GPL Silverstone...what a cool track.

No undrivable slippery sections...nice sweeping curves with short, but quick straights. An all around fun track to drive...and the AI is respectable too. I can almost feel the wind. I'm thinking of placing a fan in front of me while I drive. Force Feed back and the feel of circulating air .. and GPL. Does it get any better? ;-)

Much better. The Papyrus creative crew thought Silverstone was so boring during development that they tried, unsuccessfully, to get the rights to Brands Hatch (once the alternate home to the British GP) as a substitute, as they did with Rouen subbing for Bugatti. Brands is a fabulous track that no third-party developer has ever done justice. "Rich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:nurLb.98712$6b2.77880@edtnps84... > No undrivable slippery sections...nice sweeping curves with short, butquick > straights. An all around fun track to drive...and the AI is respectabletoo. > I can almost feel the wind. I'm thinking of placing a fan in front of me > while I drive. Force Feed back and the feel of circulating air .. and GPL. > Does it get any better? ;-) > >

Steve Smith wrote: > Brands is a fabulous track that no > third-party developer has ever done justice. But a new one is out very soon.

"Rich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<nurLb.98712$6b2.77880@edtnps84>... > No undrivable slippery sections...nice sweeping curves with short, but quick > straights. An all around fun track to drive...and the AI is respectable too. > I can almost feel the wind. I'm thinking of placing a fan in front of me > while I drive. Force Feed back and the feel of circulating air .. and GPL. > Does it get any better? ;-) I find that there are very few markers to judge braking there. On the plus side there are some areas where you can accidentally go off the track and not hit a tree or anything hard for minutes.

I have to disagree... after nearly 4 yrs on gpl silverstone is one of my favourites. Not great for fun hotlapping or just enjoying going fast ( i leave rouen for that) but silverstone always produces lots of overtaking and great races. And the 2nd gear right turns are just perfect for braking a bit to late and using that extra bit of speed to slide round the first part of the turn. And the last turn is just great when u take a sh�tload of speed into it :))) dan "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:VwwLb.129591$[email hidden]... > Much better. The Papyrus creative crew thought Silverstone was so boring > during development that they tried, unsuccessfully, to get the rights to > Brands Hatch (once the alternate home to the British GP) as a substitute,as > they did with Rouen subbing for Bugatti. Brands is a fabulous track thatno

Quoted text (10 lines)

> third-party developer has ever done justice. > > "Rich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:nurLb.98712$6b2.77880@edtnps84... > > No undrivable slippery sections...nice sweeping curves with short, but > quick > > straights. An all around fun track to drive...and the AI is respectable > too. > > I can almost feel the wind. I'm thinking of placing a fan in front of me > > while I drive. Force Feed back and the feel of circulating air .. and

GPL. > > Does it get any better? ;-) > > > > > >

I agree. I just can't hit my marks at Silverstone. Not enough points of reference, I guess.... 8-( simpson wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> "Rich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<nurLb.98712$6b2.77880@edtnps84>... > > No undrivable slippery sections...nice sweeping curves with short, but quick > > straights. An all around fun track to drive...and the AI is respectable too. > > I can almost feel the wind. I'm thinking of placing a fan in front of me > > while I drive. Force Feed back and the feel of circulating air .. and GPL. > > Does it get any better? ;-) > > I find that there are very few markers to judge braking there. On the > plus side there are some areas where you can accidentally go off the > track and not hit a tree or anything hard for minutes.

I agree. I just can't hit my marks at Silverstone. Not enough points of reference, I guess.... 8-(

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > No undrivable slippery sections...nice sweeping curves with short, but quick > > straights. An all around fun track to drive...and the AI is respectable too. > > I can almost feel the wind. I'm thinking of placing a fan in front of me > > while I drive. Force Feed back and the feel of circulating air .. and GPL. > > Does it get any better? ;-) > I find that there are very few markers to judge braking there. On the > plus side there are some areas where you can accidentally go off the > track and not hit a tree or anything hard for minutes.

"Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote here on 09 Jan 2004: > Much better. The Papyrus creative crew thought Silverstone was so > boring during development that they tried, unsuccessfully, to get > the rights to Brands Hatch (once the alternate home to the British > GP) as a substitute, as they did with Rouen subbing for Bugatti. > Brands is a fabulous track that no third-party developer has ever > done justice. I won't disagree with Brands being a great track, but (in GPL terms) I think you're terribly harsh on Silverstone. Of the original 11 circuits, probably only Spa has given me more really memorable races. I suppose it just points up the different ways in which we enjoy this amazing game. :-) -- Above address *is* valid - but snip spamtrap to get me to *read*! Support the world's oldest motorsport venue! http://www.shelsley-walsh.co.uk/future.html

Ive a nice easy setup if u want it http://www.properrecords.co.uk/dan/silverq.lo1 'save as' Its got 50%bb (which you might wanna change) but a nice easy 70/45 3 diff and susp setup. I got 1.24.9 with it dan "BRH @comcast.net>" <"bhoenig<no-spam> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I agree. I just can't hit my marks at Silverstone. Not enough points ofreference, I > guess.... 8-( > > simpson wrote: > > > "Rich" <[email hidden]> wrote in messagenews:<nurLb.98712$6b2.77880@edtnps84>... > > > No undrivable slippery sections...nice sweeping curves with short, butquick > > > straights. An all around fun track to drive...and the AI isrespectable too. > > > I can almost feel the wind. I'm thinking of placing a fan in front ofme > > > while I drive. Force Feed back and the feel of circulating air .. andGPL. > > > Does it get any better? ;-) > > > > I find that there are very few markers to judge braking there. On the > > plus side there are some areas where you can accidentally go off the > > track and not hit a tree or anything hard for minutes. >

just start braking a couple car lengths or so after the dark pavement starts (rubber). You wont make it if you lock em up. :D "BRH @comcast.net>" <"bhoenig<no-spam> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I agree. I just can't hit my marks at Silverstone. Not enough points ofreference, I > guess.... 8-( > > simpson wrote: > > > "Rich" <[email hidden]> wrote in messagenews:<nurLb.98712$6b2.77880@edtnps84>... > > > No undrivable slippery sections...nice sweeping curves with short, butquick > > > straights. An all around fun track to drive...and the AI isrespectable too. > > > I can almost feel the wind. I'm thinking of placing a fan in front ofme > > > while I drive. Force Feed back and the feel of circulating air .. andGPL. > > > Does it get any better? ;-) > > > > I find that there are very few markers to judge braking there. On the > > plus side there are some areas where you can accidentally go off the > > track and not hit a tree or anything hard for minutes. >

