make things line up, but there is no easy way to do this other than trial and error. 

This by the way is a problem with all sims, no one has solved it, and they are unlikely to solve it without a change in how we communicate to the pedals.

Quote

markop wrote:

David Tucker wrote:
On the physics front we have been sitting comfortably in the sweet spot for a very long time. We manage to continually improve our models but the gains are small and have more to do with the nuanced feel than a major shift in how the cars run. 

So basically more memory (and to some extent cpu) will keep pushing the physics forward but we are past the point where everything feels broken and the next improvement will be life changing. (not to say your favorite bug does not feel bad and fixing it won't be great).

David, the tire model is something we can't really talk about diminishing returns yet. The tract-temp vs. grip is an area which will bring almost a new experience to the sim. Beside this with the latest improvements in the tire model (which I like) something happened to the optimal grip vs. pressure "model". We are running the tires at the lowest pressure and this doesn't feel right as when compared to IRL. 

Then, there is a whole new feature to be modeled like flat spots. That's another new experience and not just a slight step in the improvement and refining process. I wouldn't talk about diminishing returns in this area. 

Next, the penalty system is another vast area to explore. For instance the server could collect breaking points, acceleration points and event trajectories of cars in a session. Then when an contact occurs the server could go back in the session history to understand which fault was. Who dive-bombed, who was unable to keep the line,... The server could even post analyze the data and decide after the race. I know it wont be 100%. That's granted. But, I'm sure it will be way better than it is now, where the both cars in a contact gets punished equally. 

Recently Nicki Thiim pointed out the IR physics are just wrong in a conversation about rake and rear wing. I'm not a racing engineer and I really can't comment, all I can say he is a WEC GTE champion and a avid sim racer. Next, Wolfgang Reip (Bentley factory racing driver) has recently said (in an interview comparing IR, rf2, AMS and Assetto) IR physics near the limit are wrong and not modeled properly. 

Anyway my point is there is apparently still room for big steps in the s.c simulation value. Keep going. Do great things. You have a wonderful, almost dream job. Take those rants and complaints as suggestion really. I'm not here for the forums, but for the racing part of IR  

I'm not trying to suggest that we don't have lots of areas we could improve, in fact there are whole regions we have not even begun to explore (like modeling an engine at stall). But if you plotted out the tire forces over time as they are now and compared them to the improved model with flat spotting and better heat handling and so on you would see very little difference in the trace. The changes would be small, the model is close to correct now so any improvement would in fact be incremental. 

Now those incremental improvements can still feel great and the small errors can add up over time, but Dave is working on fourth and fifth order stuff, not the gross shape of the curve.

 

Quote

XYZ User:

Tires overreacting to track temp changes has a major effect on racing since most official series use dynamic weather. I think the slight disappointment here is mostly that this problem hasn't had more focus after been brought up for several years now, especially if the fix would be an adjustment rather than a complete rebuild of the tire model.

Quote

David Tucker:

I find that whenever I go to Dave with a 'genius' idea on how he can improve the tires that he not only has thought about my idea but he is at least 5 steps beyond me and usually way over my head. Any flaws you see in the tire he both knows about and has a plan for how to get rid of them. Sometimes that is a matter of tweaking a number but usually it means modeling yet another sub molecular force, or other thing that goes beyond my college physics. Unfortunately he is well past looking up curves from a book, it takes time, lots of time, to develop new models (or to tweak existing models).

 

[Paps 597]

A ta video je bil priliman na iracing forumu v kakšni temi?