N2003's Damage Model

Has anyone from Papyrus ever *definitively* explained how the damage model works in their games? 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

"David G Fisher" wrote: > Far too often, N2003's damage model doesn't seem to make any sense at all. The curious part is the GPL damage model always seems pretty good - though less sophisticated (e.g. you can't lose gears in GPL and engine damage in a crash appears limited to working/not working). 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

David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Has anyone from Papyrus ever *definitively* explained how the damage model > works in their games? > > 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 tappedin > the rear. Neat stuff like that. > > We lined up in the pits at the start of our RASCAR race yesterday, andwhen > 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 Yep, it's not very good. Seen that "hit square in the tail, have the engine go out" junk happen to others several times. > >

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:[email hidden]: > Far too often, N2003's damage model doesn't seem to make any sense at > all. > > David G Fisher 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

Would some of this damage modeling be related to your driver ratings? You know, in the opponent manager settings where you can adjust your driver rating. That's just an idea on my part. 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 ??

"Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in > news:[email hidden]: > > > Far too often, N2003's damage model doesn't seem to make any sense at > > all. > > > > David G Fisher > > 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

That makes sense though, the rear wing isn't made to fly forward, so the supports will go out and you'll lose both wings.

David G Fisher wrote: > Has anyone from Papyrus ever *definitively* explained > how the damage model works in their games? I don't think so, but I am convinced there is a random factor there. 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

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 15:19:32 -0500, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >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. You're not going to crack an engine block from getting hit in the rear, but you're going to do serious damage to the drivetrain. The engine is going to receive a pretty similar amount of force regardless of which end hits something first anyway, otherwise you'd see the motor coming back into the driver's compartment during an accident. 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

Jason Moyer <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 15:19:32 -0500, "David G Fisher" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >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 caris > >crumpled if the back end hits the wall. Engines being damaged when tappedin

Quoted text (12 lines)

> >the rear. Neat stuff like that. > > You're not going to crack an engine block from getting hit in the > rear, but you're going to do serious damage to the drivetrain. The > engine is going to receive a pretty similar amount of force regardless > of which end hits something first anyway, otherwise you'd see the > motor coming back into the driver's compartment during an accident. > > 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

But the key word here is tapped. I saw it happen to a guy who got tapped in the rear exiting his pit stall. Not a hard impact at all, yet engine gone. And nope, that was all that was hit. No way should something like that have any engine damage of any kind.

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 23:15:45 +0100, Joachim Trensz <[email hidden]> wrote: >I've never checked how statistically correct their frequency of >occurrence is in N2k3, though <g> 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

"JP" wrote...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> But the key word here is tapped. I saw it happen to a guy > who got tapped in the rear exiting his pit stall. Not a > hard impact at all, yet engine gone. And nope, that was > all that was hit. > > No way should something like that have any engine damage > of any kind.

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!

Jan Verschueren <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:rbUXb.2939$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> "JP" wrote... > > But the key word here is tapped. I saw it happen to a guy > > who got tapped in the rear exiting his pit stall. Not a > > hard impact at all, yet engine gone. And nope, that was > > all that was hit. > > > > No way should something like that have any engine damage > > of any kind. > > 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

Quoted text (7 lines)

> 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. > >

I was riding along ZZ and you may have been in the catbirds seat for a great win at daytona. My sympathy goes out to ya. Mitch "ZZ" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:TJRXb.42635$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (27 lines)

> Would some of this damage modeling be related to your driver ratings? You > know, in the opponent manager settings where you can adjust your driver > rating. > That's just an idea on my part. > > 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 ?? > > > >

"JP" wrote... > > > <snip> > Ugh, how is this a comparison ? Because the car in front will not be pushed along like you see in the movies. It will stall and spin out. > First, I didn't say no damage. I said engine damage. Now imagine the above happening to an engine and drivetrain that doesn't have the 100.000 mile overdesign safeguards built into it. <g> > Second, in the game example I mentioned, the hitting car > naturally does the exact opposite of accelerate. By hitting another car you transfer momentum to it, i.e. you accelerate it. > It's a lousy damage model, quit making excuses for it. N1 > had a better one. 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. =---

Jan Verschueren <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:1tUXb.2944$[email hidden]... > "JP" wrote... > > > > <snip> > > Ugh, how is this a comparison ? > > Because the car in front will not be pushed along like you see in the > movies. It will stall and spin out. Movies ? Talking about in the game <g> > > > First, I didn't say no damage. I said engine damage. > > Now imagine the above happening to an engine and drivetrain that doesn't > have the 100.000 mile overdesign safeguards built into it. <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. > > > Second, in the game example I mentioned, the hitting car > > naturally does the exact opposite of accelerate. > > By hitting another car you transfer momentum to it, i.e. you accelerateit. Nope > > > It's a lousy damage model, quit making excuses for it. N1 > > had a better one. > > It's not optimum, but, if it's truly random damage, how come it alwayshits > Dave, or Mitch or Larry and not one of the other, more mechanically > sympathetic drivers in RASCAR like me? > > Jan. Don't remember my saying anything about random damage. Did agree that the model itself stinks. > >

"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:1tUXb.2944$[email hidden]... > "JP" wrote... > It's not optimum, but, if it's truly random damage, how come it alwayshits > Dave, or Mitch or Larry and not one of the other, more mechanically > sympathetic drivers in RASCAR like me? > > Jan. What do you keep saying these lost gears happen to me? You said that after a race recently as well. I lost a gear at RA (still won the race), but other than that, I don't think I've lost a gear more than one other time in any of the other (maybe 100) RASCAR races. We just ran six road races + six practice road races and I only lost that one gear. I shifted cleanly and the damn thing just went. Never lost one in practice either. The only problems I had were being punted by lapped cars, screen freezes, or being disco'd. Otherwise I was fighting for a top three spot in each race, but still (apparently)being as easy on the car as you claim you are. If you want to count yesterday, that's fine, but since I hadn't moved an inch yet (or pressed the throttle), I really kind of doubt it was my fault. Losing a gear before the race even started yesterday, and ZZ 's ignition problem, are just the two latest unexplainable events that caused me to finally ask what is going on with this damage model. My concern about the crappy damage model doesn't just come from my experience, but from so many others I see have their race ruined by it. It's annoying to see drivers lost or damaged so badly they can't compete due to this issue. It happens practically every week. Having a crumpled hood and no rear body damage at all when only the rear end of the car comes in contact with the wall is more than odd. Having an engine go when I or someone else is tapped from behind is silly. There are other things that are annoying like the pit crew being unable to simply flatten a hood. David G Fisher

"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:wUUXb.181$[email hidden]... > > Jan Verschueren <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:1tUXb.2944$[email hidden]... > 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. Exactly. Real life is the only place you need to look to prove there's something wrong with how the damage model works in this situation. David G Fisher

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 00:50:05 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote: >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? "Because you're lucky" Jan, it's a lost cause. You could be spending this time racing TPTCC2 with us on Sierra. Jason

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 19:18:53 -0600, "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote: > 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. I've never gotten engine damage in N2003 from a pit road tap. Then again, as I only drive a few dozen races a day and I'm sure you, being a huge fan of the sim, have been rockin it nonstop since it came out, I will defer to your superior insight on the matter. Jason

"Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 00:50:05 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >It's not optimum, but, if it's truly random damage, how come it alwayshits

Quoted text (9 lines)

> >Dave, or Mitch or Larry and not one of the other, more mechanically > >sympathetic drivers in RASCAR like me? > > "Because you're lucky" > > Jan, it's a lost cause. You could be spending this time racing TPTCC2 > with us on Sierra. > > Jason

He's not "lucky", he's wrong. It's absolutely, positively, 100% wrong for him to say that I've lost gears more than most others, and to imply it's becaue I've been hard or wild with my shifting. 12 RASCAR Winter Series road course races. Lost one gear. I'm sure you read my reply to Jan's post, but you choose to act like you didn't. Same old r.a.s. David G Fisher.

Oh brother, youre stretching it now. Pre patch I think in about 5k laps Ive lost gears once maybe twice. Two races in a row I lost gears for no reason. Dave loses first before he moved was what this thread is about isnt it? Maybe YOU can find a way to blame that on Dave and me but I tend to lean towards poor programming. "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:1tUXb.2944$[email hidden]... > > It's not optimum, but, if it's truly random damage, how come it alwayshits

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Dave, or Mitch or Larry and not one of the other, more mechanically > sympathetic drivers in RASCAR like me? > > Jan. > =--- > >

"Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 19:18:53 -0600, "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > 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. > > I've never gotten engine damage in N2003 from a pit road tap. > > Then again, as I only drive a few dozen races a day and I'm sure you, > being a huge fan of the sim, have been rockin it nonstop since it came > out, I will defer to your superior insight on the matter. > > Jason

I've never heard someone even attempt to try and deny that this particular thing (being tapped from behind and losing an engine) happens in N2003. David G Fisher

Jason Moyer <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 19:18:53 -0600, "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > 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. > > I've never gotten engine damage in N2003 from a pit road tap. > > Then again, as I only drive a few dozen races a day and I'm sure you, > being a huge fan of the sim, have been rockin it nonstop since it came > out, I will defer to your superior insight on the matter. > > Jason

Why thank you. I didn't realize it was a personal matter for you, this issue, since it seems dissenting opinions bother you so much.