Yer disagreeing w. Papy, not me. I love Silverstone. I always assumed it was because I'm not an Alien, so it's a lot easier for me to drive than, say, Brands, which is a beatch. (Likewise, I've never gotten Rouen right, whereas Bugatti is a cake walk.) However good or bad Silver was, I don't think there can be any argument that the modern ver. is an unmitigated disaster, particularly that bewildering and pointless go-kart section toward the end of the lap. (Likewise, the modern A1 Ring is a pale imitation of the Oesterreichring that preceded it.) (Monza, OTOH, has held up pretty well, all in all, doncha think?) "Dan_Leach" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:btnhmc$9ghlr$[email hidden]... > I have to disagree... after nearly 4 yrs on gpl silverstone is one of my > favourites. Not great for fun hotlapping or just enjoying going fast ( i > leave rouen for that) but silverstone always produces lots of overtakingand > great races. And the 2nd gear right turns are just perfect for braking abit

Quoted text (7 lines)

> to late and using that extra bit of speed to slide round the first part of > the turn. And the last turn is just great when u take a sh�tload of speed > into it :))) > dan > "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:VwwLb.129591$[email hidden]... > > Much better. The Papyrus creative crew thought Silverstone was so

boring > > during development that they tried, unsuccessfully, to get the rights to > > Brands Hatch (once the alternate home to the British GP) as asubstitute, > as > > they did with Rouen subbing for Bugatti. Brands is a fabulous trackthat

Quoted text (8 lines)

> no > > third-party developer has ever done justice. > > > > "Rich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:nurLb.98712$6b2.77880@edtnps84... > > > No undrivable slippery sections...nice sweeping curves with short, but > > quick > > > straights. An all around fun track to drive...and the AI is

respectable > > too. > > > I can almost feel the wind. I'm thinking of placing a fan in front ofme

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > > while I drive. Force Feed back and the feel of circulating air .. and > GPL. > > > Does it get any better? ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > >

Absolutely. Silverstone is right up there with Monza as an online delight! "David Buttery" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (21 lines)

> "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote here on 09 > Jan 2004: > > > Much better. The Papyrus creative crew thought Silverstone was so > > boring during development that they tried, unsuccessfully, to get > > the rights to Brands Hatch (once the alternate home to the British > > GP) as a substitute, as they did with Rouen subbing for Bugatti. > > Brands is a fabulous track that no third-party developer has ever > > done justice. > > I won't disagree with Brands being a great track, but (in GPL terms) > I think you're terribly harsh on Silverstone. Of the original 11 > circuits, probably only Spa has given me more really memorable races. > I suppose it just points up the different ways in which we enjoy this > amazing game. :-) > > -- > Above address *is* valid - but snip spamtrap to get me to *read*! > > Support the world's oldest motorsport venue! > http://www.shelsley-walsh.co.uk/future.html

Rich wrote: > No undrivable slippery sections...nice sweeping curves with short, but quick > straights. An all around fun track to drive...and the AI is respectable too. You've got to be KIDDING me?! I've never found such a bunch of brainless <<peep>>holes as the AI at Silverstone. As soon as you start (and they ALWAYS and ALL start like Gods, unfairly), they all want to dive into Copse like utter nutters, being all at the same place, braking at the latest possible moment, and not taking notice at all that you've just passed them, bumping into you and punting you off at every opportunity. And apart from Chapel turning onto Hangar Straight, were they WILL let you by if you have a good pass, they usually drive like blind drunks. If I could give the Silverstone AI's designer at Papy an enormous and painful kick in the rear, I'd do it with utter joy. I'm not kidding. Apart from that, GPL Silverstone is ok, although it's all too easy to go off at the lefthanders. And the kerbs in these are utterly dangerous - one slight touch and you fly into the scenery at 120 mph; wonder if they were like that in real life. > I can almost feel the wind. I'm thinking of placing a fan in front of me > while I drive. Force Feed back and the feel of circulating air .. and GPL. > Does it get any better? ;-) Yes - at Zandvoort ;) Regards, Rudy (GPLRank -21) > >

"Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bto1cn$b8g$[email hidden]... > Rich wrote: > > No undrivable slippery sections...nice sweeping curves with short, butquick > > straights. An all around fun track to drive...and the AI is respectabletoo.

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > You've got to be KIDDING me?! I've never found such a bunch of > brainless <<peep>>holes as the AI at Silverstone. > > As soon as you start (and they ALWAYS and ALL start like Gods, > unfairly), they all want to dive into Copse like utter nutters, being > all at the same place, braking at the latest possible moment, and not > taking notice at all that you've just passed them, bumping into you and > punting you off at every opportunity. And apart from Chapel turning > onto Hangar Straight, were they WILL let you by if you have a good pass, > they usually drive like blind drunks.

