rec.autos.simulators

by **John Pancoas** » Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:49:13

Well, someone turning off smoke when others don't is an unfair advantage.
Fwiw, still don't see why a boss or anyone would need control over the line
feature.

-John

> He also said "Or give the server boss that option." Which I think is
> every bit as reasonable as giving the server boss the option to force
>***pit view or force smoke.

> > Exactly. It doesn't give an unfair advantage, so don't know why it
> should
> > be banned.

> > -John

> > > > Yep. Forcing non-use of the driving line ? Who cares if
> someone uses
> > > it
> > > > ? A bit on the extreme side IMO.

> > > > -John

> > > I agree John, especially when racing with noobs. It shows them where
> one
> > is
> > > generally going to lift, brake and get back into the gas. A couple
> of
> > weeks
> > > ago I noticed it paying off since I only got punted once in a Marty
> race
> > > where noobs tend to drive HARD into the corners and rear end the
> guys that
> > > actually know how to get around the place.(The line there must have
> been
> > > showing them 'Hey, lift early, brake straight, then corner...) Leave
> it be
> > > for the learners, turn it off if you don't like it.

by **P.C. Oxfor** » Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:46:31

You might be right about that. I don' know that much about flight sims. I
tried to get into IL- Sturmovik due the buzz that game generated, but
couldn't. Just not my cup of meat. I admired it more than enjoyed it.
However, their support and customer interaction, featuring regular updates
and frequent posts by Oleg Maddox, the designer, were impressive. After a
while, one suspects it's the designer/developper/end user dialogue that
matters most. A rapport I found missing in EA's titles- among other
offenders.

-Peter

by **Admi** » Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:58:31

<SNIP>

True. We had to restart our league race there and run 175 laps without
cautions. Went by pretty fast at least :) They need to park the pace car
further down the back stretch or tighten the code. It all has to do with
where the leader is when the yellow comes out and how badly the pace car
wants to catch the leader and get in front of him...Our Marty race started
out even weirder than that, waved off the green/start, pace car pitted, came
back on the track, picked up the leader and went green next time by...of
course the first yellow saw the pace car ripping through the field at around
150mph. We had guys in the fence, on top of the pit walls, it was hilarious.
Unfortunatley, we probably won't race their again until next year and NR2002
will be replaced by N5 or 2003. Seems to be a self perpetuating problem...it
would be nice to get in a full Marty race with cautions so more guys could
finish on the lead lap tho.

by **Admi** » Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:52:56

OH NO! He didn't just start the "Forced***pit view" thread again did he?
LOL!!

I don't force either in my league, though I myself run***pit and smoke. I
don't force***pit so guys can see to get to the pits when the hood is
lopped over their windsheild, and I don't force smoke for the guys trying to
run the sim on Pentium 2's with Voodoo3's. I would not turn off the driving
line either, I'd like the guys I race with to be able to learn the line and
the driving line (from using it on the new tracks) appears to be a aptly
named 'ideal' line to learn. Put more than a day into learning how to 'race'
with this sim and you'll know that the ideal line is not always the way to
go in traffic, but outside of traffic is a good line to run and be
consistent. Just IMO, but I encourage its use for my league members that
have gotten NR2002 as their FIRST racing sim. Otherwise, we'd have more
yellows than we already do....must be working, we only had 2 yellers in a 76
lapper at Dega last week and one of those was caused by a server burp...and
the Marty example, I only got punted once. Normally a bunch of SS racers
that join the league have no clue how to get around shorties correctly and
ram the vets from behind entering the corners, so it's not so bad since the
advent of the driving line aid. Of course we still run paceless, yellowless
road course races though. There's only so much a driving line aid CAN do,
LOL!!

by **John Pancoas** » Wed, 24 Apr 2002 09:14:50

Lol, me too re IL-2.......just couldn't get into it, but it's a great sim.
Very true about Maddox, good points.

