rec.autos.simulators

It seems so damn random, and has very little to do with how you treat the
car. Also, there's that ridiculous *feature* where the front of the car is
crumpled if the back end hits the wall. Engines being damaged when tapped in
the rear. Neat stuff like that.

We lined up in the pits at the start of our RASCAR race yesterday, and when
I put my car into first (without ever even revving up the engine), it was
already lost. How in the hell do you lose first gear before you've even
rolled an inch out of the pits to start the race???

In F1C, if you hit something with the LF wheel, the LF wheel is damaged. If
you hit something with the front or back spoiler, the spoiler is damaged.
Makes sense.

Far too often, N2003's damage model doesn't seem to make any sense at all.

David G Fisher

Engine damage from over revving seems pretty well modelled and not just a
random factor and the correct wheels and suspension get damaged according to
impact.

It is quite a novelty losing a gear in a sim, but it soon wears off when it
seems related to a virtal mechanics bad workmanship then your own treatment
of the 'box. I suppose this is realistic - components fail through no fault
of the driver, but it seems a bit harsh for sim racing.

As for the engine damage when being tapped from behind, I suppose the impact
could have worked electrics loose - but it seems a bit far fetched! More
like a random failure based upon an impact full stop - regardless where it
is.

Seems to me that the added sophistication added to the GPL damage model
could do with some more work. The ability to select random damage on the
server would be good and simply having the right bits being damaged based on
where it is hit would seem a given with such a mature development.

Cheers
Tony

   Yep, it's not very good.  Seen that "hit square in the tail, have the
engine go out" junk happen to others several times.

  You've never nosed into a wall hard with the ISI products and lost both
wings?  Granted nr2k3 is odd.  Some is random, like your gear.  Chalk that
up I guess to a hurried pit crew that didn't get the dogs properly sorted.
dave henrie

Does anyone know if the sim models two ignition boxes? Like if you primary
goes, you could hit a key and the second ignition starts?
I had the ignition go yesterday with 5 laps to go in a race that was going
to fall perfectly into my lap. Just as I had planned it.

--
Richard "ZZ" Busch

Member:
Screamers Racing League
OAO
CORS
MARA TransAm
RASCAR
GPL Rank + 17.415
MoGPL Rank + 318.586
N2002 Rank + 7.695
TransAm Rank  ??

Like ignition failure - how could the driver have caused that if I
behaved well and didn't crash into anything.

I think, N2k3 causes random failures in addition to driver-induced ones,
simply because they also happen in reality.

I've never checked how statistically correct their frequency of
occurrence is in N2k3, though <g>

Achim

I can't say I've ever seen damage to the front of my car unless the
front of my car hit something, but what do I know.

Jason

  No way should something like that have any engine damage of any kind.

I would guess I race, on average, around 1500 to 2000 miles a week
online, and I've had maybe 3 random failures since last February.  If
anything, the frequency is probably lower than a typical team would
see.  I don't think most sim racers could deal with the real failure
rate an average team faces in racing.  Of course, we also don't have
to deal with cars that are low on horsepower, have aerodynamic
problems, and so forth.

I would say with 99% confidence that failures in N2003 are part random
and part abuse.  If you notice, under 70 clear you can run a track 20
times with 100% tape and the engine will fail at a different spot
every time.  I've had motors blow up in qualifying at watkins glen
shortly after taking the green flag, and I've also done 5-6 laps with
full tape and no problem.  Likewise, I shift without lifting
everywhere and I've seen maybe 3 gear failures, one of them being a
broken 1st gear when I tried to pull out of the pits in practice.

Jason

No damage eh? -Here's what you do.

Get two clapped out cars and advance the idle on one so it will do, say,
8mph in 1st without the driver touching the controls. Take both somewhere
you can't kill any innocent bystanders and do the following:

Your buddy drivers the car with the advanced idle and does nothing but keep
it straight. You drive the second car. Line yourself the other car and
_GENTLY_ drive into it (need to be as straight as possible for the desired
effect). Once full contact is made, accellerate and tell me what happens.

Jan. <VBG>
=---
PS.: your buddy is not allowed to accellerate, put the clutch in or pull his
car out of gear!

  Ugh, how is this a comparison ?  First, I didn't say no damage.  I said
engine damage.  Second, in the game example I mentioned, the hitting car
naturally does the exact opposite of accelerate.

  It's a lousy damage model, quit making excuses for it.  N1 had a better
one.

Mitch

Because the car in front will not be pushed along like you see in the
movies. It will stall and spin out.

Now imagine the above happening to an engine and drivetrain that doesn't
have the 100.000 mile overdesign safeguards built into it. <g>

By hitting another car you transfer momentum to it, i.e. you accelerate it.

It's not optimum, but, if it's truly random damage, how come it always hits
Dave, or Mitch or Larry and not one of the other, more mechanically
sympathetic drivers in RASCAR like me?

Jan.
=---

  Movies ?  Talking about in the game <g>

  Don't have to imagine.  Pit road taps happen every race in real life.
Never once in over twenty years of attending races seen an engine damaged
because of them.
it.

  Nope

  Don't remember my saying anything about random damage.  Did agree that the
model itself stinks.