I think the term "aggressive" comes to mind here. AI is certainly not as courteous as online. I'm not looking for opponents to pull over for me and worship the ground I drive on. I say respectable because that is the type of challenge I prefer. The harder it is the better you get as a driver. It's not blind drunk ...its challenging. ..the way it should be. I find the late brakes AI displays is telling you to stay the hell out of the way slow poke! And if you can drive this track late braking yourself, then applying throttle in the corners to *gain* traction, you'd get decent speed and be far enough ahead of the other drivers for the next corner. > If I could give the Silverstone AI's designer at Papy an enormous and > painful kick in the rear, I'd do it with utter joy. I'm not kidding. *sigh* > > Apart from that, GPL Silverstone is ok, although it's all too easy to go > off at the lefthanders. And the kerbs in these are utterly dangerous - > one slight touch and you fly into the scenery at 120 mph; wonder if they > were like that in real life. Funny, I dont have this problem...and I use no aids. > > > I can almost feel the wind. I'm thinking of placing a fan in front of me > > while I drive. Force Feed back and the feel of circulating air .. andGPL.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Does it get any better? ;-) > > Yes - at Zandvoort ;) > > Regards, Rudy > (GPLRank -21) > > > >

I think everyone has a feel for a certain track. I myself, do not like sharp curves and hairpins. It seems too taxing on the car and the driver to have to constantly accelerate from a practical standstill all the time. Progressive corners are nice as they seem to just catapult the g's out of the turns. Silver does that for me...as does Monza.

It's a matter of opinion of course, but I like the modern Silverstone, at least for modern F1. In any less nimble mount I would certainly prefer the old layout but in F1 it's a blast. The best F1 race of 2003 happened at Silverstone, and it wasn't just because of the crazy guy who ran down Hangar straight. Plus when driving it I find all of the corners except the go-kart section to be quite challenging and fun. In particular blasting through the esses or trying to take Bridge flat out is a blast. The track allows you to run a very nice compromise between downforce and speed, feels great. I have yet to get any enjoyment out of the modern Monza, but perhaps it's just because the ISI version is so poor. "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:rFLLb.131985$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Yer disagreeing w. Papy, not me. I love Silverstone. I always assumed it > was because I'm not an Alien, so it's a lot easier for me to drive than, > say, Brands, which is a beatch. > > (Likewise, I've never gotten Rouen right, whereas Bugatti is a cake walk.) > > However good or bad Silver was, I don't think there can be any argument

that

Quoted text (8 lines)

> the modern ver. is an unmitigated disaster, particularly that bewildering > and pointless go-kart section toward the end of the lap. > > (Likewise, the modern A1 Ring is a pale imitation of the Oesterreichring > that preceded it.) > > (Monza, OTOH, has held up pretty well, all in all, doncha think?) >

Yep. Only problem though is normally T1, lap 1 with the standard 3 wide grid :) Ditto for Nurb'. No braking references, particularly from a standing start. "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bGLLb.131986$[email hidden]... > Absolutely. Silverstone is right up there with Monza as an onlinedelight!

Quoted text (26 lines)

> > "David Buttery" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote here on 09 > > Jan 2004: > > > > > Much better. The Papyrus creative crew thought Silverstone was so > > > boring during development that they tried, unsuccessfully, to get > > > the rights to Brands Hatch (once the alternate home to the British > > > GP) as a substitute, as they did with Rouen subbing for Bugatti. > > > Brands is a fabulous track that no third-party developer has ever > > > done justice. > > > > I won't disagree with Brands being a great track, but (in GPL terms) > > I think you're terribly harsh on Silverstone. Of the original 11 > > circuits, probably only Spa has given me more really memorable races. > > I suppose it just points up the different ways in which we enjoy this > > amazing game. :-) > > > > -- > > Above address *is* valid - but snip spamtrap to get me to *read*! > > > > Support the world's oldest motorsport venue! > > http://www.shelsley-walsh.co.uk/future.html > >

I love Silverstone too :) "Rich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:nurLb.98712$6b2.77880@edtnps84... > No undrivable slippery sections...nice sweeping curves with short, butquick > straights. An all around fun track to drive...and the AI is respectabletoo. > I can almost feel the wind. I'm thinking of placing a fan in front of me > while I drive. Force Feed back and the feel of circulating air .. and GPL. > Does it get any better? ;-) > >

Rich wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>not taking notice at all that you've just passed them, bumping into you and >>punting you off at every opportunity. And apart from Chapel turning >>onto Hangar Straight, were they WILL let you by if you have a good pass, >>they usually drive like blind drunks. > I think the term "aggressive" comes to mind here. AI is certainly not as > courteous as online.

Yep, in this case it's more like they drive like zombies on acid. Read: dumb programming. > I'm not looking for opponents to pull over for me and worship the ground I > drive on. Me neither, but these binary-damaged AI go a bit further and will actually run *into* ya if you've just made a clean pass. I expect them to behave (more or less at least) like humans, not rolling chicanes which move toward you like you weren't there. > I say respectable because that is the type of challenge I prefer. The harder > it is the better you get as a driver. Well I can't say I got better as a driver even after I did win several offline races at Silverstone. The problem is they don't *learn* either: still all dive toward that one spot like bees on a honeypot in Copse Corner, making accidents almost inevitable - unless you want to lose several more places (I usually drop from 1st to 5th or 8th after the first corner since I rarely dare pass there anymore) or get a perfect start (a rare occasion for most os us mortals). > It's not blind drunk ...its challenging. ..the way it should be. It's VERY blind drunk. If they CAN (programmatically) "see you pass" and not react to it. They DO react correctly to the very same passing manoeuvre in Chapel Corner and let you by if you are in front, but if you do the very same thing (correctly) at the start they'll just run into you. That's just not the way it's supposed to be, that's dumb programming. If they (the programmers) can get it right in several corners, there's no real excuse to get it wrong in others. I don't expect the AI to move over if I'm coming in from behind, but I don't expect them to run into me when I've passed either. > I find the late brakes AI displays is telling you to stay the hell out of > the way slow poke! Well, since I've hyped the AI to run sub-negative times and usually still win by some margin once I've passed them (PB is 1:28.2), I would say it's more their kamikaze driving style into Copse that's at fault here. Their reacting correctly at Chapel (and sometimes Abbey and Woodcote) proves that the programmers were just plain slacking in designing the AI on part of this track. >>If I could give the Silverstone AI's designer at Papy an enormous and >>painful kick in the rear, I'd do it with utter joy. I'm not kidding. > > > *sigh* Yes, that's what I'd say afterwards, too. Finally... oh, pure bliss! >>one slight touch and you fly into the scenery at 120 mph; wonder if they >>were like that in real life. > Funny, I dont have this problem...and I use no aids. I've never used them either. But I'd like to see what happens to *your* car if you take Abbey just a tad too tight and run part of your left front wheel over the kerbs. These things are nasty - in real life, they'd be utterly dangerous.

