rec.autos.simulators

N2002: AI quailifying speed and race speed at Bristol (and other tracks)

Ben Side

N2002: AI quailifying speed and race speed at Bristol (and other tracks)

by Ben Side » Sat, 30 Mar 2002 05:44:05

Last week Jeff Gordon won the pole at Bristol with a 127+ MPH effort. The
highest race speeds averaged 117 or 118.  Of course, the N2002 AI is nowhere
close to this ratio: at 100% AI strength, the fastest N2002 qualifiers were
about 118 mph. Then they ran roughly the same speeds during the race!  I
hate to "sticky up" the track with the track.ini file so that qualifying
speeds are roughly the same as real life, because then the AI races at
qualifying speeds!  I think we need some kind of utility, or a patch, for
N2002 to correct this discrepancy.  I hope papy is reading this...
Brian Oste

N2002: AI quailifying speed and race speed at Bristol (and other tracks)

by Brian Oste » Sat, 30 Mar 2002 06:47:28

If you want to adjust the qualifying speeds, simply adjust the ai
qualifying modifier in the ini file.

Brian Oster



Brian Oster

Admi

N2002: AI quailifying speed and race speed at Bristol (and other tracks)

by Admi » Sat, 30 Mar 2002 05:56:04

I've noticed this too, mainly in N4 though. Last fall, DEJ took the pole at
Atlanta and that night in a league event I got the pole and was nearly a
1/10 faster than he ran using "supposedly" the same weather as Atlanta that
very day.

I have run Bristol in N4 and N2002 and have come no where near 15.0 like JG
did (I can run in the 15's, just not a 15 flat). Could it be that temp and
cloud cover and wind aren't enough weather factors? Might we need humidity
to equalize us with the Cup guys? I know cooler, denser air makes you go
faster (makes more HP anyway) and the NR series seems to run whatever temp,
cloud cover/no cloud and wind/no wind with no humidity. That and we have 1)
A common template (decals only seprate the makes) and 2) Common engines,
same horespower. It may be that the differences in teams' engine HP output
weigh into the real outcomes on track whereas all NR2002 racers get the same
aero and same engine HP as everyone else and it is just an 'average' derived
from NASCAR PR on their cars' HP output. I bet the top teams in NASCAR are
above average in the HP department, I know the Fords make more than Chebbies
(am a Chevy fan), seems the Blue Ovals have had a distinct HP advantage for
some time, is the reason that the SB2 came about a few years ago and the SB3
(GEN-III) is already on its way to the teams if not already in use.


Steve Blankenshi

N2002: AI quailifying speed and race speed at Bristol (and other tracks)

by Steve Blankenshi » Sat, 30 Mar 2002 10:13:48

Perhaps I'm missing something, but it seems the question is, can YOU qualify with 9-10mph faster laps than you race?  Maybe so if
you could do the same car tweaks JG and company do in real life.  But if such is not available in the game, why would you want to be
off the back in every qualifying session and then have the AI running at your level again for the race?  How much do your own R and
Q laptimes differ?

SB

PS - OT here but I did notice in the Gamespot F12002 interview that they're putting such gizmos in that one.  Smaller radiators,
adjustable rev limits, engine heat modeling, etc.  So now "qualifying setup" takes on a whole new level...


> Last week Jeff Gordon won the pole at Bristol with a 127+ MPH effort. The
> highest race speeds averaged 117 or 118.  Of course, the N2002 AI is nowhere
> close to this ratio: at 100% AI strength, the fastest N2002 qualifiers were
> about 118 mph. Then they ran roughly the same speeds during the race!  I
> hate to "sticky up" the track with the track.ini file so that qualifying
> speeds are roughly the same as real life, because then the AI races at
> qualifying speeds!  I think we need some kind of utility, or a patch, for
> N2002 to correct this discrepancy.  I hope papy is reading this...

jason moy

N2002: AI quailifying speed and race speed at Bristol (and other tracks)

by jason moy » Sat, 30 Mar 2002 17:05:01


> I have run Bristol in N4 and N2002 and have come no where near 15.0 like JG
> did (I can run in the 15's, just not a 15 flat).

Looking through the Outlaw results in OSCAR last week I see that Bob
Fellenbaum did a 15.224 in an open setup at 70 degrees 0 wind last
week.  My personal best in the fixed qual setup at 70 degrees 0 wind
is 15.6ish, off the pace but not bad for that temperature and a fixed
setup.  In a good setup at 40 degrees 0 wind I would think that 15.0
isn't very far fetched, and if my memory serves me correctly, the
temperature in Bristol the day that Gordon set the qualifying record
was colder than the lowest limit available in either sim.

That said, I've found the AI at Bristol in every Papy game since N1 is
way too easy, in qualifying and race sessions.  It's one of the few
tracks where I can utterly dominate at 100% AI strength without even
modifying the default setup (Pocono and Las Vegas being 2 others).

Jason

jason moy

N2002: AI quailifying speed and race speed at Bristol (and other tracks)

by jason moy » Sat, 30 Mar 2002 17:08:36


> PS - OT here but I did notice in the Gamespot F12002 interview that they're putting such gizmos in that one.  Smaller radiators,
> adjustable rev limits, engine heat modeling, etc.  So now "qualifying setup" takes on a whole new level...

Wow, if they fix the collision modelling, track modelling, controller
setup, and unrealistic braking and aero grip they'll have themselves a
sim.  Nice to see that engine heat and damage due to abuse is finally
being modelled in a modern F1 sim...didn't Indy 500 have that?

