F1CE2000 - 'taking it a step further' idea...

F1CE2000 let's you have totally unique attributes for each car in the game. You can specify different power/tourque curves, different weight, weight distribution, braking potential, aerodynamics, tyre stiffness, inertia, flywheel size for the engine, fuel consumption etc. A lot of these attributes are the same from car to car expect for: -weight -power/tourque curve -braking potential -aerodynamics -fuel consumption This makes the car perform different but they feel roughly the same. The power feels different and so does braking but handling wise I can't see any difference (and neither are any of the numbers different). Now, I have been fiddling with some of the numbers to get the car a bit more sharper/direct and still retain some amount of 'control' over the car while driving it. This can be done by changing just 1 variable for the car - INERTIA ... what this number (or a set of 3 numbers) does is: - By lowering the values - Make the car sharper and more responsive while sacrificing 'control' ('cos things happen too quickly). - By increasing the values - make the car nice to control but less responsive, less sharp, and less sensitive to user input. Though, this makes the car easier to drive (ie. more controllable). Odd thing I noticed is that it does not really have much effect on lap times - with the low values for inertia - the car responds to every input real fast/well and seems like it'll do anything the 'player' commands ... that is until you hit the limit of the car and then things get nasty - car is so snappy and violent that you're more then likely going to end up in the way if you cross the limit once too often. On the other hand, with the 'high' values for 'inertia' the car is really easy to drive and is very forgiving, though untimely there is on;y 'that much it can do' because the car is nowhere as sharp or responsive as with the 'low values'. Bottom line is, I can't really get an advantage in lap times with either settings - I find it that I 'think' I can be quicker with the 'snappy' car ... if only I can manage to keep it on the read and composed for a whole lap. Now here's my idea - Why not set the INERTIA values different for each car in order to get different 'feel' for the cars ... some would be easy to drive but not very responsive while others would be very sharp/direct but a real nightmare to handle on the limit. I think this would change the feel for the cars in game and add to the whole experience of driving different cars. Here's some values that I'm thinking for different cars and my reasoning (btw, all engine_inertias at .095, and stiffness ant 60): - Williams - (1400,1800, 800) - a really nice car to drive that is still pretty responsive. - Ferrari - (1200,1600,650) - snappy car that is awesome to drive a but nasty at the limit. - BAR - (1300,1700,600) - snappy car ...probably the hardest car to drive. - McLaren - (1250,1650,700) - nice car to drive (not as nice as Williams though) - Arrows - (2000,2500,1000) Nicest car to drive. - Jordan - (1500,1950,800) - average to drive and average directness. - Benetton - (1500,1950,650) - average to drive and average directness. Also, snappy. - Jaguar - (1900,2300,800) - average to drive and average directness. Though, not as direct as Jordan. - Sauber - (1300,1700,700) - excellent response but snappy. - Prost - (1800,2200,950) - Nice car to drive. -Minardi - (1700,2100,900) - Nice car to drive. This would give each car a different feel which minic what I know about the current F1 cars. Regards, David Mocnay

David, EXCELLENT idea, but FWIW, I already find each car to handle a bit differently. I haven't bothered to look at the values, but I've run most of my laps to date in either Schumi's Ferrari or Mika's McLaren, and I do notice a difference in the way the cars feel -- the Ferrari seems "sharper," while the McLaren seems a bit more stable. I assume that this is due to the weight/power/braking/aero/fuel parameters, and not the inertia values. Now, that said, I really like the idea of tweaking the values to make them a little sharper than in the retail release, especially where the engine inertia values are concerned (Note: Has anybody checked to see how the decreased engine inertia and improved wheelspin characteristics affect things in the wet?). What would be REALLY nice, though, would be some sort of "Advanced Options" patch that would allow us all to run IDENTICAL "advanced" parameters, similar to the "advopt" utility for SCGT. I recommend that we get several people involved (yourself, Gregor, Bobi, etc.) involved in some testing to come up with some settings that strike a good compromise between each person's various personal preferences (Gregor prefers values that are more mathematically-correct, while you tend to prefer settings based on "feel," for example). Then, once we come up with some advanced settings that improve on the game and meet most people's advanced expectations, these values could be released as an F1CS2K "Advanced Options" pack, to somewhat standardize things for hotlap competitions and such, as well as for the sake of comparison when talking about realism overall. FWIW, if we decide to pursue something like this, it might be more appropriate to move the discussion over to Mark Rael's F1CS2K Players Guide site (http://blitzsports.com/racing/f1cs/), where the commentary and message strings wouldn't get lost in the newsbrowser melee. Whaddaya think? Anybody else have any comments or suggestions? -- JB In article <EiAZ5.268$%[email hidden]>, "David Mocnay" <[email hidden]> wrote: > F1CE2000 let's you have totally unique attributes for each car in thegame. > You can specify different power/tourque curves, different weight,weight > distribution, braking potential, aerodynamics, tyre stiffness,inertia,