-John

by **John Pancoas** » Wed, 24 Apr 2002 09:16:40

Exactly, looks like the chariot scene from Ben-Hur :)

-John

> > True enough. Of course, also true is the fact that the Martinsville
> pace
> > bug that existed in N4 BEFORE it was patched, exists now in N2002.
> Doesn't
> > speak of polished to me. Marty is unraceable at this point, especially
> > online.
> <SNIP>

> True. We had to restart our league race there and run 175 laps without
> cautions. Went by pretty fast at least :) They need to park the pace car
> further down the back stretch or tighten the code. It all has to do with
> where the leader is when the yellow comes out and how badly the pace car
> wants to catch the leader and get in front of him...Our Marty race started
> out even weirder than that, waved off the green/start, pace car pitted,
came
> back on the track, picked up the leader and went green next time by...of
> course the first yellow saw the pace car ripping through the field at
around
> 150mph. We had guys in the fence, on top of the pit walls, it was
hilarious.
> Unfortunatley, we probably won't race their again until next year and
NR2002
> will be replaced by N5 or 2003. Seems to be a self perpetuating
problem...it
> would be nice to get in a full Marty race with cautions so more guys could
> finish on the lead lap tho.

by **John Pancoas** » Wed, 24 Apr 2002 11:04:38

Key word is MADE. Didn't keep MAKING. Point is, so what if they went
under ? Others took their place, and flight sims continue, as they always
will, irregardless of the "sky is falling" advocates.

-John

> On Mon, 22 Apr 2002 17:13:15 -0600, "John Pancoast"

> > Yep. Because they failed to adapt. Others took their place.

> >-John

> Failed to adapt to what, exactly?

> They made the best *** flightsims ever.

> >> On Mon, 22 Apr 2002 13:00:30 -0600, "John Pancoast"

> >> >.be nice to developers or flight sims will go
> >> >away..........been hearing that bs for four*** years now
> >myself.........as
> >> >flight sims keep getting churned out year after year.

> >> Microprose/Spectrum Holobyte, Dynamix, iMagic, Janes, DiD,
> >> Digital Integration etc., etc., no longer "churn out" ***
> >> flightsims, since they're out of business.

by **Eldre** » Wed, 24 Apr 2002 12:48:07

> Well, someone turning off smoke when others don't is an unfair advantage.

How is that? If someone needs to turn off the smoke to get good framerates,
how is that an advantage? The people with stronger systems don't get the
slowdown that the slower systems get. Also, I'd say that having the smoke ON
is an advantage, as you get a bit more warning for an incident up ahead...

Eldred
--
Homepage - http://www.racesimcentral.net/~epickett
A friend of mine is involved in a fund-raiser walk-a-thon for research to cure
*** cancer. If you can, please go to my homepage and see how to make a
donation. Thank you.

Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

by **John Pancoas** » Wed, 24 Apr 2002 13:10:37

Because those with smoke have to drive into/through it in a wreck, while
those without have a clear view of what's going on ahead/around them.

-John

> > Well, someone turning off smoke when others don't is an unfair
advantage.

> How is that? If someone needs to turn off the smoke to get good
framerates,
> how is that an advantage? The people with stronger systems don't get the
> slowdown that the slower systems get. Also, I'd say that having the smoke
ON
> is an advantage, as you get a bit more warning for an incident up ahead...

> Eldred
> --
> Homepage - http://www.racesimcentral.net/~epickett
> A friend of mine is involved in a fund-raiser walk-a-thon for research to
cure
> *** cancer. If you can, please go to my homepage and see how to make a
> donation. Thank you.

> Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

by **Biz** » Wed, 24 Apr 2002 13:16:32

Having the smoke on gives an advantage of spotting upcoming trouble sooner, but you can't see squat
when you get into it, so to me its a give and take situation...As this post is clearly showing,
everyone has their own pet peeves for features they want to see in the patch, I would hate to be the
commitee, etc that had to decide what they implement and what they don't. You'll never make more
than half of the people happy half the time....or something like that..yeah thats it...lol
--
Biz

"Don't touch that please, your primitive intellect wouldn't understand
alloys and compositions and,......things with molecular structures,....and
the....." - Ash

> > Well, someone turning off smoke when others don't is an unfair advantage.