Quoted text (9 lines)

>>>Does it get any better? ;-) >> >>Yes - at Zandvoort ;) > I myself, do not like sharp curves and hairpins. It seems too taxing on the > car and the driver to have to constantly > accelerate from a practical standstill all the time. Progressive corners are > nice as they seem to just catapult the g's out of the turns. > Silver does that for me...as does Monza.

I've got no problem with both fast and slow tracks myself (well.. Mexico's Esses being the exception - yuck), have won against F1 AI on all of them and am negative on all, but I still think the AI programming on some tracks is severely lacking in common sense. Since I'm mainly an offline driver, the Silverstone AI often spoils much of the fun because they tend to drive like nutters. Sure, after the start I can wait a few corners, but since J. Clark nearly always pulls off a perfect start (another AI fault, imho) he's usually far away once I get past those frontline backmarkers and have to take crazy risks in the first corners to stay fairly close. I'm not a kamikaze-type driver, so that's not my idea of fun - I don't think the real F1 aces drove like kamikazes either. AI should behave like drivers who want to stay alive or at least finish the race and on most parts of Silverstone, they don't. And in this case I blame sloppy AI programming - after all, they did get it right in most other places. Regards, Rudy (GPLRank -21)

"Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote here on 10 Jan 2004: > Absolutely. Silverstone is right up there with Monza as an online > delight! ...with the significant difference that it's not unheard of for more than half the field to get past the first corner at Silverstone. ;-) -- Above address *is* valid - but snip spamtrap to get me to *read*! Support the world's oldest motorsport venue! http://www.shelsley-walsh.co.uk/future.html

Of all the features from the original "design document" that *didn't* make it into GPL, the one I regret the most was "smart" AI. No, not the infamous "hype" scaling (where the AI just kept getting faster every time you reeled off a lucky lap), I mean AI that got better and better the more laps they did. The scariest was when they'd follow you for several laps and analyze where you were weakest (i.e., slowest), then put a move on you the next lap. My objection to the AI that shipped with the game was not that it was dumb. It seemed about as smart as yer average club racer. But definitely not as smart as the guys whose names were on the sides of the cars: Clark, Hill, Gurney, Hulme, Brabham, Surtees, Rindt, et alia. "Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:btpvmo$pk2$[email hidden]... > Rich wrote: > > >>not taking notice at all that you've just passed them, bumping into youand

Quoted text (12 lines)

> >>punting you off at every opportunity. And apart from Chapel turning > >>onto Hangar Straight, were they WILL let you by if you have a good pass, > >>they usually drive like blind drunks. > > > I think the term "aggressive" comes to mind here. AI is certainly not as > > courteous as online. > > > Yep, in this case it's more like they drive like zombies on acid. Read: > dumb programming. > > > I'm not looking for opponents to pull over for me and worship the ground

I

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > drive on. > > Me neither, but these binary-damaged AI go a bit further and will > actually run *into* ya if you've just made a clean pass. I expect them > to behave (more or less at least) like humans, not rolling chicanes > which move toward you like you weren't there. > > > I say respectable because that is the type of challenge I prefer. The

harder

Quoted text (24 lines)

> > it is the better you get as a driver. > > Well I can't say I got better as a driver even after I did win several > offline races at Silverstone. The problem is they don't *learn* either: > still all dive toward that one spot like bees on a honeypot in Copse > Corner, making accidents almost inevitable - unless you want to lose > several more places (I usually drop from 1st to 5th or 8th after the > first corner since I rarely dare pass there anymore) or get a perfect > start (a rare occasion for most os us mortals). > > > It's not blind drunk ...its challenging. ..the way it should be. > > It's VERY blind drunk. If they CAN (programmatically) "see you pass" and > not react to it. They DO react correctly to the very same passing > manoeuvre in Chapel Corner and let you by if you are in front, but if > you do the very same thing (correctly) at the start they'll just run > into you. That's just not the way it's supposed to be, that's dumb > programming. If they (the programmers) can get it right in several > corners, there's no real excuse to get it wrong in others. > > I don't expect the AI to move over if I'm coming in from behind, but I > don't expect them to run into me when I've passed either. > > > I find the late brakes AI displays is telling you to stay the hell out

of

Quoted text (32 lines)

> > the way slow poke! > > Well, since I've hyped the AI to run sub-negative times and usually > still win by some margin once I've passed them (PB is 1:28.2), I would > say it's more their kamikaze driving style into Copse that's at fault > here. Their reacting correctly at Chapel (and sometimes Abbey and > Woodcote) proves that the programmers were just plain slacking in > designing the AI on part of this track. > > >>If I could give the Silverstone AI's designer at Papy an enormous and > >>painful kick in the rear, I'd do it with utter joy. I'm not kidding. > > > > > > *sigh* > > Yes, that's what I'd say afterwards, too. Finally... oh, pure bliss! > > >>one slight touch and you fly into the scenery at 120 mph; wonder if they > >>were like that in real life. > > > Funny, I dont have this problem...and I use no aids. > > I've never used them either. But I'd like to see what happens to *your* > car if you take Abbey just a tad too tight and run part of your left > front wheel over the kerbs. These things are nasty - in real life, > they'd be utterly dangerous. > > >>>Does it get any better? ;-) > >> > >>Yes - at Zandvoort ;) > > > I myself, do not like sharp curves and hairpins. It seems too taxing on

the > > car and the driver to have to constantly > > accelerate from a practical standstill all the time. Progressive cornersare