Quoted text (9 lines)

> flywheel size for the engine, fuel consumption etc. A lot of these > attributes are the same from car to car expect for: > -weight > -power/tourque curve > -braking potential > -aerodynamics > -fuel consumption > > This makes the car perform different but they feel roughly the same.

The > power feels different and so does braking but handling wise I can'tsee any > difference (and neither are any of the numbers different). Now, Ihave been > fiddling with some of the numbers to get the car a bit moresharper/direct > and still retain some amount of 'control' over the car while drivingit. > This can be done by changing just 1 variable for the car -INERTIA ... what > this number (or a set of 3 numbers) does is: > - By lowering the values - Make the car sharper and more responsivewhile > sacrificing 'control' ('cos things happen too quickly). > - By increasing the values - make the car nice to control but less > responsive, less sharp, and less sensitive to user input. Though,this makes > the car easier to drive (ie. more controllable). > > Odd thing I noticed is that it does not really have much effect on lap > times - with the low values for inertia - the car responds to everyinput > real fast/well and seems like it'll do anything the 'player'commands ... > that is until you hit the limit of the car and then things get nasty - car > is so snappy and violent that you're more then likely going to end upin the > way if you cross the limit once too often. On the other hand, with the > 'high' values for 'inertia' the car is really easy to drive and isvery > forgiving, though untimely there is on;y 'that much it can do'because the > car is nowhere as sharp or responsive as with the 'low values'.Bottom line > is, I can't really get an advantage in lap times with eithersettings - I > find it that I 'think' I can be quicker with the 'snappy' car ... ifonly I > can manage to keep it on the read and composed for a whole lap. > > Now here's my idea - Why not set the INERTIA values different foreach car > in order to get different 'feel' for the cars ... some would be easyto > drive but not very responsive while others would be very sharp/directbut a > real nightmare to handle on the limit. I think this would change thefeel > for the cars in game and add to the whole experience of drivingdifferent > cars. > > Here's some values that I'm thinking for different cars and myreasoning > (btw, all engine_inertias at .095, and stiffness ant 60): > > - Williams - (1400,1800, 800) - a really nice car to drive that isstill > pretty responsive. > > - Ferrari - (1200,1600,650) - snappy car that is awesome to drive abut > nasty at the limit. > - BAR - (1300,1700,600) - snappy car ...probably the hardest car todrive. > - McLaren - (1250,1650,700) - nice car to drive (not as nice asWilliams > though) > - Arrows - (2000,2500,1000) Nicest car to drive. > - Jordan - (1500,1950,800) - average to drive and average directness. > - Benetton - (1500,1950,650) - average to drive and averagedirectness.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Also, snappy. > - Jaguar - (1900,2300,800) - average to drive and average directness. > Though, not as direct as Jordan. > - Sauber - (1300,1700,700) - excellent response but snappy. > - Prost - (1800,2200,950) - Nice car to drive. > -Minardi - (1700,2100,900) - Nice car to drive. > > This would give each car a different feel which minic what I know

about the > current F1 cars. > > Regards, > David Mocnay > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