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 03:18:29 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Oh brother, youre stretching it now. Pre patch I think in about 5k laps Ive >lost gears once maybe twice. Two races in a row I lost gears for no reason. >Dave loses first before he moved was what this thread is about isnt it? >Maybe YOU can find a way to blame that on Dave and me but I tend to lean >towards poor programming. I wonder if Mark Martin and Jeff Burton are kicking the Rousch programmers right now. Jason

"Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 03:18:29 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Oh brother, youre stretching it now. Pre patch I think in about 5k lapsIve > >lost gears once maybe twice. Two races in a row I lost gears for noreason.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >Dave loses first before he moved was what this thread is about isnt it? > >Maybe YOU can find a way to blame that on Dave and me but I tend to lean > >towards poor programming. > > I wonder if Mark Martin and Jeff Burton are kicking the Rousch > programmers right now. > > Jason

At least they moved an inch before their engines blew. Did someone tap their rear bumper causing the engine to go boom? David G Fisher

David G Fisher wrote: ... > is silly. There are other things that are annoying like > the pit crew being unable to simply flatten a hood. I think the reason why the hood never seems to get fully de-crumpled is that Papy uses the hood as a damage indicator for the overall damage status of the car. Which may be the reason why it also gets crumpled sometimes when you actually only have damage at the rear. The hood is probably used as an instrument to show the player that his car has a certain degree of damage, and the various states of damage are shown by different states of damage of the hood. One thing comes to mind when you guys talk about the damage model - if you're talking about online damage, some inaccuracy may be added by being online when you collide with other cars. Even with good connections, there's always some inaccuracy when things that require utmost precision come into play, and a small tap online may cause more damage than expected simply because the game thought it was a harder tap because the data it got from the other car weren't entirely correct. Achim

"Jason Moyer" wrote... > > <snip> > "Because you're lucky" > > Jan, it's a lost cause. You could be spending this time > racing TPTCC2 with us on Sierra. Hehehe... don't get me started on that one, Jason. ;-) Jan. =---

"David G Fisher" wrote... > > <snip> > > What do you keep saying these lost gears happen to me? You > said that after a race recently as well. <snip> Two reasons: one is I have bad memory and obviously I remembered wrong. The second is you and Mitch are soft targets because you appear fairly uncritical of your own driving to me. Whatever happens, most of the time it's the game's or someone else's fault. Anyway, it doesn't matter if it's you or Mitch or Ginger or Uwe that loses a gear or drops a cylinder. The point is it's not utterly random or it would happen to me as well. I'm sure there is a certain random factor applied to how much damage an incident does to the car and I'm well aware the online environment can greatly impact the severity of same, but you have to do something wrong or have something wrong done to you to get damage, IMO. Jan. =---

Jason Moyer wrote: ... > 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. Yep, partial failures are simply missing. A shame, actually. It would be cool to have telemetry (or your crew chief) tell you that there's something with the ignition they can't figure out, but they'll keep watching, and then a few minutes later a message 'it's getting worse' and in the car you notice you get more backfiring with a slightly reduced hp, and then after a while it goes away and the crew chief says 'now it's gone, I have no idea what's going on there' <g> > I would say with 99% confidence that failures in N2003 > are part random and part abuse. Yep, that's how I see it as well. Mainly abuse, with a small randomness factor added. Achim

Joachim Trensz <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:c0q3d4$18akfu$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (24 lines)

> David G Fisher wrote: > > ... > > > is silly. There are other things that are annoying like > > the pit crew being unable to simply flatten a hood. > > I think the reason why the hood never seems to get fully de-crumpled is > that Papy uses the hood as a damage indicator for the overall damage > status of the car. Which may be the reason why it also gets crumpled > sometimes when you actually only have damage at the rear. The hood is > probably used as an instrument to show the player that his car has a > certain degree of damage, and the various states of damage are shown by > different states of damage of the hood. > > One thing comes to mind when you guys talk about the damage model - if > you're talking about online damage, some inaccuracy may be added by > being online when you collide with other cars. Even with good > connections, there's always some inaccuracy when things that require > utmost precision come into play, and a small tap online may cause more > damage than expected simply because the game thought it was a harder tap > because the data it got from the other car weren't entirely correct. > > Achim

Good point. But to suffer engine damage or front end damage from a rear hit ? Seems that would take a lot of warp, etc. to do, but I think you're onto something. The models are different off and online. >

> I would say with 99% confidence that failures in N2003 > are part random and part abuse. Yep, that's how I see it as well. Mainly abuse, with a small randomness factor added. Achim ----------------------------------------------------- Ok, how do you abuse an ignition? At Daytona? Your on the gas the whole time. -- Richard "ZZ" Busch Member: Screamers Racing League OAO CORS MARA TransAm RASCAR GPL Rank + 17.410 MoGPL Rank + 318.294 N2003 Rank -10.8830

bigest problem you guys overlook, is connection vs collision detection... just like the warps that you do see, there are warps that you dont see, because the game had to calculate the positions and issue damage... sometimes a warping car doing 3 mph can give another car a 200mph impact... dont belive me try this, sit in your buddies pits stall next time you go online together, watch as he "enters" the track, it is much like the "too tight" starting grid in GPL... I saw a car bounce off me, over the pit wall... LOL David G Fisher wrote:

Quoted text (21 lines)

> Has anyone from Papyrus ever *definitively* explained how the damage > model works in their games? > > 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

ZZ wrote: ... > Ok, how do you abuse an ignition? At Daytona? That's where the small randomness factor comes in, of course <g> Achim

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:56:14 -0500, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >At least they moved an inch before their engines blew. Mark drove how many laps before his engine exploded? 5? If, as you say, it's "bad programming" if an engine fails for a reason other than abuse, than clearly Mark needs to go yell at some programmers. The manner in which he and Burton exited the race yesterday was completely unrealistic. (As far as engines being DOA you might want to give Greg Biffle a call). And yeah, if you noticed during the accident midway through the race yesterday, there were cars that backed into the wall at speeds which would cause minimal damage in N2003 and they were unable to fire the engines back up! But that's because backing into a wall doesn't do anything that would effect the performance of the engine (like damaging the fuel system, the drivetrain, and even the block itself as it absorbs the energy being transferred through the chassis on impact). Things you learn if you actually watch the races, eh? Jason

ZZ wrote: ... > Ok, how do you abuse an ignition? At Daytona? That's where the small randomness factor comes in, of course <g> Achim --------------------------------- Ok, but why did it have to happen to me? ;-) I was on my way to only my 2nd league win ever, in any sim. My first came when I was in 2nd place and the leader had to stop and feed his son. -- Richard "ZZ" Busch Member: Screamers Racing League OAO CORS MARA TransAm RASCAR GPL Rank + 17.410 MoGPL Rank + 318.294 N2003 Rank -10.8830

Jason Moyer <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (24 lines)

> On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:56:14 -0500, "David G Fisher" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >At least they moved an inch before their engines blew. > > Mark drove how many laps before his engine exploded? 5? If, as you > say, it's "bad programming" if an engine fails for a reason other than > abuse, than clearly Mark needs to go yell at some programmers. The > manner in which he and Burton exited the race yesterday was completely > unrealistic. (As far as engines being DOA you might want to give Greg > Biffle a call). > > And yeah, if you noticed during the accident midway through the race > yesterday, there were cars that backed into the wall at speeds which > would cause minimal damage in N2003 and they were unable to fire the > engines back up! But that's because backing into a wall doesn't do > anything that would effect the performance of the engine (like > damaging the fuel system, the drivetrain, and even the block itself as > it absorbs the energy being transferred through the chassis on > impact). > > Things you learn if you actually watch the races, eh? > > Jason

Wrong again. When those cars won't fire in those situations it has nothing to do with damage. They're not made to idle/power cutoff like that, and they usually get flooded among other things. Carbs ya know. Its the same reason, during a red flag, you'll see them park with their nose pointed downhill; in case the engine won't fire.

JP <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:szbYb.333$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (30 lines)

> > Jason Moyer <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:56:14 -0500, "David G Fisher" > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >At least they moved an inch before their engines blew. > > > > Mark drove how many laps before his engine exploded? 5? If, as you > > say, it's "bad programming" if an engine fails for a reason other than > > abuse, than clearly Mark needs to go yell at some programmers. The > > manner in which he and Burton exited the race yesterday was completely > > unrealistic. (As far as engines being DOA you might want to give Greg > > Biffle a call). > > > > And yeah, if you noticed during the accident midway through the race > > yesterday, there were cars that backed into the wall at speeds which > > would cause minimal damage in N2003 and they were unable to fire the > > engines back up! But that's because backing into a wall doesn't do > > anything that would effect the performance of the engine (like > > damaging the fuel system, the drivetrain, and even the block itself as > > it absorbs the energy being transferred through the chassis on > > impact). > > > > Things you learn if you actually watch the races, eh? > > > > Jason > > Wrong again. When those cars won't fire in those situations it has > nothing to do with damage. They're not made to idle/power cutoff like

that, > and they usually get flooded among other things. Carbs ya know. > Its the same reason, during a red flag, you'll see them park with their > nose pointed downhill; in case the engine won't fire. oh, and p.s. next time a car refires in such a situation, check out the exhaust. You'll see flames, made by an excess of unburnt fuel. And the exhaust exits these cars on the side, so you know where to look <g> > >

"ZZ" wrote: > Ok, but why did it have to happen to me? ;-) > I was on my way to only my 2nd league win ever, in any sim. My first came > when I was in 2nd place and the leader had to stop and feed his son. Daughter!

ZZ wrote: ... > Ok, but why did it have to happen to me? ;-) Maybe the laws of probability struck back to counter-balance your first league win when that leader had to feed his son ;) Achim

"Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 02:56:14 -0500, "David G Fisher" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >At least they moved an inch before their engines blew. > > Mark drove how many laps before his engine exploded? 5? He drove 15 miles compared to my 0.00 inches. > If, as you > say, it's "bad programming" if an engine fails for a reason other than > abuse, than clearly Mark needs to go yell at some programmers. The > manner in which he and Burton exited the race yesterday was completely > unrealistic. (As far as engines being DOA you might want to give Greg > Biffle a call). My gear was gone (not engine) before I moved an inch, or even pressed the accelerator pedal.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> And yeah, if you noticed during the accident midway through the race > yesterday, there were cars that backed into the wall at speeds which > would cause minimal damage in N2003 and they were unable to fire the > engines back up! But that's because backing into a wall doesn't do > anything that would effect the performance of the engine (like > damaging the fuel system, the drivetrain, and even the block itself as > it absorbs the energy being transferred through the chassis on > impact).

JP explained this to you in another post. > Things you learn if you actually watch the races, eh? If Papyrus wants to throw in random damage, that's fine, but they should absolutely put in the option to disable it like in F1C and Thunder. You can set the damage level in those sims to none, normal, time scaled, or to represent what happened in a particular season. A real race car driver gets paid ridiculous amounts of money to race. If his car breaks down on Sunday for some unknown reason, he should still be a very happy man the rest of the week. When I race once a week, and my virtual car has a break down due to random damage modeling in N2003, I'm not happy. Give me that real money, and I'll put sponsor stickers all over my ass and run around wearing a big smile on my face no matter what happens. You won't hear a complaint from me about the damage model ever again. David G Fisher

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (33 lines)

> > "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 00:50:05 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >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? > > > > "Because you're lucky" > > > > Jan, it's a lost cause. You could be spending this time racing TPTCC2 > > with us on Sierra. > > > > Jason > > He's not "lucky", he's wrong. It's absolutely, positively, 100% wrong for > him to say that I've lost gears more than most others, and to imply it's > becaue I've been hard or wild with my shifting. > > 12 RASCAR Winter Series road course races. Lost one gear. > > I'm sure you read my reply to Jan's post, but you choose to act like you > didn't. > > Same old r.a.s. > > David G Fisher. > > >

I've lost gears before too. Lost one in practice at Mosport for no apparent reason. I think it's random and it doesn't have to happen because of something the driver did or did not do. Kinda like a bad pitstop when the crew chief says "wait something's wrong". bluestringer

"David G Fisher" wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> A real race car driver gets paid ridiculous amounts of money to race. If > his car breaks down on Sunday for some unknown reason, he should still > be a very happy man the rest of the week. When I race once a week, and > my virtual car has a break down due to random damage modeling in N2003, > I'm not happy. > Give me that real money, and I'll put sponsor stickers all over my ass > and run around wearing a big smile on my face no matter what happens. > You won't hear a complaint from me about the damage model ever again.