Jason

David G Fishe

N2002: AI quailifying speed and race speed at Bristol (and other tracks)

by David G Fishe » Sat, 30 Mar 2002 18:37:26



they're putting such gizmos in that one.  Smaller radiators,
setup" takes on a whole new level...

MGPRS2 had it. Maybe F1RS, don't remember for sure.

It would be nice now that Papyrus finally got the tire model set if they
would not STILL make all the cars exactly the same in their NASCAR series.
Accelerated tire wear and fuel usage would also be nice since they can't
seem to figure out how to put in a save game feature. With not having to
model wet weather like the F1 sims, you'd think they'd have the time to do
these things. AI seems to still be a problem area too from what I read here.
:-)

David G Fisher

John Pancoas

N2002: AI quailifying speed and race speed at Bristol (and other tracks)

by John Pancoas » Sat, 30 Mar 2002 23:42:41

  Well, part of the problem with trying to make the differences in the
models of stock car sims, is that no one _really_ knows if there is one in
actual racing, and if so, to what degree, etc.

  There's so much bs, politicing, etc. in real arguments, who knows what's
true or not.  Personally, I don't have a problem with a sim keeping them the
same; at the very least, in real life, they're very close anyway.  Hell, the
Dodge is based on a Taurus template in real life(which is based on a car
that doesn't exist<G>).

-John



Dave Henri

N2002: AI quailifying speed and race speed at Bristol (and other tracks)

by Dave Henri » Sun, 31 Mar 2002 00:17:26

"John Pancoast"  Hell, the
  The upcomming new Pontiac Grand Prix is already being called a Fodgeiac
since Nascar gave them the Taurus Templates to model their car with.  Some
say the Dodge Intrepid is a Taurus but I think that...
<Xfiles mode on>
   Ford, knowing that Dodge was getting ready to come back to Nascar,
probably and rightly figured Nascar would Kiss Dodge behind to make up for
the dreadful treatment in the 70's, and give concessions to the new car.  So
Ford, under the cover of a fake tire problem withSUV's sent industrial spies
to STEAL the blueprints for the 2nd generation Intrepid.  then they quickly
remade the Taurus(remember how quickly the oval rear window disappeared?)
into what would become the new Intrepid.  Pontiac seeing what Ford had done,
but being too late to steal Dodge's car decided the next best thing would be
to steal the car that had already stolen from the car.  Dodge, since they
knew they would be getting preferential treatment from Nascar, stayed Mum.
Chevrolet is still waiting for Dale Earnhardt to make a full recovery before
it begins another car redesign.
<Xfiles mode off>
dave henrie

Admi

N2002: AI quailifying speed and race speed at Bristol (and other tracks)

by Admi » Sun, 31 Mar 2002 00:58:30


LOL! and I agree, common templates are fine for our simming AND Ferd and
Dodge race against the 2 door GM's in 'sedans'. Go figure...that's why I say
let the Tundra into the CTS, if they can basterdize WC to suit companies
that don't make the proper car type to race, let a truck run that is offered
publicly with a 32valve DOHC engine in it! :)

John Pancoas

N2002: AI quailifying speed and race speed at Bristol (and other tracks)

by John Pancoas » Sun, 31 Mar 2002 03:42:45

  That WOULD be cool to see :)

-John




> >   Well, part of the problem with trying to make the differences in the
> > models of stock car sims, is that no one _really_ knows if there is one
in
> > actual racing, and if so, to what degree, etc.

> >   There's so much bs, politicing, etc. in real arguments, who knows
what's
> > true or not.  Personally, I don't have a problem with a sim keeping them
> the
> > same; at the very least, in real life, they're very close anyway.  Hell,
> the
> > Dodge is based on a Taurus template in real life(which is based on a car
> > that doesn't exist<G>).

> > -John

> LOL! and I agree, common templates are fine for our simming AND Ferd and
> Dodge race against the 2 door GM's in 'sedans'. Go figure...that's why I
say
> let the Tundra into the CTS, if they can basterdize WC to suit companies
> that don't make the proper car type to race, let a truck run that is
offered
> publicly with a 32valve DOHC engine in it! :)

David G Fishe

N2002: AI quailifying speed and race speed at Bristol (and other tracks)

by David G Fishe » Sun, 31 Mar 2002 05:30:42

I prefer shithead. Andre can be the***head.

David G Fisher


Goy Larse

N2002: AI quailifying speed and race speed at Bristol (and other tracks)

by Goy Larse » Sun, 31 Mar 2002 07:21:17


> I prefer shithead. Andre can be the***head.

> David G Fisher



> > shutup***head

I agree David,***head doesn't really suit you

Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy

http://www.racesimcentral.net/
http://www.racesimcentral.net/

"Animation isn't the illusion of life; it is life"
--Chuck Jones (1912-2002)--

David G Fishe

N2002: AI quailifying speed and race speed at Bristol (and other tracks)

by David G Fishe » Sun, 31 Mar 2002 07:43:30



> > I prefer shithead. Andre can be the***head.

> > David G Fisher



> > > shutup***head

> I agree David,***head doesn't really suit you

I have a feeling my joke was a little too subtle. Andre was called a
***head by the same guy in another thread. :-)

David G Fisher

Colin Harri

N2002: AI quailifying speed and race speed at Bristol (and other tracks)

by Colin Harri » Sun, 31 Mar 2002 07:53:02



No surprise there.....he usually gets called that in EVERY thread :-)


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.