David Mocnay wrote: > > - Arrows - (2000,2500,1000) Nicest car to drive. I've never heard that the Arrows is the nicest to drive. Given that it almost always records the highest speed in the speed traps, yet is still in the mid-field at best for lap times, would indicate the opposite, I would think. Cool idea, though. Dave Ewing -- ***************************************************** David A. Ewing Xilinx Boulder [email hidden] *****************************************************

I would suggest using David's recommended settings as a starting point. I will try to incorporate these tonight for some testing. If you'd like to participate on this "F1CS2K Advanced Options Project," then please do the same on your end and report your findings back here. I may start a dedicated thread on the F1CS2K Players Guide site for comments and such, if anybody else thinks it would be a good idea. -- JB In article <9182ia$kck$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] wrote: > David, > <SNIP> > What would be REALLY nice, though, would be some sort of "Advanced > Options" patch that would allow us all to run IDENTICAL "advanced" > parameters, similar to the "advopt" utility for SCGT. <SNIP> > In article <EiAZ5.268$%[email hidden]>, > "David Mocnay" <[email hidden]> wrote: <SNIP AGAIN>

Quoted text (35 lines)

> > Here's some values that I'm thinking for different cars and my > reasoning > > (btw, all engine_inertias at .095, and stiffness ant 60): > > > > - Williams - (1400,1800, 800) - a really nice car to drive that is > > still pretty responsive. > > > > - Ferrari - (1200,1600,650) - snappy car that is awesome to drive a > > but nasty at the limit. > > - BAR - (1300,1700,600) - snappy car ...probably the hardest car to > > drive. > > - McLaren - (1250,1650,700) - nice car to drive (not as nice as > > Williams though) > > - Arrows - (2000,2500,1000) Nicest car to drive. > > - Jordan - (1500,1950,800) - average to drive and average > > directness. > > - Benetton - (1500,1950,650) - average to drive and average > directness. Also, snappy. > > - Jaguar - (1900,2300,800) - average to drive and average > > directness. Though, not as direct as Jordan. > > - Sauber - (1300,1700,700) - excellent response but snappy. > > - Prost - (1800,2200,950) - Nice car to drive. > > -Minardi - (1700,2100,900) - Nice car to drive. > > > > This would give each car a different feel which minic what I know > > about the current F1 cars. > > > > Regards, > > David Mocnay > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com > http://www.deja.com/ >

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

<[email hidden]> wrote in message news:918pr9$ani$[email hidden]... > I would suggest using David's recommended settings as astarting > point. I will try to incorporate these tonight for sometesting. If > you'd like to participate on this "F1CS2K Advanced OptionsProject," > then please do the same on your end and report yourfindings back > here. I may start a dedicated thread on the F1CS2KPlayers Guide site > for comments and such, if anybody else thinks it would bea good idea. what exactly do you want. do you wan tmore power, do you want less grip or what. What i must search for. I f you want less grip change teh widht settings for the tire from 355 to 255 and you will need 10 meters more for braking :)) also try to mail SiPhi he is making a new Replay manager maybe he can help more.

Sounds good. I don't want to change things too much. I figure that changing the inertia values will/does not have an effect on the lap time (after all, power, weight, braking and aero stay the same and determine this). I figure that all that the inertia values do is make the car more responsive to the user (sharper) or move the 'slider' the other way and make the car easy to drive, hard to lose control of but at the same time less sensitive to the driver inputs (ie. less demanding and involving). Obviously the cars are already set up to have the 'correct' performance so I'm just talking about changing the sharpness(snappiness) vs easy to drive(less involving) aspect of the cars. Changing the cars to actually have different weight distributions, different grip (front or back) would be amazing but I'm not ready to undertake something so big. I'm happy with everything like this for the moment as it is :-) ps. I have driven the Jag and Ferrari a fair bit - there are some differences (besides ultimate performance) but I'm having a hard time (at the moment) 'reading' those differences. I think the Ferrari seems better over the curbs and has more front end grip. I could have sworn that I've done my best lap in a Jag while it was/is 2 secs of my best Ferrari time (that lap wasn't the best I could do either). Regards, David Mocnay pps. I'm wondering if this will have any effect on the AI? I have read that changing the inertia values too low will mess up the AI. Are my proposed values too low? What does the AI actually do that is wrong when you lower the inertia too much. [email hidden] wrote in message <918pr9$ani$[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (66 lines)