I don't recall a big pay cheque when my Kadett GT/E lunched its engine after 30 competitive miles. It is not all glamour, David - the majority of club racers spend a lot more than they earn! Agree you should be able to turn off the random damage in a sim though... Cheers Tony --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.577 / Virus Database: 366 - Release Date: 03/02/2004

"ZZ" wrote: > Ok, but why did it have to happen to me? ;-) > I was on my way to only my 2nd league win ever, in any sim. My first came > when I was in 2nd place and the leader had to stop and feed his son. Daughter! ------------------------------------ Ooops. Sorry Tony, it was quite a while ago. How is the little princess? -- Richard "ZZ" Busch Member: Screamers Racing League OAO CORS MARA TransAm RASCAR GPL Rank + 17.410 MoGPL Rank + 318.294 N2003 Rank -10.8830

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 18:29:23 -0500, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>A real race car driver gets paid ridiculous amounts of money to race. If his >car breaks down on Sunday for some unknown reason, he should still be a very >happy man the rest of the week. When I race once a week, and my virtual car >has a break down due to random damage modeling in N2003, I'm not happy. Give >me that real money, and I'll put sponsor stickers all over my ass and run >around wearing a big smile on my face no matter what happens. You won't hear >a complaint from me about the damage model ever again.

If you don't want a sim, why don't you just shut up and play Thunder? No offense, but I play sims because I want something that bears some resemblance to reality. Papy's damage model has faults, but those faults make it much less demanding than I personally would like it to be. I'd like to see fenders rubbing from wall or side to side contact, radiators cracking, explosions from fuel line ruptures, random engine failures (not saying they don't exist, I've just never had my engine let go unless I was abusing it). If the sim were as demanding as reality, you would very rarely be able to continue after most incidents in the game, and in the cases that you did you'd be staring at your monitor for an hour and a half while your crew pounded on the car. I will concede that Papy should have added an option to disable random failures (wasn't this an option in the pre-GPL days?). But if you want to be able to drive recklessly and not suffer the consequences just turn the damage off or set it to moderate (and I honestly can't say I've seen random failures occur with either setting). It disgusts me that people sit on this newsgroup and argue about realism, and then complain when realistic things occur in a sim. That makes no sense at all to me. There's no shame in simply wanting to have fun driving a car, and if that's the case you're in luck because a vast majority of racing titles are geared towards that mindset. Jason

In article <[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> writes: >If Papyrus wants to throw in random damage, that's fine, but they should >absolutely put in the option to disable it like in F1C and Thunder. You can >set the damage level in those sims to none, normal, time scaled, or to >represent what happened in a particular season. > The IICC league I'm in ran a 'no-damage' race as a test, and several cars STILL had funky mechanical failures. Something is pretty weird about the damage...

Quoted text (7 lines)

>A real race car driver gets paid ridiculous amounts of money to race. If his >car breaks down on Sunday for some unknown reason, he should still be a very >happy man the rest of the week. When I race once a week, and my virtual car >has a break down due to random damage modeling in N2003, I'm not happy. Give >me that real money, and I'll put sponsor stickers all over my ass and run >around wearing a big smile on my face no matter what happens. You won't hear >a complaint from me about the damage model ever again.

Ok, that makes sense<g> Eldred -- http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Screamers League IICC League GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80 Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71 Hist. +82.34 MoH:na N2k3 rank:in progress Slayer Spektera lvl 68 assassin Spectral_K lvl 35 Necromancer US East

In article <ty1Yb.3214$[email hidden]>, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> writes: >Anyway, it doesn't matter if it's you or Mitch or Ginger or Uwe that loses a >gear or drops a cylinder. The point is it's not utterly random or it would >happen to me as well. You just jinxed yourself, Jan...<g> Eldred -- http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Screamers League IICC League GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80 Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71 Hist. +82.34 MoH:na N2k3 rank:in progress Slayer Spektera lvl 68 assassin Spectral_K lvl 35 Necromancer US East

In article <htbYb.237222$[email hidden]>, "ZZ" <[email hidden]> writes: >Ok, but why did it have to happen to me? ;-) >I was on my way to only my 2nd league win ever, in any sim. My first came >when I was in 2nd place and the leader had to stop and feed his son. Hehe... I *wondered* what happened to you. I'm guessing you were the car that was smoking? Hell, I spun out of first place. Low on fuel, knew I needed to make a stop. The car sputtered coming towards pit in, and I made a snap decision to pit right then. The snap spin that followed was funny to Mitch, I'm sure...<g> Dave, what happened to you? You let me get my lap back(thanks), then next time I saw your car(caution flag) you were in 4th? Eldred -- http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Screamers League IICC League GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80 Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71 Hist. +82.34 MoH:na N2k3 rank:in progress Slayer Spektera lvl 68 assassin Spectral_K lvl 35 Necromancer US East

EZ killa :-) I don't understand the hostility. Can't we just once talk about something without it deteriorating into a "mine is bigger than yours" shouting match. We had damage set to off at the roadies and thats when I lost my gears. Dave's is unique which is why he was complaining, which is understandable. IMO (and others are starting to see the light) Papy's offerings are losing appeal. Why does this upset you so much? This isn't a Papy owned and operated newsgroup so you can.... Nevermind see what happens? As Dave said and Ill agree, I spend precious time getting ready to have some fun and when something ridiculously random happens its upsetting to the point of questioning a sims validity. Maybe Thunder is worse, I dont know yet but after trying the demo Im going to spend some time trying cause IMO it offers a better representation of the reality Im looking for in a Nascar sim at this moment in time. If you like to run Nascar cars on a roller derby rink as your reality then fine Im not getting upset at you am I? Mitch "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (31 lines)

> On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 18:29:23 -0500, "David G Fisher" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > If you don't want a sim, why don't you just shut up and play Thunder? > > No offense, but I play sims because I want something that bears some > resemblance to reality. Papy's damage model has faults, but those > faults make it much less demanding than I personally would like it to > be. I'd like to see fenders rubbing from wall or side to side > contact, radiators cracking, explosions from fuel line ruptures, > random engine failures (not saying they don't exist, I've just never > had my engine let go unless I was abusing it). If the sim were as > demanding as reality, you would very rarely be able to continue after > most incidents in the game, and in the cases that you did you'd be > staring at your monitor for an hour and a half while your crew pounded > on the car. > > I will concede that Papy should have added an option to disable random > failures (wasn't this an option in the pre-GPL days?). But if you > want to be able to drive recklessly and not suffer the consequences > just turn the damage off or set it to moderate (and I honestly can't > say I've seen random failures occur with either setting). > > It disgusts me that people sit on this newsgroup and argue about > realism, and then complain when realistic things occur in a sim. That > makes no sense at all to me. There's no shame in simply wanting to > have fun driving a car, and if that's the case you're in luck because > a vast majority of racing titles are geared towards that mindset. > > Jason

Heck man I was rooting for ya. Thought you may have it figured out coming to the end of the race. All I saw was you spin then you disappeared so I cycled back through the front guys. You and ZZ both had a great opportunity and Im always rooting the underdogs :-) Nice race E. Mitch "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> In article <htbYb.237222$[email hidden]>, "ZZ" > <[email hidden]> writes: > > >Ok, but why did it have to happen to me? ;-) > >I was on my way to only my 2nd league win ever, in any sim. My first came > >when I was in 2nd place and the leader had to stop and feed his son. > > Hehe... > I *wondered* what happened to you. I'm guessing you were the car that was > smoking? > Hell, I spun out of first place. Low on fuel, knew I needed to make a

stop. > The car sputtered coming towards pit in, and I made a snap decision to pit > right then. The snap spin that followed was funny to Mitch, I'msure...<g> > > Dave, what happened to you? You let me get my lap back(thanks), then nexttime

Quoted text (14 lines)

> I saw your car(caution flag) you were in 4th? > > Eldred > -- > http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > Screamers League > IICC League > GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80 > Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71 > Hist. +82.34 MoH:na > N2k3 rank:in progress > Slayer Spektera lvl 68 assassin > Spectral_K lvl 35 Necromancer > US East

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 01:48:21 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I don't understand the hostility. ARE YOU STUPID OR SOMETHING? GRRRR. (hi kidding) Jason

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Has anyone from Papyrus ever *definitively* explained how the damage model > works in their games? > > 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 tappedin > the rear. Neat stuff like that. > > We lined up in the pits at the start of our RASCAR race yesterday, andwhen > 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

Quoted text (8 lines)

> 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 > >

All the problems with the damage model were a top priority in Papyrus for NR2004, but thanks to Nascar signing the deal with the devil (EA) we will not have the pleasure of using the new sim. Shock

In article <9xeYb.26219$[email hidden]>, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> writes: >Heck man I was rooting for ya. Thought you may have it figured out coming >to the end of the race. All I saw was you spin then you disappeared so I >cycled back through the front guys. You and ZZ both had a great opportunity >and Im always rooting the underdogs :-) Nice race E. I can *usually* do well in SS races, assuming I can maintain the draft, and stay out of trouble. My lack of skill doesn't hurt me too much there. If I run any more races, I'm sure I'll take up my normal position at the end of the grid... I absolutely *hate* the Rock - grrr.... Eldred -- http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Screamers League IICC League GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80 Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71 Hist. +82.34 MoH:na N2k3 rank:in progress Slayer Spektera lvl 68 assassin Spectral_K lvl 35 Necromancer US East

Shock <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Has anyone from Papyrus ever *definitively* explained how the damagemodel > > works in their games? > > > > It seems so damn random, and has very little to do with how you treatthe > > car. Also, there's that ridiculous *feature* where the front of the caris > > crumpled if the back end hits the wall. Engines being damaged whentapped > 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), itwas > > 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 isdamaged. > > Makes sense. > > > > Far too often, N2003's damage model doesn't seem to make any sense atall.