Quoted text (25 lines)

> > nice as they seem to just catapult the g's out of the turns. > > Silver does that for me...as does Monza. > > I've got no problem with both fast and slow tracks myself (well.. > Mexico's Esses being the exception - yuck), have won against F1 AI on > all of them and am negative on all, but I still think the AI programming > on some tracks is severely lacking in common sense. Since I'm mainly an > offline driver, the Silverstone AI often spoils much of the fun because > they tend to drive like nutters. > > Sure, after the start I can wait a few corners, but since J. Clark > nearly always pulls off a perfect start (another AI fault, imho) he's > usually far away once I get past those frontline backmarkers and have to > take crazy risks in the first corners to stay fairly close. I'm not a > kamikaze-type driver, so that's not my idea of fun - I don't think the > real F1 aces drove like kamikazes either. > > AI should behave like drivers who want to stay alive or at least finish > the race and on most parts of Silverstone, they don't. And in this case > I blame sloppy AI programming - after all, they did get it right in most > other places. > > Regards, Rudy > (GPLRank -21) >

As Donohue said, in order to win, first you have to finish. Of course, qualifying on the front row helps too.... "David Buttery" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote here on 10 > Jan 2004: > > > Absolutely. Silverstone is right up there with Monza as an online > > delight! > > ...with the significant difference that it's not unheard of for more > than half the field to get past the first corner at Silverstone. ;-) > > -- > Above address *is* valid - but snip spamtrap to get me to *read*! > > Support the world's oldest motorsport venue! > http://www.shelsley-walsh.co.uk/future.html

Steve Smith wrote: > Of all the features from the original "design document" that *didn't* make > it into GPL, the one I regret the most was "smart" AI. No, not the infamous > "hype" scaling (where the AI just kept getting faster every time you reeled > off a lucky lap), I mean AI that got better and better the more laps they > did. The scariest was when they'd follow you for several laps and analyze > where you were weakest (i.e., slowest), then put a move on you the next lap. Hey yes, that's what I've (more subconsciously than otherwise) been wondering about as well. It was mentioned in FWD, but after a while I couldn't say I noticed them stalking me at my weak points. (On the other hand, GPL usually gives you plenty of sweaty palms already!) Other funny thing: the Ferrari isn't mentioned in the manual due to licensing issues. But there is a HUGE big Ferrari on the cover of the box and the manuals! ;) And another funny thing I noticed recently: the Lotus seems to have really whopping big wide rear tyres compared to, say, the Cooper or Ferrari, which are about as wide as their front rubbers. It also seems to have more rear-end grip - wonder if these tyre differences were there in real life, too. (And did Jack B. ever get to drive the betas?) > My objection to the AI that shipped with the game was not that it was dumb. > It seemed about as smart as yer average club racer. But definitely not as > smart as the guys whose names were on the sides of the cars: Clark, Hill, > Gurney, Hulme, Brabham, Surtees, Rindt, et alia. Hmm, I'd say it was as smart as most club racers in most places, but a lot dumber in others, and indeed certainly not up to Clark standards, but that would've been a bit much to expect. Nevertheless, even yer average club racer would usually not steer right into you after you've just put your car almost completely in front of them. It's my pet hate in GPL. I've never, never understood why they didn't implement a simple "if the AI car gets closer than 5 inches to yours, have him steer away from your car, and/or possibly back off slightly." That's what a real life driver would mostly do, and it doesn't seem all that difficult to develop - after all, the AI doesn't contend with accurate physics anyway. That said, there are corners (like Chapel or Hugenholtz hairpin) where the AI will correctly let you by if you make a good pass. (Which makes it all the more sad that after a few races in NR2002 I sadly noticed that the AI basically still had the same problems on road courses!) Regards, Rudy (GPLRank -21)

This whole thread has been very enjoyable to read. Thanks, group! Thanks, Rich, for getting it started. BTW I like Silverstone; it's the second track I managed to go negative. (I also like women who tell me how good looking I am.) And if I could learn how to take all the corners in GPL as well as I take the second turn at Silverstone, I'd be an Alien. T1 is still a challenge for me. Jim Rich wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>No undrivable slippery sections...nice sweeping curves with short, but quick >straights. An all around fun track to drive...and the AI is respectable too. >I can almost feel the wind. I'm thinking of placing a fan in front of me >while I drive. Force Feed back and the feel of circulating air .. and GPL. >Does it get any better? ;-) > > > >

I included Ferrari in the original copy for the strategy guide, but every word written abt. Ferrari had to be vetted by Ferrari, and as the copy was overdue at the printer's, Papy took the easy way out and simply deleted every reference to car. No RW F1 pilot ever drove the beta. I tried to hook Papy up with Gurney, with whom I've been friends since the Sixties, but Papy was diffident (to put it mildly) and Dan begged off, saying he never was any good at simulations. His son Alex drives sims, but by the time I found out about that, the game was shrink-wrapped. Papy could have made the AI more responsive...but only at the expense of CPU cycles, and they were reluctant to borrow from the first-person driving experience to improve the AI's etiquette. Besides, they knew the best GPL could get would be online. As to tires, unlike today, when the only difference among them is the shape of the shoulder (and some wear-specific compound secrets), in '67 there was enormous difference between the teams' choices, and yes, the Lotus really did have huge rear tires compared to the others (in part to take advantage of a greater rear-weight bias). The contact patch area is fully modeled in the physics, AFAIK. "Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:btqc2a$ct6$[email hidden]... > Steve Smith wrote: > > > Of all the features from the original "design document" that *didn't*make > > it into GPL, the one I regret the most was "smart" AI. No, not theinfamous > > "hype" scaling (where the AI just kept getting faster every time youreeled > > off a lucky lap), I mean AI that got better and better the more lapsthey > > did. The scariest was when they'd follow you for several laps andanalyze > > where you were weakest (i.e., slowest), then put a move on you the nextlap.