>I would suggest using David's recommended settings as a starting >point. I will try to incorporate these tonight for some testing. If >you'd like to participate on this "F1CS2K Advanced Options Project," >then please do the same on your end and report your findings back >here. I may start a dedicated thread on the F1CS2K Players Guide site >for comments and such, if anybody else thinks it would be a good idea. > >-- JB > >In article <9182ia$kck$[email hidden]>, > [email hidden] wrote: >> David, >> > ><SNIP> > >> What would be REALLY nice, though, would be some sort of "Advanced >> Options" patch that would allow us all to run IDENTICAL "advanced" >> parameters, similar to the "advopt" utility for SCGT. > ><SNIP> > >> In article <EiAZ5.268$%[email hidden]>, >> "David Mocnay" <[email hidden]> wrote: > ><SNIP AGAIN> > >> > Here's some values that I'm thinking for different cars and my >> reasoning >> > (btw, all engine_inertias at .095, and stiffness ant 60): >> > >> > - Williams - (1400,1800, 800) - a really nice car to drive that is >> > still pretty responsive. >> > >> > - Ferrari - (1200,1600,650) - snappy car that is awesome to drive a >> > but nasty at the limit. >> > - BAR - (1300,1700,600) - snappy car ...probably the hardest car to >> > drive. >> > - McLaren - (1250,1650,700) - nice car to drive (not as nice as >> > Williams though) >> > - Arrows - (2000,2500,1000) Nicest car to drive. >> > - Jordan - (1500,1950,800) - average to drive and average >> > directness. >> > - Benetton - (1500,1950,650) - average to drive and average >> directness. Also, snappy. >> > - Jaguar - (1900,2300,800) - average to drive and average >> > directness. Though, not as direct as Jordan. >> > - Sauber - (1300,1700,700) - excellent response but snappy. >> > - Prost - (1800,2200,950) - Nice car to drive. >> > -Minardi - (1700,2100,900) - Nice car to drive. >> > >> > This would give each car a different feel which minic what I know >> > about the current F1 cars. >> > >> > Regards, >> > David Mocnay >> > >> > >> >> Sent via Deja.com >> http://www.deja.com/ >> > > >Sent via Deja.com >http://www.deja.com/

Arrows - the ultimate grip has more to do with the Arrows 'lack of perfornace' more than anything else. If you watch the arrows o nthe track, you'll rarely see the car step out (or more to the point snap). It always seems to have a very nicely balances attitude. I could be wrong about it being the 'nicest' car to drive but it wouldn't be far. Also, you'll notice that both the cars seems to to really well in the rain (unlike Ferraris) - that hints at the car communicating it's limits really well as well as behaving nicely on the limit. Afterall, look where they oftne run and then look at the drivers - they never did that well in any other cars so I'd be inclined to say that it's not their 'Shuey-like' skill. btw, if you have different opinion about this with other cars as well then let me know .... what I got here is only my 1st draft. What would you say is the nicest/easiest car to drive? Which one is the hardest? etc. Regards, David Mocnay David Ewing wrote in message <[email hidden]>... >David Mocnay wrote: > >> >> - Arrows - (2000,2500,1000) Nicest car to drive. > >I've never heard that the Arrows is the nicest to drive. Given that italmost >always records the highest speed in the speed traps, yet is still in the >mid-field at best for lap times, would indicate the opposite, I wouldthink.