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > All the problems with the damage model were a top priority in Papyrus for > NR2004, but thanks to Nascar signing the deal with the devil (EA) we will > not have the pleasure of using the new sim. > > Shock

Lol, yeah who'd a thunk they couldn't have got it right in their umptienth version, eh ? > >

"Tony Rickard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:QwcYb.637$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (19 lines)

> "David G Fisher" wrote: > > > A real race car driver gets paid ridiculous amounts of money to race. If > > his car breaks down on Sunday for some unknown reason, he should still > > be a very happy man the rest of the week. When I race once a week, and > > my virtual car has a break down due to random damage modeling in N2003, > > I'm not happy. > > Give me that real money, and I'll put sponsor stickers all over my ass > > and run around wearing a big smile on my face no matter what happens. > > You won't hear a complaint from me about the damage model ever again. > > I don't recall a big pay cheque when my Kadett GT/E lunched its engine > after 30 competitive miles. It is not all glamour, David - the majority of > club racers spend a lot more than they earn! > > Agree you should be able to turn off the random damage in a sim though... > > Cheers > Tony

I was referring to a real NASCAR race car driver, since it's a NASCAR sim. David G Fisher

"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:KdgYb.368$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > Shock <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > Has anyone from Papyrus ever *definitively* explained how the damage > model > > > works in their games? > > > > > > 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

Quoted text (11 lines)

> 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 isdamaged.

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > 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 > > > > > > > > > > All the problems with the damage model were a top priority in Papyrus

for > > NR2004, but thanks to Nascar signing the deal with the devil (EA) wewill

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > not have the pleasure of using the new sim. > > > > Shock > > Lol, yeah who'd a thunk they couldn't have got it right in their > umptienth version, eh ? > > > > > > > >

For a relatively small company they did a very respectable job. It is the closest thing we have to a perfect Nascar simulator right now and it will continue to be the best for a long time to come. Shock

>"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote > The IICC league I'm in ran a 'no-damage' race as a test, and several carsSTILL > had funky mechanical failures. Something is pretty weird about thedamage... Gee, random failures and mech damage even with no-damage checks. I've seen this since Nascar Racing 1. People have said this here on r.a.s for all these days. Papy always denied it happened. They said they couldn't reproduce such things in testing. Not that it's a bad thing, to have those random failures. It's just always gets you when you least want it to happen, like when leading the field <G> -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

So youre going to short change yourself a great sim because of a flawed idealogy? That's real smart... Where I live money talks and BS walks, so how about blaming Papy/Sierra/Vivendi/whoever else for not investing the hard earned money I paid for every single product they EVER released and pony up to Nascar as they should have. What the hell has EA to do with that? I'd imagine there are quite a few guys that will run NR2003 for years just like GPLrs still race regularly with much enjoyment. If we never had another Nascar sim I'd be right there with ya'll but I want something better than NR2003 and I dont give a flyin f*&k who makes it. Thunder04 is getting close and I hope 05 surpasses that. Mitch "Shock" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > All the problems with the damage model were a top priority in Papyrus for > NR2004, but thanks to Nascar signing the deal with the devil (EA) we will > not have the pleasure of using the new sim. > > Shock > >

At least if I make you mad I don't have to worry about getting wrecked out <vbseg>. "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 01:48:21 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >I don't understand the hostility. > > ARE YOU STUPID OR SOMETHING? GRRRR. > > (hi kidding) > > Jason

"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> In article <htbYb.237222$[email hidden]>, "ZZ" > <[email hidden]> writes: > > >Ok, but why did it have to happen to me? ;-) > >I was on my way to only my 2nd league win ever, in any sim. My first came > >when I was in 2nd place and the leader had to stop and feed his son. > > Hehe... > I *wondered* what happened to you. I'm guessing you were the car that was > smoking? > Hell, I spun out of first place. Low on fuel, knew I needed to make a

stop. > The car sputtered coming towards pit in, and I made a snap decision to pit > right then. The snap spin that followed was funny to Mitch, I'msure...<g> > > Dave, what happened to you? You let me get my lap back(thanks), then nexttime > I saw your car(caution flag) you were in 4th? > > Eldred I was a lap and a half short of fuel, so I had to pit. Ginger and I had some minor damage, so you being in the front of our three car group was the best way to go. Mitch and I were discussing it on TS. I actually screwed up though and didn't let Ginger have his lap back when the yellow came out. David G FIsher

Joachim Trensz wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> ZZ wrote: > ... > >> Ok, but why did it have to happen to me? ;-) > > > Maybe the laws of probability struck back to counter-balance your first > league win when that leader had to feed his son ;) > > Achim

Daughter. <g> Achim

David G Fisher wrote: ... > A real race car driver gets paid ridiculous amounts of money to race. If his > car breaks down on Sunday for some unknown reason, he should still be a very > happy man the rest of the week. When I race once a week, and my virtual car > has a break down due to random damage modeling in N2003, I'm not happy... You've just in the most revolutionary way redefined the meaning of 'race sim'. And what's more, you've even invented a whole new class of simulation - the 'happiness simulator' :) ;) Achim

Jason Moyer wrote: ... > It disgusts me that people sit on this newsgroup and argue about > realism, and then complain when realistic things occur in a sim. Leaving Dave's definition of a 'happiness sim' <g> aside (which I think was made in jest), I think people mainly get annoyed by breakdowns they don't understand, breakdowns that seem unlogical to them (whether they really are unlogical or not is another matter). It's not so much the breakdown which annoys them, but the fact that it seems like it's a flaw in the game rather than a simulation of reality. Achim

EldredP wrote: ... > The IICC league I'm in ran a 'no-damage' race as a test, and several cars STILL > had funky mechanical failures. Something is pretty weird about the damage... That's interesting. I know you can get engine damage even with 'Damage OFF'. But other damage I've never seen happening. Maybe there's a but in the 'Damage OFF' switch? :) Achim

"Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 18:29:23 -0500, "David G Fisher" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >A real race car driver gets paid ridiculous amounts of money to race. Ifhis > >car breaks down on Sunday for some unknown reason, he should still be avery > >happy man the rest of the week. When I race once a week, and my virtualcar > >has a break down due to random damage modeling in N2003, I'm not happy.Give > >me that real money, and I'll put sponsor stickers all over my ass and run > >around wearing a big smile on my face no matter what happens. You won'thear > >a complaint from me about the damage model ever again. > > If you don't want a sim, why don't you just shut up and play Thunder? Ok. > No offense, but I play sims because I want something that bears some > resemblance to reality. I don't. I wish there were super duper lasers on the hood of the car.

Quoted text (13 lines)

>Papy's damage model has faults, but those > faults make it much less demanding than I personally would like it to > be. I'd like to see fenders rubbing from wall or side to side > contact, radiators cracking, explosions from fuel line ruptures, > random engine failures (not saying they don't exist, I've just never > had my engine let go unless I was abusing it). If the sim were as > demanding as reality, you would very rarely be able to continue after > most incidents in the game, and in the cases that you did you'd be > staring at your monitor for an hour and a half while your crew pounded > on the car. > > I will concede that Papy should have added an option to disable random > failures (wasn't this an option in the pre-GPL days?).

Would of been nice. F1C and Thunder has it. > But if you > want to be able to drive recklessly and not suffer the consequences > just turn the damage off or set it to moderate (and I honestly can't > say I've seen random failures occur with either setting). So I must be a reckless driver because I don't like random, and sometimes unrealistic damage which ruins the races for other drivers? Didn't know I drove that way. Thanks for the info. I'm much more annoyed that it happens to others that I'm racing against. Who wants to win a race, or gain position because a competitor is knocked out of a race due to a flip of the coin? I sure as hell don't. Random damage has rarely happened to me actually. I've been lucky. I just finished 10 out of the 12 RASCAR winter series races, and our first Cup race. The two I didn't finish were due to disco's. Apparently my reckless style of driving helps me to finish races. > It disgusts me that people sit on this newsgroup and argue about > realism, and then complain when realistic things occur in a sim. That > makes no sense at all to me. There's no shame in simply wanting to > have fun driving a car, and if that's the case you're in luck because > a vast majority of racing titles are geared towards that mindset. The random damage modeling doesn't make N2003 even an inch closer to reality. The game is so far away from reality that that one little feature is nothing more than an annoyance since it can't be turned off. I, and everyone else who's honest with themselves, could sit here for hours and write about how unrealistic these sims are, and how unrealistic our use of them is. For instance, do you only race 100% races, and only at the exact day and time that NASCAR runs their races? Being in favor of random damage doesn't make you any more of a serious simmer than anyone else. David G Fisher

"Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4031d344$0$13250$[email hidden]... > David G Fisher wrote: > ... > > A real race car driver gets paid ridiculous amounts of money to race. Ifhis > > car breaks down on Sunday for some unknown reason, he should still be avery > > happy man the rest of the week. When I race once a week, and my virtualcar > > has a break down due to random damage modeling in N2003, I'm nothappy...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > You've just in the most revolutionary way redefined > the meaning of 'race sim'. And what's more, you've > even invented a whole new class of simulation - > the 'happiness simulator' :) ;) > > Achim

Would you like to provide setups for the Happy Racing simulator I'm developing? You'll need to make everyone happy though, not just Neil, Ginger, and I. :-) David G Fisher

David G Fisher wrote: ... > Would you like to provide setups for the Happy Racing simulator I'm > developing? You'll need to make everyone happy though, not just Neil, > Ginger, and I. :-) Aw man I'm afraid no can do :( I don't want to stain such a noble project with my unworthy hotlapper stuff <g> Achim

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:52:21 +0100, Joachim Trensz <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>David G Fisher wrote: >... >> Would you like to provide setups for the Happy Racing simulator I'm >> developing? You'll need to make everyone happy though, not just Neil, >> Ginger, and I. :-) > >Aw man I'm afraid no can do :( I don't want to stain such a noble >project with my unworthy hotlapper stuff <g>

You guys could make a sim of 60's VW hippie bus racing. =) Jason (sorry, too easy)

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 05:50:43 GMT, "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote: >At least if I make you mad I don't have to worry about getting wrecked out ><vbseg>. Whenever Eldred and I set up some Mosport TPTCC practice maybe you ought to show up and see what it's like getting mounted by a pro. =p Jason