Quoted text (23 lines)

> > > Hey yes, that's what I've (more subconsciously than otherwise) been > wondering about as well. > > > It was mentioned in FWD, but after a while I couldn't say I noticed them > stalking me at my weak points. (On the other hand, GPL usually gives you > plenty of sweaty palms already!) > > Other funny thing: the Ferrari isn't mentioned in the manual due to > licensing issues. But there is a HUGE big Ferrari on the cover of the > box and the manuals! ;) > > And another funny thing I noticed recently: the Lotus seems to have > really whopping big wide rear tyres compared to, say, the Cooper or > Ferrari, which are about as wide as their front rubbers. It also seems > to have more rear-end grip - wonder if these tyre differences were there > in real life, too. > > (And did Jack B. ever get to drive the betas?) > > > My objection to the AI that shipped with the game was not that it was

dumb. > > It seemed about as smart as yer average club racer. But definitely notas > > smart as the guys whose names were on the sides of the cars: Clark,Hill,

Quoted text (23 lines)

> > Gurney, Hulme, Brabham, Surtees, Rindt, et alia. > > Hmm, I'd say it was as smart as most club racers in most places, but a > lot dumber in others, and indeed certainly not up to Clark standards, > but that would've been a bit much to expect. Nevertheless, even yer > average club racer would usually not steer right into you after you've > just put your car almost completely in front of them. > > It's my pet hate in GPL. I've never, never understood why they didn't > implement a simple "if the AI car gets closer than 5 inches to yours, > have him steer away from your car, and/or possibly back off slightly." > > That's what a real life driver would mostly do, and it doesn't seem all > that difficult to develop - after all, the AI doesn't contend with > accurate physics anyway. That said, there are corners (like Chapel or > Hugenholtz hairpin) where the AI will correctly let you by if you make a > good pass. (Which makes it all the more sad that after a few races in > NR2002 I sadly noticed that the AI basically still had the same problems > on road courses!) > > Regards, Rudy > (GPLRank -21) >

Steve Smith wrote: > I included Ferrari in the original copy for the strategy guide, but every > word written abt. Ferrari had to be vetted by Ferrari, and as the copy was > overdue at the printer's, Papy took the easy way out and simply deleted > every reference to car. Hmmm... Then I take it the Ferrari cover picture had already been agreed upon? Otherwise, it's still a bit of a mystery, isn't it ;) > No RW F1 pilot ever drove the beta. I tried to hook Papy up with Gurney, > with whom I've been friends since the Sixties, but Papy was diffident (to > put it mildly) and Dan begged off, saying he never was any good at > simulations. Too bad though, would've been nice. A GPL Eagle track test by Dan Gurney would still be somewhat of a non plus ultra. A few weeks ago it was noticed that Emerson Fittipaldi had been doing some GPL'ing in the evening (in a Hyperstim I think), and in the morning came back to do some more! (The ultimate racing junkie, perhaps? I mean, doing GPL after being F1 World Champion seems kinda Iggy Pop, who can't stop rockin' either! :) The only other RW F1 pilot of the era that has been confirmed to drive GPL was Surtees, afaik. That said, I wonder how much car characteristics in GPL were there in real life that real life F1 racers could confirm - was the Eagle indeed pretty good in fast sweeps, the Lotus and Ferrari great midrange accelerators, the BRM a tank but fairly easy, the Brabham light and pretty twitchy... > Papy could have made the AI more responsive...but only at the expense of CPU > cycles, and they were reluctant to borrow from the first-person driving > experience to improve the AI's etiquette. Besides, they knew the best GPL > could get would be online. Ok, from a tech point of view I can understand that. (Nevertheless, it still seems a bit 'off' when the AI reacts one way (the right way) in one corner and then completely different in others.) > enormous difference between the teams' choices, and yes, the Lotus really > did have huge rear tires compared to the others (in part to take advantage > of a greater rear-weight bias). The contact patch area is fully modeled in > the physics, AFAIK. It seems so. In my experience, the Brab and Ferrari, which have pretty slim rear tyres (tires ;) seem rather 'slidey' in the rear end, while the Lotus seems to stick it's rear end to the track (until it breaks loose, at which time it reacts relatively snappy), and accelerates accordingly. Regards, Rudy (GPLRank -21)