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >Cool idea, though. > >Dave Ewing > >-- >***************************************************** >David A. Ewing >Xilinx Boulder [email hidden] >***************************************************** > > >

> You can specify different power/tourque curves, different weight, > weight distribution, braking potential, aerodynamics, tyre > stiffness, inertia, flywheel size for the engine, fuel consumption > etc. I just downloaded the demo. Important question here: *HOW* do you adjust these things? I can't find any settings resembling these in any game files. -Dirt- 2000 White/Red CBR929RR **Jesus saves sinners and redeems them for valuable cash prizes** Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

In article <EiAZ5.268$%[email hidden]>, "David Mocnay" <[email hidden]> wrote: <SNIP> > Here's some values that I'm thinking for different cars and myreasoning > (btw, all engine_inertias at .095, and stiffness ant 60): > > - Williams - (1400,1800, 800) - a really nice car to drive that isstill > pretty responsive. > > - Ferrari - (1200,1600,650) - snappy car that is awesome to drive abut > nasty at the limit. > - BAR - (1300,1700,600) - snappy car ...probably the hardest car todrive. > - McLaren - (1250,1650,700) - nice car to drive (not as nice asWilliams > though) > - Arrows - (2000,2500,1000) Nicest car to drive. > - Jordan - (1500,1950,800) - average to drive and average directness. > - Benetton - (1500,1950,650) - average to drive and averagedirectness.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Also, snappy. > - Jaguar - (1900,2300,800) - average to drive and average directness. > Though, not as direct as Jordan. > - Sauber - (1300,1700,700) - excellent response but snappy. > - Prost - (1800,2200,950) - Nice car to drive. > -Minardi - (1700,2100,900) - Nice car to drive. > > This would give each car a different feel which minic what I know

about the > current F1 cars. FWIW, do we know what the difference is between the values in the "Default.vhs" file (or what these values do) versus the "*.veh" files? Is the "Default.vhs" a global file that is applied to all cars and modified by the individual "*.veh" files, is it just a baseline reference file, does the "Default.vhs" file establish the vehicle settings when you have "All Cars Equal" selected, or is this the player's vehicle value? I'm sure this is documeted somewhere, but I couldn't find a quick reference. Thanks in advance, guys! -- JB Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

You need to modify the VEH files in the 'car' folders under \season00\vehicles. Each VEH file represents the data for each car. Youi can change these values in any text editor. Regards, Daid Mocnay Chris Cavin wrote in message <9195d8$ki9$[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (21 lines)

> >> You can specify different power/tourque curves, different weight, >> weight distribution, braking potential, aerodynamics, tyre >> stiffness, inertia, flywheel size for the engine, fuel consumption >> etc. > > >I just downloaded the demo. Important question here: > >*HOW* do you adjust these things? > >I can't find any settings resembling these in any game files. > >-Dirt- >2000 White/Red CBR929RR > >**Jesus saves sinners and redeems them for valuable cash prizes** > > >Sent via Deja.com >http://www.deja.com/

[email hidden] wrote:

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > FWIW, do we know what the difference is between the values in > the "Default.vhs" file (or what these values do) versus the "*.veh" > files? Is the "Default.vhs" a global file that is applied to all cars > and modified by the individual "*.veh" files, is it just a baseline > reference file, does the "Default.vhs" file establish the vehicle > settings when you have "All Cars Equal" selected, or is this the > player's vehicle value? I'm sure this is documeted somewhere, but I > couldn't find a quick reference. > > Thanks in advance, guys! > > -- JB > > Sent via Deja.com > http://www.deja.com/

The default.vhs file is definitely used when you select all cars equal, and other ones are used when this is not selected. I also believe that this is the file that is loaded first for any car, and then its special .veh file that overrides the settings that are declared again. It might be worth experimenting if deleting some of the settings in the .veh file makes the program then use the .vhs settings. -Gregor

David Mocnay wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Regards, > David Mocnay > pps. I'm wondering if this will have any effect on the AI? I have read that > changing the inertia values too low will mess up the AI. Are my proposed > values too low? What does the AI actually do that is wrong when you lower > the inertia too much. >

It's not so much the AI driving part that is affected, but the physics calculations. If the z-axis inerita is too low (about 400 or lower), you will notice an instability when the cars will just start shaking left-right around the nose-tail axis. The tire stiffness affects the AI driving part, though, as the cars become much more precise, but with only altering the inertia I think not much would happen. I've never tried it myself, though. -Gregor

Thanks. Also, is a "deadzone" setting for the controller in there? I set all my deadzones to 0% and there's still an annoying dead spot in the center of the steering that makes it EXTREMELY hard to be smooth through the last turn at Indy (Indy T4). I've used the DXTweak to make all my DX zones 0% so it's in the demo, not my controller.