Jason Moyer wrote: ... > You guys could make a sim of 60's VW hippie bus racing. =) I'm old enough to remember these days with kind reminiscence :) freedom, love and peace... it was a wonderful time to be a young man in... :) Achim

>Ginger and I had some minor damage, so you being in the front of our three >car group was the best way to go. Mitch and I were discussing it on TS. I >actually screwed up though and didn't let Ginger have his lap back when the >yellow came out. I was damaged, as well. First one came early. Someone spun near the top and stopped facing traffic. As I was approaching he decided to go down the track to turn around. I changed my line high to go where he would vacate...then he stopped again. I hit the wall trying to avoid him... :-( Second time I was trying to avoid someone who was about 40 mph off pace in the middle of the turn. Again, hit the wall high. It was a pretty interesting mid part of the race. I caught up with Brian, and we stayed in line running down stragglers. Our pack gained cars as we went - we eventually had six cars running in a train. I was pleased to see that we were actually gaining time on the leaders...<g> Eldred -- http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Screamers League IICC League GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80 Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71 Hist. +82.34 MoH:na N2k3 rank:in progress Slayer Spektera lvl 68 assassin Spectral_K lvl 35 Necromancer US East

A time when future presidents didnt have to inhale ;) "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:c0ti80$1barua$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Jason Moyer wrote: > ... > > You guys could make a sim of 60's VW hippie bus racing. =) > > I'm old enough to remember these days with kind reminiscence :) freedom, > love and peace... it was a wonderful time to be a young man in... :) > > Achim

Dave, I've come to the conclusion that having Random Damage disabled does NOT apply to online races. We've seen way too much wackiness to think that it actually is. -Larry "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Has anyone from Papyrus ever *definitively* explained how the damage model > works in their games? > > 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 tappedin > the rear. Neat stuff like that. > > We lined up in the pits at the start of our RASCAR race yesterday, andwhen > 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

Quoted text (8 lines)

> 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 > >

"Larry" wrote... > Gee, I'm not entirely sure how to take that :) Simple... Larry = carbreaker. <ducks> Jan. ;-)) =---

Gee, I'm not entirely sure how to take that :) -Larry

Quoted text (8 lines)

> "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:1tUXb.2944$[email hidden]... > > 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.

"David G Fisher" wrote: > I was referring to a real NASCAR race car driver, since it's a NASCAR sim. I thought you were referring to RASCAR since it is a real race against real people rather than a fantasy NASCAR race... I like the club racing analogy to RASCAR, ah well.

ZZ wrote: > > Ok, but why did it have to happen to me? ;-) > > I was on my way to only my 2nd league win ever, in any sim. My firstcame

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > when I was in 2nd place and the leader had to stop and feed his son. > > Daughter! > > ------------------------------------ > > Ooops. Sorry Tony, it was quite a while ago. How is the little princess?

She is fine - but not wishing to age us all she is now SEVEN. I think grids are a bit tighter now to be able to park up, get woken toddler a drink, upstairs to the wife (she didn't understand!) & toddler, return to racing and drive back through the field to a podium place! Mind you I am not sure I could manage 3am race starts any more...so perhaps I am getting old! Cheers Tony

I shouldn't have said it that way about EA because I used to play some of their games...NBA Live and Madden NFL. Now I am only interesting in simulators. And when it comes to simulators, it is a different story. EA's game ''Nascar Thunder'' is not a simulator it is a game. Papyrus NR2003 is a simulator. I find it hard to believe that you think Nascar Thunder 2004 is remotely close to NR2003 in simulating the effects that changes have on the racecar, because it simply isn't and any sim racer would tell you the same thing. If EA released a simulator that would allow me to make proper changes to the car I would play it and not care who made it, but I don't see EA Sports releasing anything more than an arcade style game targeted at children. And yes that is where the money is and I don't blame EA for making money and I do think Papy (etc) could have done more to promote their product. So what this boils down to is that the sim community will not have an updated version of Nascar Racing by Papyrus, however, Papyrus was smart enough to allow mod to be installed and used with their product. This effort will allow us to use updated cars, physics, and will also allow third party developers to make changes to the game over time. Nice move Papy! Shock "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:AGhYb.26269$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> So youre going to short change yourself a great sim because of a flawed > idealogy? That's real smart... Where I live money talks and BS walks, so > how about blaming Papy/Sierra/Vivendi/whoever else for not investing the > hard earned money I paid for every single product they EVER released and > pony up to Nascar as they should have. What the hell has EA to do with > that? > > I'd imagine there are quite a few guys that will run NR2003 for years just > like GPLrs still race regularly with much enjoyment. If we never had > another Nascar sim I'd be right there with ya'll but I want something

better > than NR2003 and I dont give a flyin f*&k who makes it. Thunder04 isgetting

Quoted text (8 lines)

> close and I hope 05 surpasses that. > > Mitch > > > "Shock" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > All the problems with the > damage model were a top priority in Papyrus for > > NR2004, but thanks to Nascar signing the deal with the devil (EA) we

will

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > not have the pleasure of using the new sim. > > > > Shock > > > > > >

"Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:u_sYb.3323$iB.2065@lakeread06...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Dave, > > I've come to the conclusion that having Random Damage disabled does NOT > apply to online races. We've seen way too much wackiness to think that it > actually is. > > -Larry

There isn't a way to disable random damage. That's the problem. You can turn the damage down to moderate or off, but that's not the same as having random damage off. David G Fisher

"David G Fisher" wrote: > Being in favor of random damage doesn't make you any more of a serious > simmer than anyone else. I agree. Serious online simming takes away the driving against the computer aspect. We all use the same computer generated animations true, but we are racing against real people in real time with the computer accurately plotting where we are in relation to each other so we can race pretty closely to racing on a track. Of course the experience is not the same and we would be foolish to think it is but at least we have an equal footing to "race" each other in a reasonably realistic way. Random damage just brings us back to playing against a computerised random number generator - computers have been pretty good at that for years (actually computers have been pretty crap at generating real random numbers but that is not the point!) Maybe if you simulated a career where you get to afford the best engine bulders, make decisions on whether to change engines based on practise telemetry etc. you could factor in mechanical damage unrelated to the race itself - but that all sounds way too involved for me. Sim racing can be serious without all that stuff. Cheers Tony

"Shock" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > If EA released a simulator that would allow me to make proper > changes to the car I would play it and not care who made it, but I don'tsee > EA Sports releasing anything more than an arcade style game targeted at > children. That's a ridiculous comment. F1C is every bit the simulator that N2003 is, and more IMO. David G Fisher

"Shock" wrote: > So what this boils down to is that the sim community will not have > an updated version of Nascar Racing by Papyrus, however, Papyrus was smart > enough to allow mod to be installed and used with their product. This > effort will allow us to use updated cars, physics, and will also allowthird > party developers to make changes to the game over time. Nice move Papy! The EA sims are much more accessible for modders. The Papy mod capability will not allow further devlopment of a Nascar sim as far as I know. Whether the underlying EA engine is good enough is another matter. Personally I don't think it currently is but many respected members on RAS rate it highly so I guess it is just personal taste. Cheers Tony

>"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > That's a ridiculous comment. F1C is every bit the simulator that N2003 is, > and more IMO. Sorry but I don't consider a sim any darn game where you have to tweak files and re-arrange stuff in the back-door to "open up" sim-like features. That ISI doesn't want to promote such options up-front in the in-game menu simply means they don't care about such features (ex: high-res physics, etc...). -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

"Tony Rickard" wrote...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > <snip> > The EA sims are much more accessible for modders. The Papy > mod capability will not allow further devlopment of a Nascar > sim as far as I know. > > Whether the underlying EA engine is good enough is another > matter. Personally I don't think it currently is but many > respected members on RAS rate it highly so I guess it is > just personal taste.

It's another way of approaching the matter, another way of simulating things as some aspects of the sim are generated in an artificial manner, rather than an attempt to "really" calculate what's going on; using a different means to an end, if you will. But, as single player experience, it can produce some some darn satisfying racing. The big let down is the controller setup and the fact you have to manually edit files to get it to respond right in the FF department. A lot of work, but worth it, IMO. Jan. =---

"Jan Verschueren" wrote: > The big let down is the controller setup and the fact you have to manually > edit files to get it to respond right in the FF department. A lot of work, > but worth it, IMO. I have never got it to feel right - with or without FF. I gave up on FF in other sims some while ago.