> How is that? If someone needs to turn off the smoke to get good framerates,
> how is that an advantage? The people with stronger systems don't get the
> slowdown that the slower systems get. Also, I'd say that having the smoke ON
> is an advantage, as you get a bit more warning for an incident up ahead...

> Eldred
> --
> Homepage - http://www.racesimcentral.net/~epickett
> A friend of mine is involved in a fund-raiser walk-a-thon for research to cure
> *** cancer. If you can, please go to my homepage and see how to make a
> donation. Thank you.

> Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

by **Biz** » Wed, 24 Apr 2002 13:18:18

Actually IMO, if you have been following a thread, top-posting allows you to quickly read the new
content, without having to wade through some of the posts you've already read.....
--
Biz

"Don't touch that please, your primitive intellect wouldn't understand
alloys and compositions and,......things with molecular structures,....and
the....." - Ash

> > Key word is MADE. Didn't keep MAKING. Point is, so what if they went
> >under ? Others took their place, and flight sims continue, as they always
> >will, irregardless of the "sky is falling" advocates.

> >-John

> Wrong.

> There has been *no* substitute for Microprose Falcon 4 or
> Dynamix' Red Baron*, or Jane's F15/F18, or DiD's EF2000.
> No hard feelings, sir, but you don't seem to have much
> knowledge at all of *** flightsims.

> Also, top-posting is bad for the readability of a thread.
> Just a tip.

> >> On Mon, 22 Apr 2002 17:13:15 -0600, "John Pancoast"

> >> > Yep. Because they failed to adapt. Others took their place.

> >> >-John

> >> Failed to adapt to what, exactly?

> >> They made the best *** flightsims ever.

> >> >> On Mon, 22 Apr 2002 13:00:30 -0600, "John Pancoast"

> >> >> >.be nice to developers or flight sims will go
> >> >> >away..........been hearing that bs for four*** years now
> >> >myself.........as
> >> >> >flight sims keep getting churned out year after year.

> >> >> Microprose/Spectrum Holobyte, Dynamix, iMagic, Janes, DiD,
> >> >> Digital Integration etc., etc., no longer "churn out" ***
> >> >> flightsims, since they're out of business.

by **John Pancoas** » Wed, 24 Apr 2002 13:41:19

lol, actually, I do........since 1988, I do, including all the titles you
mention. And I've heard the same thing every year since then about the
death of *** flight sims.......just as the same old cry is now taking
place.

But whatever, it's not really worth arguing about, eh ?

-John

> On Mon, 22 Apr 2002 20:04:38 -0600, "John Pancoast"

> > Key word is MADE. Didn't keep MAKING. Point is, so what if they went
> >under ? Others took their place, and flight sims continue, as they
always
> >will, irregardless of the "sky is falling" advocates.

> >-John

> Wrong.

> There has been *no* substitute for Microprose Falcon 4 or
> Dynamix' Red Baron*, or Jane's F15/F18, or DiD's EF2000.
> No hard feelings, sir, but you don't seem to have much
> knowledge at all of *** flightsims.

> Also, top-posting is bad for the readability of a thread.
> Just a tip.

> >> On Mon, 22 Apr 2002 17:13:15 -0600, "John Pancoast"

> >> > Yep. Because they failed to adapt. Others took their place.

> >> >-John

> >> Failed to adapt to what, exactly?

> >> They made the best *** flightsims ever.

> >> >> On Mon, 22 Apr 2002 13:00:30 -0600, "John Pancoast"

> >> >> >.be nice to developers or flight sims will go
> >> >> >away..........been hearing that bs for four*** years now
> >> >myself.........as
> >> >> >flight sims keep getting churned out year after year.

> >> >> Microprose/Spectrum Holobyte, Dynamix, iMagic, Janes, DiD,
> >> >> Digital Integration etc., etc., no longer "churn out" ***
> >> >> flightsims, since they're out of business.

by **John Pancoas** » Wed, 24 Apr 2002 13:44:13

That's what I always thought too, but guess not<G>

-John

to quickly read the new

> content, without having to wade through some of the posts you've already
read.....
> --
> Biz

> "Don't touch that please, your primitive intellect wouldn't understand
> alloys and compositions and,......things with molecular structures,....and
> the....." - Ash

> > On Mon, 22 Apr 2002 20:04:38 -0600, "John Pancoast"

> > > Key word is MADE. Didn't keep MAKING. Point is, so what if they
went
> > >under ? Others took their place, and flight sims continue, as they
always
> > >will, irregardless of the "sky is falling" advocates.