Quoted text (25 lines)

> You need to modify the VEH files in the 'car' folders under > \season00\vehicles. Each VEH file represents the data for each car. > You can change these values in any text editor. > > Regards, > Daid Mocnay > > Chris Cavin wrote in message <9195d8$ki9$[email hidden]>... > > > >> You can specify different power/tourque curves, different weight, > >> weight distribution, braking potential, aerodynamics, tyre > >> stiffness, inertia, flywheel size for the engine, fuel consumption > >> etc. > > > > > >I just downloaded the demo. Important question here: > > > >*HOW* do you adjust these things? > > > >I can't find any settings resembling these in any game files. > > > >-Dirt- > >2000 White/Red CBR929RR > > > >**Jesus saves sinners and redeems them for valuable cash prizes**

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

For F12000, the only way I could alter the veh file for my car and get the oppenents to use the settings that came with the game is to set the "All Cars Equal" in the "rules" menus, and "Player Cars Equal" in the "Unsupported Features" menus. Then only alter the veh file for the car I will drive. The AI seems to have the most problems driving with the engine inertia and the 4 wheel inertias turned down, they get a lot of wheel spin and spinouts. An easy way to give your car more power is to just boost the clutch efficiency, it seems to simply multiply all the rpm_torque settings. Tightening up the suspension via the veh file works well. I like to mess with the TerraDry.aiw file in the "Tracks" folder. I put the Roads parameter TFBumby=(0.006) for a more jittery, vibrating experience, especially at high speeds. I like to set the Dirt and Gravel pits for more "sink" and the rumble strips more bump. I've expiremented with cars with twice the mass and downforce and more tire grip (friction up a little and stiffness down), and you get stronger FF in the turns. This is why the FF sucks, it's programmed to work with any range of possible cars. I might wait for better FF before I upgrade. Anyway, with a heavier car the tires heat up and wear so fast it's undrivable, so I boosted the tire mass by about 10 times and the optimum tire warmth up to 220.0 That worked and I could drive on them even with the tire wear indicator way down to even 60%. However, after about 10 or 12 laps the tire performance suddenly declines drastically, just like with regular settings. This is with soft tires. So I think there might be a canned tire wear effect for the soft tires. Seems like it. I got fed up and went back to GPL. Now when I do play F1 2000, it's primarily with just all the inertia settings down and some road bumbiness. The suprising thing is, F1 2000 made me a little better at GPL. After a few days I got new best times. Tom

Quoted text (27 lines)

>[email hidden] wrote: >> >> FWIW, do we know what the difference is between the values in >> the "Default.vhs" file (or what these values do) versus the "*.veh" >> files? Is the "Default.vhs" a global file that is applied to all cars >> and modified by the individual "*.veh" files, is it just a baseline >> reference file, does the "Default.vhs" file establish the vehicle >> settings when you have "All Cars Equal" selected, or is this the >> player's vehicle value? I'm sure this is documeted somewhere, but I >> couldn't find a quick reference. >> >> Thanks in advance, guys! >> >> -- JB >> >> Sent via Deja.com >> http://www.deja.com/ > >The default.vhs file is definitely used when you select all cars equal, >and other ones are used when this is not selected. I also believe that >this is the file that is loaded first for any car, and then its special >.veh file that overrides the settings that are declared again. It might >be worth experimenting if deleting some of the settings in the .veh file >makes the program then use the .vhs settings. > >-Gregor >

I wanted to up the tyre stiffness to about 60 as well (on all cars). Do you see a problem withthat Gregor? What does the AI do when the tyres are stiffer? Regards, David Mocnay Gregor Veble wrote in message <[email hidden]>... >David Mocnay wrote: >> >> Regards, >> David Mocnay >> pps. I'm wondering if this will have any effect on the AI? I have readthat