I really enjoy the FF in F1C/mods (and NR2003 to a lesser extent). It took a BUNCH of messing to finally get it right but its about as perfect FF Ive ever felt in any sim. As I'm driving my 90' 5.0 Stang I often compare how they feel and it gives a remarkably similar feel. Now I can just copy the controller section of the player.ini to any new mods and I get the same feel. What you guys seem to forget is that ini's have been around a lot longer than EA games :-) Mitch Any Momo force guys want to give my settings a try here is my controller section of my player.ini [ Controls ] Keyboard Steering="0.20189" Keyboard Throttle="0.49906" Keyboard Brake="0.49906" Keyboard Clutch="0.20189" Force Feedback="0" Mimic Steering="0" // Mimic AI or pitlane assistance with force feedback Gear Select Button Hold="0" // Enable this option if using a gear select device that holds down a joystick button while in a gear and releases all buttons in neutral (such as the Act-Labs USB Shifter) Alternate Rearlook Activation="1" // if left look and right look are both pressed, rearlook becomes activated VFX-3D Head Tracking="0" // Enable this option if you have a VFX-3D HMD and you want to enable head tracking (VFX driver v. 2.6 must be installed) HMD Pitch Exponent="1.00000" // Exponent to apply to pitch tracking. > 1.0 makes tracking near-center slower, > 0 & < 1.0 makes tracking near-center faster. HMD Yaw Exponent="1.00000" // Exponent to apply to yaw tracking. > 1.0 makes tracking near-center slower, > 0 & < 1.0 makes tracking near-center faster. HMD Roll Exponent="1.00000" // Exponent to apply to roll tracking. > 1.0 makes tracking near-center slower, > 0 & < 1.0 makes tracking near-center faster. Options Num Controls="44" // Number of configurable controls displayed in options Axis [00, 00] Dead Zone="0.00000" // Controller 1 X Axis [00, 00] Sensitivity="0.45283" Axis [00, 00] Center="0.50000" // 0.0=min, 0.5=center, 1.0=max (use to correct centering or split-axis issues) Axis [00, 01] Dead Zone="0.00000" // Controller 1 Y Axis [00, 01] Sensitivity="0.50000" Axis [00, 01] Center="1.00000" Axis [00, 02] Dead Zone="0.00000" // Controller 1 Z Axis [00, 02] Sensitivity="0.50000" Axis [00, 02] Center="0.50000" Axis [00, 03] Dead Zone="0.00000" // Controller 1 RX Axis [00, 03] Sensitivity="0.50000" Axis [00, 03] Center="0.50000" Axis [00, 04] Dead Zone="0.00000" // Controller 1 RY Axis [00, 04] Sensitivity="0.50000" Axis [00, 04] Center="0.50000" Axis [00, 05] Dead Zone="0.00000" // Controller 1 RZ Axis [00, 05] Sensitivity="0.50000" Axis [00, 05] Center="1.00000" Axis [00, 06] Dead Zone="0.00000" // Controller 1 S0 Axis [00, 06] Sensitivity="0.50000" Axis [00, 06] Center="0.50000" Axis [00, 07] Dead Zone="0.00000" // Controller 1 S1 Axis [00, 07] Sensitivity="0.50000" Axis [00, 07] Center="0.50000" Axis [01, 00] Dead Zone="0.00000" // Controller 2 X Axis [01, 00] Sensitivity="0.45283" Axis [01, 00] Center="0.50000" // 0.0=min, 0.5=center, 1.0=max (use to correct centering or split-axis issues) Axis [01, 01] Dead Zone="0.00000" // Controller 2 Y Axis [01, 01] Sensitivity="0.50000" Axis [01, 01] Center="0.50000" Axis [01, 02] Dead Zone="0.00000" // Controller 2 Z Axis [01, 02] Sensitivity="0.50000" Axis [01, 02] Center="1.00000" Axis [01, 03] Dead Zone="0.00000" // Controller 2 RX Axis [01, 03] Sensitivity="0.50000" Axis [01, 03] Center="1.00000" Axis [01, 04] Dead Zone="0.00000" // Controller 2 RY Axis [01, 04] Sensitivity="0.50000" Axis [01, 04] Center="0.50000" Axis [01, 05] Dead Zone="0.00000" // Controller 2 RZ Axis [01, 05] Sensitivity="0.50000" Axis [01, 05] Center="0.50000" Axis [01, 06] Dead Zone="0.00000" // Controller 2 S0 Axis [01, 06] Sensitivity="0.50000" Axis [01, 06] Center="0.50000" Axis [01, 07] Dead Zone="0.00000" // Controller 2 S1 Axis [01, 07] Sensitivity="0.50000" Axis [01, 07] Center="0.50000" Control - Accelerate="(1, 4)" Control - Brake="(1, 12)" Control - Steer Left="(1, 2)" Control - Steer Right="(1, 1)" Control - Shift Up="(1, 14)" Control - Shift Down="(1, 13)" Control - Neutral="(0, 89)" Control - Reverse Gear="(0, 89)" Control - First Gear="(0, 89)" Control - Second Gear="(0, 89)" Control - Third Gear="(0, 89)" Control - Fourth Gear="(0, 89)" Control - Fifth Gear="(0, 89)" Control - Sixth Gear="(0, 89)" Control - Seventh Gear="(0, 89)" Control - Clutch In="(0, 16)" Control - Display Mode="(1, 18)" Control - Pit Request="(0, 31)" Control - Pit Menu Up="(0, 200)" Control - Pit Menu Down="(0, 208)" Control - Pit Menu Inc="(0, 205)" Control - Pit Menu Dec="(0, 203)" Control - TCOverride="(0, 24)" Control - Launch Control="(0, 57)" Control - Speed Limiter="(1, 20)" Control - Bias Forward="(1, 17)" Control - Bias Rearward="(1, 19)" Control - Look Left="(1, 15)" Control - Look Right="(1, 16)" Control - Rear Look="(1, 35)" Control - Instant Replay="(0, 19)" Control - Pause="(0, 25)" Control - Restart Race="(0, 21)" Control - Zero HMD="(0, 89)" Control - Display Vehicle Labels="(0, 15)" Control - Ignition="(0, 89)" Control - Starter="(0, 89)" Control - Horn="(0, 157)" Control - Headlights="(0, 89)" Control - Handbrake="(0, 89)" Control - Look Up="(0, 89)" Control - Look Down="(0, 89)" Control - Look Roll Left="(0, 89)" Control - Look Roll Right="(0, 89)" FFB Device Type="1" // Type of FFB controller: 0=none 1=wheel, 2=stick/custom, 3=rumble pad. FFB Effects Level="4" // Number of FFB effects to use: 0=No Effects, 1=Low, 2=Medium, 3=High, 4=Full, 5=Custom. FFB Gain="1.00000" // Strength of Force Feedback effects. Range 0.0 to 1.0. FFB Throttle FX on steer axis="1" // 0 = Throttle effects on throttle axis, 1 = throttle effects on steering axis. FFB Brake FX on steer axis="1" // 0 = Brake effects on brake axis, 1 = brake effects on steering axis. FFB steer vibe freq mult="0.20000" // Controls frequency of steering vibration. Recommended: 0.5 to 1.0, 0.0 disables steering vibration. FFB steer vibe zero magnitude="0.03500" // Magnitude of steering vibration at 0mph (reference point). FFB steer vibe slope="0.00000" // Slope of line defining magnitude as a function of frequency (used with FFB steer vibe zero magnitude). FFB steer vibe wave type="0" // Type of wave to use for vibe: 0=Sine, 1=Square, 2=Triangle, 3=Sawtooth up, 4=Sawtooth down. FFB steer force average weight="0.60000" // How much weight is given to new steering force calculations each frame (0.01 - 1.0). Lower values will smooth out the steering force, but will also add latency. FFB steer force exponent="0.80000" // Steering force output "sensitivity". Range 0.0 to infinity. 0.0 to 1.0 = higher sensitivity, greater than 1.0 = lower sensitivity. FFB steer force input max="-11500.00000" // Recommended: 11500 (-11500 if controller pulls in the wrong direction). FFB steer force output max="1.80000" // Maximum force output of steering force, recommendation 0.8 to 2.0 FFB steer force grip weight="0.90000" // Range 0.0 to 1.0, recommended: 0.4 to 0.9. How much weight is given to tire grip when calculating steering force. FFB steer update thresh="0.01500" // Amount of change required to update steer force/vibe (0.0 - 1.0). Lower values = steering force updated more frequently = lower frame rate. FFB steer friction coefficient="0.17500" // Coefficient to use for steering friction. Range: -1.0 to 1.0 FFB steer friction saturation="1.00000" // Saturation value to use for steering friction. Range: 0 - 1.0 FFB steer damper coefficient="0.17500" // Coefficient to use for steering damper. Range: -1.0 to 1.0 FFB steer damper saturation="1.00000" // Saturation value to use for steering damper. Range: 0 - 1.0 FFB throttle vibe freq mult="0.17000" // Scales actual engine frequency to force FFB vibration frequency. Suggested range: 0.10 to 0.50 FFB throttle vibe zero magnitude="0.09000" // Magnitude of engine vibration at 0rpm (reference point). FFB throttle vibe slope="0.00000" // Slope of line defining magnitude as a function of frequency (used with FFB throttle vibe zero magnitude). FFB throttle vibe wave type="0" // Type of wave to use for vibe: 0=Sine, 1=Square, 2=Triangle, 3=Sawtooth up, 4=Sawtooth down. FFB throttle vibe update thresh="0.08000" // Amount of change required to update throttle vibe (0.0 - 1.0) FFB brake vibe freq mult="0.90000" // Scales actual brake rotational frequency to force feedback vibration frequency. FFB brake vibe zero magnitude="0.10000" // Magnitude of brake vibration at 0mph (reference point). FFB brake vibe slope="0.00000" // Slope of line defining magnitude as a function of frequency (used with FFB brake vibe zero magnitude). FFB brake vibe wave type="0" // Type of wave to use for vibe: 0=Sine, 1=Square, 2=Triangle, 3=Sawtooth up, 4=Sawtooth down. FFB brake vibe update thresh="0.05000" // Amount of change required to update brake vibe (0.0 to 1.0) FFB rumble strip magnitude="0.35000" // How strong the rumble strip rumble is. Range 0.0 to 1.0, 0.0 disables effect. FFB rumble strip freq mult="0.60000" // Rumble stip frequency multiplier 1.0 = one rumble per wheel rev. FFB rumble strip wave type="0" // Type of wave to use for vibe: 0=Sine, 1=Square, 2=Triangle, 3=Sawtooth up, 4=Sawtooth down. FFB rumble strip pull factor="-1.50000" // How strongly wheel pulls right/left when running over a rumble strip. Suggested range: -1.5 to 1.5. FFB rumble strip update thresh="0.07500" // Amount of change required to update rumble strip effect (0.0 - 1.0) FFB jolt magnitude="1.00000" // How strong jolts from other cars (or walls) are. Suggested Range: -2.0 to 2.0. FFB Joy[00] Axis[00] Spring Saturation Pos="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[00] Spring Coefficient Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[00] Spring Saturation Neg="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[00] Spring Coefficient Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[01] Spring Saturation Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[01] Spring Coefficient Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Coeffic ient to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[01] Spring Saturation Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[01] Spring Coefficient Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[02] Spring Saturation Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[02] Spring Coefficient Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[02] Spring Saturation Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[02] Spring Coefficient Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[03] Spring Saturation Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[03] Spring Coefficient Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[03] Spring Saturation Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[03] Spring Coefficient Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[04] Spring Saturation Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[04] Spring Coefficient Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[04] Spring Saturation Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[04] Spring Coefficient Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[05] Spring Saturation Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[05] Spring Coefficient Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[05] Spring Saturation Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[05] Spring Coefficient Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[06] Spring Saturation Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[06] Spring Coefficient Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[06] Spring Saturation Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[06] Spring Coefficient Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[07] Spring Saturation Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[07] Spring Coefficient Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[07] Spring Saturation Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[00] Axis[07] Spring Coefficient Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[00] Spring Saturation Pos="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[00] Spring Coefficient Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[00] Spring Saturation Neg="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[00] Spring Coefficient Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[01] Spring Saturation Pos="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[01] Spring Coefficient Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[01] Spring Saturation Neg="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[01] Spring Coefficient Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[02] Spring Saturation Pos="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[02] Spring Coefficient Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[02] Spring Saturation Neg="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[02] Spring Coefficient Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[03] Spring Saturation Pos="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[03] Spring Coefficient Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[03] Spring Saturation Neg="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[03] Spring Coefficient Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[04] Spring Saturation Pos="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[04] Spring Coefficient Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[04] Spring Saturation Neg="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[04] Spring Coefficient Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[05] Spring Saturation Pos="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[05] Spring Coefficient Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[05] Spring Saturation Neg="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[05] Spring Coefficient Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[06] Spring Saturation Pos="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[06] Spring Coefficient Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[06] Spring Saturation Neg="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[06] Spring Coefficient Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[07] Spring Saturation Pos="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[07] Spring Coefficient Pos="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[07] Spring Saturation Neg="1.00000" // DirectInput Saturation to use for spring FFB Joy[01] Axis[07] Spring Coefficient Neg="0.00000" // DirectInput Coefficient to use for spring "Tony Rickard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:GMxYb.1484$[email hidden]... > "Jan Verschueren" wrote: > > > The big let down is the controller setup and the fact you have tomanually > > edit files to get it to respond right in the FF department. A lot ofwork, > > but worth it, IMO. > > I have never got it to feel right - with or without FF. I gave up on FF in > other sims some while ago. > >