Steve, thanks for all the insight. GPL was an amazing piece of software for its time, and remains so today. Be curious to see what Dave K. and the Boys (sounds like a rock band) would be capable of doing with GPL today if given a clean slate and a enough resources to develop it properly...Hey, I can dream, can't I? -- See ya in the pits, Dean I have a terrible memory. In fact my memory's so bad I can't remember how long it's been since I've forgotten anything. "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:tR3Mb.70868$[email hidden]... > I included Ferrari in the original copy for the strategy guide, but every > word written abt. Ferrari had to be vetted by Ferrari, and as the copy was > overdue at the printer's, Papy took the easy way out and simply deleted > every reference to car. > > No RW F1 pilot ever drove the beta. I tried to hook Papy up with Gurney, > with whom I've been friends since the Sixties, but Papy was diffident (to > put it mildly) and Dan begged off, saying he never was any good at > simulations. His son Alex drives sims, but by the time I found out about > that, the game was shrink-wrapped. > > Papy could have made the AI more responsive...but only at the expense of CPU > cycles, and they were reluctant to borrow from the first-person driving > experience to improve the AI's etiquette. Besides, they knew the best GPL > could get would be online. > > As to tires, unlike today, when the only difference among them is the shape > of the shoulder (and some wear-specific compound secrets), in '67 there was > enormous difference between the teams' choices, and yes, the Lotus really > did have huge rear tires compared to the others (in part to take advantage > of a greater rear-weight bias). The contact patch area is fully modeled in > the physics, AFAIK. > > "Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:btqc2a$ct6$[email hidden]... > > Steve Smith wrote: > > > > > Of all the features from the original "design document" that *didn't* > make > > > it into GPL, the one I regret the most was "smart" AI. No, not the > infamous > > > "hype" scaling (where the AI just kept getting faster every time you > reeled > > > off a lucky lap), I mean AI that got better and better the more laps > they > > > did. The scariest was when they'd follow you for several laps and > analyze > > > where you were weakest (i.e., slowest), then put a move on you the next > lap. > > > > > > Hey yes, that's what I've (more subconsciously than otherwise) been > > wondering about as well. > > > > > > It was mentioned in FWD, but after a while I couldn't say I noticed them > > stalking me at my weak points. (On the other hand, GPL usually gives you > > plenty of sweaty palms already!) > > > > Other funny thing: the Ferrari isn't mentioned in the manual due to > > licensing issues. But there is a HUGE big Ferrari on the cover of the > > box and the manuals! ;) > > > > And another funny thing I noticed recently: the Lotus seems to have > > really whopping big wide rear tyres compared to, say, the Cooper or > > Ferrari, which are about as wide as their front rubbers. It also seems > > to have more rear-end grip - wonder if these tyre differences were there > > in real life, too. > > > > (And did Jack B. ever get to drive the betas?) > > > > > My objection to the AI that shipped with the game was not that it was > dumb. > > > It seemed about as smart as yer average club racer. But definitely not > as > > > smart as the guys whose names were on the sides of the cars: Clark, > Hill, > > > Gurney, Hulme, Brabham, Surtees, Rindt, et alia. > > > > Hmm, I'd say it was as smart as most club racers in most places, but a > > lot dumber in others, and indeed certainly not up to Clark standards, > > but that would've been a bit much to expect. Nevertheless, even yer > > average club racer would usually not steer right into you after you've > > just put your car almost completely in front of them. > > > > It's my pet hate in GPL. I've never, never understood why they didn't > > implement a simple "if the AI car gets closer than 5 inches to yours, > > have him steer away from your car, and/or possibly back off slightly." > > > > That's what a real life driver would mostly do, and it doesn't seem all > > that difficult to develop - after all, the AI doesn't contend with > > accurate physics anyway. That said, there are corners (like Chapel or > > Hugenholtz hairpin) where the AI will correctly let you by if you make a > > good pass. (Which makes it all the more sad that after a few races in > > NR2002 I sadly noticed that the AI basically still had the same problems > > on road courses!) > > > > Regards, Rudy > > (GPLRank -21) > > > >

Ferrari are control freaks...and not just on the tracks. For a revu of Acer's 'Ferrari 3000' in Car and Driver, I asked Acer's p.r. guy in the USA for a foto of the laptop in the bkgnd. and the Ferrari-logo'd mouse in the foreground. "No can do," he replied ruefully. Every foto of the laptop--even tho Ferrari doesn't actually make it--has to be approved by Maranello, a process that would take months and miss the story's deadline. Ferrari would rather lose the opportunity to influence a million-plus car guys than trust their own suppliers to take a decent foto of the product. It seems to finish first, first you must be a Not-Nice Guy. Works for them. "Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:btqtgb$c0g$[email hidden]... > Steve Smith wrote: > > > I included Ferrari in the original copy for the strategy guide, butevery > > word written abt. Ferrari had to be vetted by Ferrari, and as the copywas

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > overdue at the printer's, Papy took the easy way out and simply deleted > > every reference to car. > > Hmmm... Then I take it the Ferrari cover picture had already been agreed > upon? Otherwise, it's still a bit of a mystery, isn't it ;) > > > No RW F1 pilot ever drove the beta. I tried to hook Papy up with

Gurney, > > with whom I've been friends since the Sixties, but Papy was diffident(to

Quoted text (22 lines)

> > put it mildly) and Dan begged off, saying he never was any good at > > simulations. > > Too bad though, would've been nice. A GPL Eagle track test by Dan Gurney > would still be somewhat of a non plus ultra. > > A few weeks ago it was noticed that Emerson Fittipaldi had been doing > some GPL'ing in the evening (in a Hyperstim I think), and in the morning > came back to do some more! (The ultimate racing junkie, perhaps? I > mean, doing GPL after being F1 World Champion seems kinda Iggy Pop, who > can't stop rockin' either! :) > > The only other RW F1 pilot of the era that has been confirmed to drive > GPL was Surtees, afaik. > > That said, I wonder how much car characteristics in GPL were there in > real life that real life F1 racers could confirm - was the Eagle indeed > pretty good in fast sweeps, the Lotus and Ferrari great midrange > accelerators, the BRM a tank but fairly easy, the Brabham light and > pretty twitchy... > > > Papy could have made the AI more responsive...but only at the expense of

CPU > > cycles, and they were reluctant to borrow from the first-person driving > > experience to improve the AI's etiquette. Besides, they knew the bestGPL

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > could get would be online. > > Ok, from a tech point of view I can understand that. (Nevertheless, it > still seems a bit 'off' when the AI reacts one way (the right way) in > one corner and then completely different in others.) > > > enormous difference between the teams' choices, and yes, the Lotus

really > > did have huge rear tires compared to the others (in part to takeadvantage > > of a greater rear-weight bias). The contact patch area is fully modeledin

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > the physics, AFAIK. > > It seems so. In my experience, the Brab and Ferrari, which have pretty > slim rear tyres (tires ;) seem rather 'slidey' in the rear end, while > the Lotus seems to stick it's rear end to the track (until it breaks > loose, at which time it reacts relatively snappy), and accelerates > accordingly. > > Regards, Rudy > (GPLRank -21) >