Quoted text (15 lines)

>> changing the inertia values too low will mess up the AI. Are my proposed >> values too low? What does the AI actually do that is wrong when you lower >> the inertia too much. >> > >It's not so much the AI driving part that is affected, but the physics >calculations. If the z-axis inerita is too low (about 400 or lower), you >will notice an instability when the cars will just start shaking >left-right around the nose-tail axis. > >The tire stiffness affects the AI driving part, though, as the cars >become much more precise, but with only altering the inertia I think not >much would happen. I've never tried it myself, though. > >-Gregor

Go to the directory \fice2000\save\<your_name>\. There is a file with PLR extension (it has the same name as your driver name). This is just a textfile so open it in notepad and find a line that sais "JoystickDeadZone = (0.20)" - change it to (0.0) to have zero dead-zone (ps. This value is reset to .20 every time you go into the controller setings screen in game. So either don't go there or edit this after each time you do that). Regards, David Mocnay Chris Cavin wrote in message <91agfu$krq$[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (36 lines)

>Thanks. Also, is a "deadzone" setting for the controller in there? I >set all my deadzones to 0% and there's still an annoying dead spot in >the center of the steering that makes it EXTREMELY hard to be smooth >through the last turn at Indy (Indy T4). I've used the DXTweak to make >all my DX zones 0% so it's in the demo, not my controller. > > >> You need to modify the VEH files in the 'car' folders under >> \season00\vehicles. Each VEH file represents the data for each car. >> You can change these values in any text editor. >> >> Regards, >> Daid Mocnay >> >> Chris Cavin wrote in message <9195d8$ki9$[email hidden]>... >> > >> >> You can specify different power/tourque curves, different weight, >> >> weight distribution, braking potential, aerodynamics, tyre >> >> stiffness, inertia, flywheel size for the engine, fuel consumption >> >> etc. >> > >> > >> >I just downloaded the demo. Important question here: >> > >> >*HOW* do you adjust these things? >> > >> >I can't find any settings resembling these in any game files. >> > >> >-Dirt- >> >2000 White/Red CBR929RR >> > >> >**Jesus saves sinners and redeems them for valuable cash prizes** > > >Sent via Deja.com >http://www.deja.com/

David Mocnay wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > I wanted to up the tyre stiffness to about 60 as well (on all cars). Do you > see a problem withthat Gregor? What does the AI do when the tyres are > stiffer? > Regards, > David Mocnay >

60 is probably the best compromise. The AI in F1 2000 tend to spin out at places if a combination of both hire tire stiffness and lower inertia are applied. However, as AI was much improved in the new release, this may not be so much of an issue. -Gregor

In article <[email hidden]>, Gregor Veble <[email hidden]> wrote: > David Mocnay wrote: > > > > I wanted to up the tyre stiffness to about 60 as well (on allcars). Do you > > see a problem withthat Gregor? What does the AI do when the tyresare

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > stiffer? > > Regards, > > David Mocnay > > > > 60 is probably the best compromise. The AI in F1 2000 tend to spin out > at places if a combination of both hire tire stiffness and lower

inertia > are applied. However, as AI was much improved in the new release, this > may not be so much of an issue. > > -Gregor FWIW, we may want to come up with a standardized "Advanced Options" patch/file soon, given the arrival of the new F1CS2000Rank board (http://f1cs2krank.dhs.org/). -- JB Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