Shock <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:KdgYb.368$[email hidden]... > > > > Shock <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > Has anyone from Papyrus ever *definitively* explained how the damage > > model > > > > works in their games? > > > > > > > > It seems so damn random, and has very little to do with how you

treat

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > 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

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > 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

Quoted text (28 lines)

> > all. > > > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All the problems with the damage model were a top priority in Papyrus > for > > > NR2004, but thanks to Nascar signing the deal with the devil (EA) we > will > > > not have the pleasure of using the new sim. > > > > > > Shock > > > > Lol, yeah who'd a thunk they couldn't have got it right in their > > umptienth version, eh ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For a relatively small company they did a very respectable job. It is the > closest thing we have to a perfect Nascar simulator right now and it will > continue to be the best for a long time to come. > > Shock

They did an awesome job. But it won't be the best in the future. > >

Joachim Trensz <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4031d507$0$318$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> Jason Moyer wrote: > ... > > It disgusts me that people sit on this newsgroup and argue about > > realism, and then complain when realistic things occur in a sim. > > Leaving Dave's definition of a 'happiness sim' <g> aside (which I think > was made in jest), I think people mainly get annoyed by breakdowns they > don't understand, breakdowns that seem unlogical to them (whether they > really are unlogical or not is another matter). > > It's not so much the breakdown which annoys them, but the fact that it > seems like it's a flaw in the game rather than a simulation of reality. > > Achim

Exactly. My complaint is of a lack of realism, not about to much of it.

"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:2aBYb.58$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > Shock <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:KdgYb.368$[email hidden]... > > > > > > Shock <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > > > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > Has anyone from Papyrus ever *definitively* explained how the

damage

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > > model > > > > > works in their games? > > > > > > > > > > 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

Quoted text (33 lines)

> > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All the problems with the damage model were a top priority in

Papyrus

Quoted text (17 lines)

> > for > > > > NR2004, but thanks to Nascar signing the deal with the devil (EA) we > > will > > > > not have the pleasure of using the new sim. > > > > > > > > Shock > > > > > > Lol, yeah who'd a thunk they couldn't have got it right in their > > > umptienth version, eh ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For a relatively small company they did a very respectable job. It is

the > > closest thing we have to a perfect Nascar simulator right now and itwill

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > continue to be the best for a long time to come. > > > > Shock > > They did an awesome job. But it won't be the best in the future. > > > > > > > >

I hope a better one comes along, I guess I just don't have much faith in EA. I hope I am wrong. Shock

Not taking this miserable past winter season into account, usually my car gets broken _for_ me on the normal season tracks :) We've all been bit by the "rear bumper is connected to the #7 cylinder exhaust valve" feature though :) -Larry "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:hhtYb.5078$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> "Larry" wrote... > > Gee, I'm not entirely sure how to take that :) > > Simple... Larry = carbreaker. <ducks> > > Jan. ;-)) > =--- > >

Well, I'll just have to ring in on this conversation, though my heart tells me I might regret it :) I am not Anti-EA. I don't blame them for Nascar's stupidity in giving them the license after Papy did such a damned fine job for the last, what, 8 years? I have NO doubt it was all about Money and Papy actually had very little say in what transpired. For now, NR2003 is the most realistic _simulator_ there is going, and by a far, far margin has the best online MultiPlayer experience. It's not without it's faults, but right now it is simply the best overall experience. Nascar Thunder (including 2004) has not progressed enough for me to consider it a valid replacement for NR2003. I don't dislike it because it's EA, or because it's not Papy, I dislike it because it simply is not good enough to replace NR2003 yet. It really is that simple. For one, the online limitations simply must be overcome. I also do not care for the physics model. Much like F1C, it still feels to me like the car does not steer, or turn. It rotates on an imaginary 'pin' that feels like it's located about 2 feet in front of the driver. I have no idea why I have that feeling, but I do. It does not feel natural to me. I won't even get into the game's menu screens. It's just a bloody mess all around. And the controller code is far, FAR more complicated than it should be. It takes far too much work to get the best feel possible, and even when you do, it still feels to me like a slot car, but not a slot car (it's kind of hard for me to explain) :) If a day ever arrives where Nascar Thunder 200x is truly better than NR2003, then I'll be switching to it right along with everyone else. Not until then... -Larry "Shock" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I shouldn't have said it that way about EA because I used to play some of > their games...NBA Live and Madden NFL. Now I am only interesting in > simulators. And when it comes to simulators, it is a different story.EA's > game ''Nascar Thunder'' is not a simulator it is a game. Papyrus NR2003is > a simulator. I find it hard to believe that you think Nascar Thunder 2004 > is remotely close to NR2003 in simulating the effects that changes have on > the racecar, because it simply isn't and any sim racer would tell you the > same thing. If EA released a simulator that would allow me to make proper > changes to the car I would play it and not care who made it, but I don'tsee > EA Sports releasing anything more than an arcade style game targeted at > children. And yes that is where the money is and I don't blame EA for > making money and I do think Papy (etc) could have done more to promotetheir > product. So what this boils down to is that the sim community will nothave > an updated version of Nascar Racing by Papyrus, however, Papyrus was smart > enough to allow mod to be installed and used with their product. This > effort will allow us to use updated cars, physics, and will also allowthird

Quoted text (9 lines)

> party developers to make changes to the game over time. Nice move Papy! > > Shock > > > "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:AGhYb.26269$[email hidden]... > > So youre going to short change yourself a great sim because of a flawed > > idealogy? That's real smart... Where I live money talks and BS walks,

so > > how about blaming Papy/Sierra/Vivendi/whoever else for not investing the > > hard earned money I paid for every single product they EVER released and > > pony up to Nascar as they should have. What the hell has EA to do with > > that? > > > > I'd imagine there are quite a few guys that will run NR2003 for yearsjust

Quoted text (23 lines)

> > like GPLrs still race regularly with much enjoyment. If we never had > > another Nascar sim I'd be right there with ya'll but I want something > better > > than NR2003 and I dont give a flyin f*&k who makes it. Thunder04 is > getting > > close and I hope 05 surpasses that. > > > > Mitch > > > > > > "Shock" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > All the problems with the > > damage model were a top priority in Papyrus for > > > NR2004, but thanks to Nascar signing the deal with the devil (EA) we > will > > > not have the pleasure of using the new sim. > > > > > > Shock > > > > > > > > > > > >

Can someone expand on this please ? -Larry "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3LvYb.5888$[email hidden]... > Sorry but I don't consider a sim any darn game where you have to tweakfiles > and re-arrange stuff in the back-door to "open up" sim-like features.That > ISI doesn't want to promote such options up-front in the in-game menusimply > means they don't care about such features (ex: high-res physics, etc...).

I thought there was an INI setting for this somewhere? I'm not sure. It's been a while since I did any hosting. -Larry "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:u_sYb.3323$iB.2065@lakeread06... > > Dave, > > > > I've come to the conclusion that having Random Damage disabled does NOT > > apply to online races. We've seen way too much wackiness to think that

it > > actually is. > > > > -Larry > > There isn't a way to disable random damage. That's the problem. You canturn > the damage down to moderate or off, but that's not the same as havingrandom > damage off. > > David G Fisher > >

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:32:36 -0500, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Not taking this miserable past winter season into account, usually my car >gets broken _for_ me on the normal season tracks :) > >We've all been bit by the "rear bumper is connected to the #7 cylinder >exhaust valve" feature though :) Are you sure it's the engine taking damage and not the fuel system/driveline? Jason

It explicitly would say "Valve". -Larry "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:32:36 -0500, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Not taking this miserable past winter season into account, usually my car > >gets broken _for_ me on the normal season tracks :) > > > >We've all been bit by the "rear bumper is connected to the #7 cylinder > >exhaust valve" feature though :) > > Are you sure it's the engine taking damage and not the fuel > system/driveline? > > Jason

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:46:24 -0500, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote: >It explicitly would say "Valve". That is incredibly lame. Jason

In terms of a reason Nascar most probably went with EA, it is about money, big deal. EA sponsors races and cars. Sierra/Papy have never even bothered doing either. One has shown an interest to work with/support Nascar, one hasn't, reason doesn't much matter. Not a hard decision as to which to choose imo. Larry <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:l6PYb.4366$iB.3968@lakeread06... > Well, I'll just have to ring in on this conversation, though my hearttells > me I might regret it :) > > I am not Anti-EA. I don't blame them for Nascar's stupidity in givingthem

Quoted text (7 lines)

> the license after Papy did such a damned fine job for the last, what, 8 > years? I have NO doubt it was all about Money and Papy actually had very > little say in what transpired. > > For now, NR2003 is the most realistic _simulator_ there is going, and by a > far, far margin has the best online MultiPlayer experience. It's not > without it's faults, but right now it is simply the best overall

experience. > > Nascar Thunder (including 2004) has not progressed enough for me toconsider

Quoted text (9 lines)

> it a valid replacement for NR2003. > > I don't dislike it because it's EA, or because it's not Papy, I dislike it > because it simply is not good enough to replace NR2003 yet. It really is > that simple. > > For one, the online limitations simply must be overcome. > > I also do not care for the physics model. Much like F1C, it still feels

to > me like the car does not steer, or turn. It rotates on an imaginary 'pin' > that feels like it's located about 2 feet in front of the driver. I haveno > idea why I have that feeling, but I do. It does not feel natural to me. > > I won't even get into the game's menu screens. It's just a bloody messall > around. > > And the controller code is far, FAR more complicated than it should be.It > takes far too much work to get the best feel possible, and even when youdo, > it still feels to me like a slot car, but not a slot car (it's kind ofhard > for me to explain) :) > > If a day ever arrives where Nascar Thunder 200x is truly better thanNR2003,