In article <h%bMb.137013$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > Works for them. > Unless Carroll Shelby's around. Then, it doesn't work for Ferrari. Ferrari's just mad because an American whooped their ass at LeMans, not once, but MANY times. LOL

I joined a race at Silverstone late a while back. starting from the back of the grid I was forced to pit lane, missed all the wrecking into T1 and was in first when I exited the pits. lol. kinda lame really. "The Carvalho Family" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> This whole thread has been very enjoyable to read. Thanks, group! > Thanks, Rich, for getting it started. > > BTW I like Silverstone; it's the second track I managed to go negative. > (I also like women who tell me how good looking I am.) And if I could > learn how to take all the corners in GPL as well as I take the second > turn at Silverstone, I'd be an Alien. T1 is still a challenge for me. > > Jim > > Rich wrote: > > >No undrivable slippery sections...nice sweeping curves with short, but

quick > >straights. An all around fun track to drive...and the AI is respectabletoo. > >I can almost feel the wind. I'm thinking of placing a fan in front of me > >while I drive. Force Feed back and the feel of circulating air .. andGPL. > >Does it get any better? ;-) > > > > > > > > >

A great cheat is to start at the back of the grid, hook right, and *deliberately* accelerate down the pit road without backing off for Copse. Your car will lean--hard--on the wall, slingshoting you around the turn and out onto the track...IN THE LEAD! (P.S. This only works with damage off. And don't try this in an online race.) "Charlie B" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:kFgMb.4232$[email hidden]... > I joined a race at Silverstone late a while back. starting from the backof

Quoted text (24 lines)

> the grid I was forced to pit lane, missed all the wrecking into T1 and was > in first when I exited the pits. lol. kinda lame really. > > > > "The Carvalho Family" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > This whole thread has been very enjoyable to read. Thanks, group! > > Thanks, Rich, for getting it started. > > > > BTW I like Silverstone; it's the second track I managed to go negative. > > (I also like women who tell me how good looking I am.) And if I could > > learn how to take all the corners in GPL as well as I take the second > > turn at Silverstone, I'd be an Alien. T1 is still a challenge for me. > > > > Jim > > > > Rich wrote: > > > > >No undrivable slippery sections...nice sweeping curves with short, but > quick > > >straights. An all around fun track to drive...and the AI is respectable > too. > > >I can almost feel the wind. I'm thinking of placing a fan in front of

me

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > >while I drive. Force Feed back and the feel of circulating air .. and > GPL. > > >Does it get any better? ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Steve Smith wrote: > A great cheat is to start at the back of the grid, hook right, and > *deliberately* accelerate down the pit road without backing off for Copse. > Your car will lean--hard--on the wall, slingshoting you around the turn and > out onto the track...IN THE LEAD! (P.S. This only works with damage off. > And don't try this in an online race.) Now why didn't you tell THAT trick to Dan Gurney when it mattered? I bet he never was in an online race and had never set damage to "on" either. ;) Regards, Rudy (GPLRank -21)

The Carvalho Family wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> This whole thread has been very enjoyable to read. Thanks, group! > Thanks, Rich, for getting it started. > > BTW I like Silverstone; it's the second track I managed to go negative. > (I also like women who tell me how good looking I am.) And if I could > learn how to take all the corners in GPL as well as I take the second > turn at Silverstone, I'd be an Alien. T1 is still a challenge for me.

Easiest way to get a brake marker for T1 is to make a new groove with Phil Flacks Racing Line application. You can make a whoole new groove based on any replay lap you give it. They should all stick a big black mark for the brake point at T1 on the track for you.

Thanks for the tip, Kevin. YAGPLUtility I haven't heard about. I look it up. Jim Kevin Clark wrote:

Quoted text (17 lines)

> The Carvalho Family wrote: > >> This whole thread has been very enjoyable to read. Thanks, group! >> Thanks, Rich, for getting it started. >> >> BTW I like Silverstone; it's the second track I managed to go >> negative. (I also like women who tell me how good looking I am.) And >> if I could learn how to take all the corners in GPL as well as I take >> the second turn at Silverstone, I'd be an Alien. T1 is still a >> challenge for me. > > > Easiest way to get a brake marker for T1 is to make a new groove with > Phil Flacks Racing Line application. You can make a whoole new groove > based on any replay lap you give it. They should all stick a big black > mark for the brake point at T1 on the track for you. >

I like the modern Silverstone in the F1 cars a lot too. With a good setup, it's a fantastic track to drive. David G Fisher "Haqsau" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > It's a matter of opinion of course, but I like the modern Silverstone, at > least for modern F1. In any less nimble mount I would certainly preferthe > old layout but in F1 it's a blast. The best F1 race of 2003 happened at > Silverstone, and it wasn't just because of the crazy guy who ran downHangar > straight. Plus when driving it I find all of the corners except thego-kart > section to be quite challenging and fun. In particular blasting throughthe > esses or trying to take Bridge flat out is a blast. The track allows youto

Quoted text (9 lines)

> run a very nice compromise between downforce and speed, feels great. > > I have yet to get any enjoyment out of the modern Monza, but perhaps it's > just because the ISI version is so poor. > > > "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:rFLLb.131985$[email hidden]... > > Yer disagreeing w. Papy, not me. I love Silverstone. I always assumed

it > > was because I'm not an Alien, so it's a lot easier for me to drive than, > > say, Brands, which is a beatch. > > > > (Likewise, I've never gotten Rouen right, whereas Bugatti is a cakewalk.) > > > > However good or bad Silver was, I don't think there can be any argument > that > > the modern ver. is an unmitigated disaster, particularly thatbewildering

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > and pointless go-kart section toward the end of the lap. > > > > (Likewise, the modern A1 Ring is a pale imitation of the Oesterreichring > > that preceded it.) > > > > (Monza, OTOH, has held up pretty well, all in all, doncha think?) > > > >