David Mocnay wrote: > btw, if you have different opinion about this with other cars as well then > let me know .... what I got here is only my 1st draft. What would you say is > the nicest/easiest car to drive? Which one is the hardest? etc. I think the consensus is that the McLaren was the best balanced car - performed well on both high and low downforce circuits, very smooth over the bumps, easy on tires, etc. That was certainly true in 1999, although Ferrari did a great job in closing the gap this year. The Ferrari was probably slightly more squirrely, although that might have just been Schumacher's uncompromising setups (think Huttu). I would guess that the Williams was another well balanced, "easy" to drive car. The Jaguar, judging from Irvine's and Herbert's comments, was one of the poorest handling cars. BAR was also a bit rough (powerful engine but poor in the turns). The Prost received a lot of criticism from Alesi and Heidfeld, and not just for its terrible reliability record. It's tough to say about the Jordan. Trulli, in particular, had some good qualifying sessions, but the car was so unreliable that I'm not sure how strong it actually was. The Benetton was probably somewhere in the middle. Just my wild guesses, Dave Ewing -- ***************************************************** David A. Ewing Xilinx Boulder [email hidden] *****************************************************

Yeah, that's the way I saw things too .. except for McLaren. McLaren seemed really good - that is untill it stepped out - then it seemed to spin more often than come back in line. So I was thinking that McLaren is damn fast (which it already is in game), but getting the car 'over' the limit should be dangerous. No as bad as BAR, but somehere in the middle if this list. Just my thoughs again. -- Regards, David Mocnay "David Ewing" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > David Mocnay wrote: > > > btw, if you have different opinion about this with other cars as well then > > let me know .... what I got here is only my 1st draft. What would you say is > > the nicest/easiest car to drive? Which one is the hardest? etc. > > I think the consensus is that the McLaren was the best balanced car - performed > well on both high and low downforce circuits, very smooth over the bumps, easy > on tires, etc. That was certainly true in 1999, although Ferrari did a great > job in closing the gap this year. The Ferrari was probably slightly more > squirrely, although that might have just been Schumacher's uncompromising > setups (think Huttu). > > I would guess that the Williams was another well balanced, "easy" to drive car. > > The Jaguar, judging from Irvine's and Herbert's comments, was one of the > poorest handling cars. BAR was also a bit rough (powerful engine but poor in > the turns). The Prost received a lot of criticism from Alesi and Heidfeld, and > not just for its terrible reliability record. > > It's tough to say about the Jordan. Trulli, in particular, had some good > qualifying sessions, but the car was so unreliable that I'm not sure how strong > it actually was. The Benetton was probably somewhere in the middle. > > Just my wild guesses, > > Dave Ewing > > > > -- > ***************************************************** > David A. Ewing > Xilinx Boulder [email hidden] > ***************************************************** > > >

David, I have quoted your values below on the High Gear F1 2000 forum -- you might want to check out the discussions going on over there. I believe there is an "Advanced Options Editor" in the works for F1CS2K, and we're trying to hash out all the necessary tweaks to make it work, so I think your input (and that of others from this newsgroup) might be helpful to some degree. Here's the link: http://forums.simracingnews.com/ubb/Forum13/HTML/002289.html Looking forward to seeing your input over there! <G> -- JB F1CS2K Rank 100.668 http://f1cs2krank.dhs.org/ In article <EiAZ5.268$%[email hidden]>, "David Mocnay" <[email hidden]> wrote: <SNIP> > Here's some values that I'm thinking for different cars and myreasoning > (btw, all engine_inertias at .095, and stiffness ant 60): > > - Williams - (1400,1800, 800) - a really nice car to drive that isstill > pretty responsive. > > - Ferrari - (1200,1600,650) - snappy car that is awesome to drive abut > nasty at the limit. > - BAR - (1300,1700,600) - snappy car ...probably the hardest car todrive. > - McLaren - (1250,1650,700) - nice car to drive (not as nice asWilliams > though) > - Arrows - (2000,2500,1000) Nicest car to drive. > - Jordan - (1500,1950,800) - average to drive and average directness. > - Benetton - (1500,1950,650) - average to drive and averagedirectness.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Also, snappy. > - Jaguar - (1900,2300,800) - average to drive and average directness. > Though, not as direct as Jordan. > - Sauber - (1300,1700,700) - excellent response but snappy. > - Prost - (1800,2200,950) - Nice car to drive. > -Minardi - (1700,2100,900) - Nice car to drive. > > This would give each car a different feel which minic what I know

about the > current F1 cars. > > Regards, > David Mocnay > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/