> > >-John

> > Wrong.

> > There has been *no* substitute for Microprose Falcon 4 or
> > Dynamix' Red Baron*, or Jane's F15/F18, or DiD's EF2000.
> > No hard feelings, sir, but you don't seem to have much
> > knowledge at all of *** flightsims.

> > Also, top-posting is bad for the readability of a thread.
> > Just a tip.

> > >> On Mon, 22 Apr 2002 17:13:15 -0600, "John Pancoast"

> > >> > Yep. Because they failed to adapt. Others took their place.

> > >> >-John

> > >> Failed to adapt to what, exactly?

> > >> They made the best *** flightsims ever.

> > >> >> On Mon, 22 Apr 2002 13:00:30 -0600, "John Pancoast"

> > >> >> >.be nice to developers or flight sims will go
> > >> >> >away..........been hearing that bs for four*** years now
> > >> >myself.........as
> > >> >> >flight sims keep getting churned out year after year.

> > >> >> Microprose/Spectrum Holobyte, Dynamix, iMagic, Janes, DiD,
> > >> >> Digital Integration etc., etc., no longer "churn out" ***
> > >> >> flightsims, since they're out of business.

by **John Pancoas** » Wed, 24 Apr 2002 13:44:41

No kidding, rock and a hard place there :)

-John

sooner, but you can't see squat
post is clearly showing,
patch, I would hate to be the
You'll never make more
that..yeah thats it...lol

> --
> Biz

> "Don't touch that please, your primitive intellect wouldn't understand
> alloys and compositions and,......things with molecular structures,....and
> the....." - Ash

> > > Well, someone turning off smoke when others don't is an unfair
advantage.

> > How is that? If someone needs to turn off the smoke to get good
framerates,
> > how is that an advantage? The people with stronger systems don't get
the
> > slowdown that the slower systems get. Also, I'd say that having the
smoke ON
> > is an advantage, as you get a bit more warning for an incident up
ahead...

> > Eldred
> > --
> > Homepage - http://www.racesimcentral.net/~epickett
> > A friend of mine is involved in a fund-raiser walk-a-thon for research
to cure
> > *** cancer. If you can, please go to my homepage and see how to make
a
> > donation. Thank you.

> > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

by **Joachim Trens** » Wed, 24 Apr 2002 17:56:35

Smoke off can be an advantage at Sears where everybody cuts across the grass
a lot, or where there are many offs.

The clouds can be so dense and large that they prevent you from seeing the
track, and it can be quite difficult to keep it on the track while racing
through one of the larger ones without seeing the track anymore. Also they
conceal of course cars parked behind the cloud, which forces you to try an
drive more carefully (sometimes doesn't help much either).

Clouds probably also cause screen stutters on many systems. Therefor, I'd
say smoke off overall is an advantage and can make it a little easier.

Achim

> > Well, someone turning off smoke when others don't is an unfair
advantage.

> How is that? If someone needs to turn off the smoke to get good
framerates,
> how is that an advantage? The people with stronger systems don't get the
> slowdown that the slower systems get. Also, I'd say that having the smoke
ON
> is an advantage, as you get a bit more warning for an incident up ahead...

...

rec.autos.simulators

Upcoming N2K2 Patch

Upcoming N2K2 Patch

Upcoming N2K2 Patch

Upcoming N2K2 Patch

Upcoming N2K2 Patch

Upcoming N2K2 Patch

Upcoming N2K2 Patch

Upcoming N2K2 Patch

Upcoming N2K2 Patch

Upcoming N2K2 Patch

Upcoming N2K2 Patch

Upcoming N2K2 Patch

Upcoming N2K2 Patch

Upcoming N2K2 Patch

Upcoming N2K2 Patch

Upcoming N2K2 Patch