Quoted text (10 lines)

> then I'll be switching to it right along with everyone else. > > Not until then... > > -Larry > > > "Shock" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > I shouldn't have said it that way about EA because I used to play some

of > > their games...NBA Live and Madden NFL. Now I am only interesting in > > simulators. And when it comes to simulators, it is a different story. > EA's > > game ''Nascar Thunder'' is not a simulator it is a game. Papyrus NR2003 > is > > a simulator. I find it hard to believe that you think Nascar Thunder2004 > > is remotely close to NR2003 in simulating the effects that changes haveon > > the racecar, because it simply isn't and any sim racer would tell youthe > > same thing. If EA released a simulator that would allow me to makeproper

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > changes to the car I would play it and not care who made it, but I don't > see > > EA Sports releasing anything more than an arcade style game targeted at > > children. And yes that is where the money is and I don't blame EA for > > making money and I do think Papy (etc) could have done more to promote > their > > product. So what this boils down to is that the sim community will not > have > > an updated version of Nascar Racing by Papyrus, however, Papyrus was

smart

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > enough to allow mod to be installed and used with their product. This > > effort will allow us to use updated cars, physics, and will also allow > third > > party developers to make changes to the game over time. Nice move Papy! > > > > Shock > > > > > > "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:AGhYb.26269$[email hidden]... > > > So youre going to short change yourself a great sim because of a

flawed > > > idealogy? That's real smart... Where I live money talks and BSwalks, > so > > > how about blaming Papy/Sierra/Vivendi/whoever else for not investingthe > > > hard earned money I paid for every single product they EVER releasedand > > > pony up to Nascar as they should have. What the hell has EA to dowith

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > > that? > > > > > > I'd imagine there are quite a few guys that will run NR2003 for years > just > > > like GPLrs still race regularly with much enjoyment. If we never had > > > another Nascar sim I'd be right there with ya'll but I want something > > better > > > than NR2003 and I dont give a flyin f*&k who makes it. Thunder04 is > > getting > > > close and I hope 05 surpasses that. > > > > > > Mitch > > > > > > > > > "Shock" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > All the problems with

the

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > > damage model were a top priority in Papyrus for > > > > NR2004, but thanks to Nascar signing the deal with the devil (EA) we > > will > > > > not have the pleasure of using the new sim. > > > > > > > > Shock > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Quoted text (12 lines)

>> Sorry but I don't consider a sim any darn game where you have to >> tweak > files >> and re-arrange stuff in the back-door to "open up" sim-like features. > That >> ISI doesn't want to promote such options up-front in the in-game menu > simply >> means they don't care about such features (ex: high-res physics, >> etc...). > > >

I disagree with that assesment. Yes it is a pain that stuff is 'hidden' from the average user. But consider this. EA pays ISI to produce a mass-market product. If they can IMPROVE on that with some under-the- table hacks then great. This isn't like the built-in cheats that every console game must have these days. Certain features like super high rate physics or the curb hack can slow down the sim. I'm sure companies like ISI and Papyrus have to meet framerate budgets. Either by pixel counts or code complexity, the sim HAS to run on Joe-Bob's HP box. The fact they have made these items available to us UBER-gamers should be looked on as a good thing. If you are too put off by having to tweek your system, I'm sure the Xbox or PS2 is a fine piece of hardware and should be fairly tweek-free. dave henrie

Yep. That's what we've been saying :) -Larry "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:46:24 -0500, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >It explicitly would say "Valve". > > That is incredibly lame. > > Jason

I have NO doubt Sierra is the entitity actually responsible for this travesty. -Larry "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:cdSYb.107$[email hidden]... > In terms of a reason Nascar most probably went with EA, it is aboutmoney, > big deal. EA sponsors races and cars. Sierra/Papy have never evenbothered

Quoted text (7 lines)

> doing either. One has shown an interest to work with/support Nascar, one > hasn't, reason doesn't much matter. > > Not a hard decision as to which to choose imo. > > > Larry <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:l6PYb.4366$iB.3968@lakeread06...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Well, I'll just have to ring in on this conversation, though my heart > tells > > me I might regret it :) > > > > I am not Anti-EA. I don't blame them for Nascar's stupidity in giving > them > > the license after Papy did such a damned fine job for the last, what, 8 > > years? I have NO doubt it was all about Money and Papy actually had

very > > little say in what transpired. > > > > For now, NR2003 is the most realistic _simulator_ there is going, and bya

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > far, far margin has the best online MultiPlayer experience. It's not > > without it's faults, but right now it is simply the best overall > experience. > > > > Nascar Thunder (including 2004) has not progressed enough for me to > consider > > it a valid replacement for NR2003. > > > > I don't dislike it because it's EA, or because it's not Papy, I dislike

it > > because it simply is not good enough to replace NR2003 yet. It reallyis

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > that simple. > > > > For one, the online limitations simply must be overcome. > > > > I also do not care for the physics model. Much like F1C, it still feels > to > > me like the car does not steer, or turn. It rotates on an imaginary

'pin' > > that feels like it's located about 2 feet in front of the driver. Ihave

Quoted text (32 lines)

> no > > idea why I have that feeling, but I do. It does not feel natural to me. > > > > I won't even get into the game's menu screens. It's just a bloody mess > all > > around. > > > > And the controller code is far, FAR more complicated than it should be. > It > > takes far too much work to get the best feel possible, and even when you > do, > > it still feels to me like a slot car, but not a slot car (it's kind of > hard > > for me to explain) :) > > > > If a day ever arrives where Nascar Thunder 200x is truly better than > NR2003, > > then I'll be switching to it right along with everyone else. > > > > Not until then... > > > > -Larry > > > > > > "Shock" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > I shouldn't have said it that way about EA because I used to play some > of > > > their games...NBA Live and Madden NFL. Now I am only interesting in > > > simulators. And when it comes to simulators, it is a different story. > > EA's > > > game ''Nascar Thunder'' is not a simulator it is a game. Papyrus

NR2003 > > is > > > a simulator. I find it hard to believe that you think Nascar Thunder > 2004 > > > is remotely close to NR2003 in simulating the effects that changeshave > on > > > the racecar, because it simply isn't and any sim racer would tell you > the > > > same thing. If EA released a simulator that would allow me to make > proper > > > changes to the car I would play it and not care who made it, but Idon't > > see > > > EA Sports releasing anything more than an arcade style game targetedat > > > children. And yes that is where the money is and I don't blame EA for > > > making money and I do think Papy (etc) could have done more to promote > > their > > > product. So what this boils down to is that the sim community willnot

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > have > > > an updated version of Nascar Racing by Papyrus, however, Papyrus was > smart > > > enough to allow mod to be installed and used with their product. This > > > effort will allow us to use updated cars, physics, and will also allow > > third > > > party developers to make changes to the game over time. Nice move

Papy!

Quoted text (20 lines)

> > > > > > Shock > > > > > > > > > "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:AGhYb.26269$[email hidden]... > > > > So youre going to short change yourself a great sim because of a > flawed > > > > idealogy? That's real smart... Where I live money talks and BS > walks, > > so > > > > how about blaming Papy/Sierra/Vivendi/whoever else for not investing > the > > > > hard earned money I paid for every single product they EVER released > and > > > > pony up to Nascar as they should have. What the hell has EA to do > with > > > > that? > > > > > > > > I'd imagine there are quite a few guys that will run NR2003 for

years > > just > > > > like GPLrs still race regularly with much enjoyment. If we neverhad > > > > another Nascar sim I'd be right there with ya'll but I wantsomething

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > > better > > > > than NR2003 and I dont give a flyin f*&k who makes it. Thunder04 is > > > getting > > > > close and I hope 05 surpasses that. > > > > > > > > Mitch > > > > > > > > > > > > "Shock" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > All the problems with > the > > > > damage model were a top priority in Papyrus for > > > > > NR2004, but thanks to Nascar signing the deal with the devil (EA)

we

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > > will > > > > > not have the pleasure of using the new sim. > > > > > > > > > > Shock > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

I'm suprised someone hasn't written a 'tweak' tool that does this in an interface instead of manually editing the files. The program could have a guide, help system, bounds checking (interestingly an IN-thing these days LOL!), etc... -Larry "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > >> Sorry but I don't consider a sim any darn game where you have to > >> tweak > > files > >> and re-arrange stuff in the back-door to "open up" sim-like features. > > That > >> ISI doesn't want to promote such options up-front in the in-game menu > > simply > >> means they don't care about such features (ex: high-res physics, > >> etc...). > > > > > > > > I disagree with that assesment. Yes it is a pain that stuff is > 'hidden' from the average user. But consider this. EA pays ISI to

produce > a mass-market product. If they can IMPROVE on that with some under-the- > table hacks then great. This isn't like the built-in cheats that every > console game must have these days. > Certain features like super high rate physics or the curb hack can slow > down the sim. I'm sure companies like ISI and Papyrus have to meet > framerate budgets. Either by pixel counts or code complexity, the simHAS > to run on Joe-Bob's HP box. The fact they have made these items available > to us UBER-gamers should be looked on as a good thing. > If you are too put off by having to tweek your system, I'm sure the Xbox > or PS2 is a fine piece of hardware and should be fairly tweek-free. > > dave henrie

On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 13:23:10 -0500, "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Yep. That's what we've been saying :) Heh, let me clarify. I think it's incredibly lame that the retirement reason is given as "valve". I think it's fine that impacts to the rear of the car cause a loss of power. =p Jason

"Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:h37Zb.6067$iB.1094@lakeread06:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > I'm suprised someone hasn't written a 'tweak' tool that does this in > an interface instead of manually editing the files. The program could > have a guide, help system, bounds checking (interestingly an IN-thing > these days LOL!), etc... > > -Larry

Rich Beckett already has. I forgot where I dloaded this, but look for a utility called F1C File Editor. Puts an GUI on just about every available option. dh

Cool. I'll look for it! -Larry "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:h37Zb.6067$iB.1094@lakeread06: > > > > > I'm suprised someone hasn't written a 'tweak' tool that does this in > > an interface instead of manually editing the files. The program could > > have a guide, help system, bounds checking (interestingly an IN-thing > > these days LOL!), etc... > > > > -Larry > > Rich Beckett already has. I forgot where I dloaded this, but look for

a > utility called F1C File Editor. Puts an GUI on just about every available > option. > > dh