New MOMO and GPL

Ok. Ive finally bit the bullet and and dragged myself into the FF world. What do i need to do to get FF working in GPL ? Will swapping the core.ini with the sample .ini do the trick ? I know it was enabled in the 1.2 patch. Im guessing swapping the .ini files and change the 0 to a 1 in the new core.ini too ?? Thanks fer listening guys !

"GMpartsguy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:qCGU9.669361$P31.499879@rwcrnsc53... > Ok. Ive finally bit the bullet and and dragged myself into the FF world. > What do i need to do to get FF working in GPL ? Will swapping the core.ini > with the sample .ini do the trick ? I know it was enabled in the 1.2patch. > Im guessing swapping the .ini files and change the 0 to a 1 in the new > core.ini too ?? > Thanks fer listening guys ! You need this little lot in your core.ini: [ Joy ] allow_force_feedback = 1 ; Use FF if device has it force_feedback_damping = 10.00000 ; force feedback damping coefficient force_feedback_latency = 0.0650000 ; force feedback latency (secs) max_steering_torque = 500.000000 ; steering torque in N*in giving max device force Make sure it's called core.ini, not core.ini.sample (disable 'hide extensions for known file types' in the folder options to be sure). Your core.ini probably already contains these lines, so to enable ff, you'll just need to change the first line from 0 to 1. The other settings are really down to personal preference, so mine almost certainly won't suit you or your controller, but a quick google of this group should give you plenty of example settings from others with your wheel. Read the readme11.txt for more info on setting up ff. If you're used to non-ff, initially it will feel disconcerting, but stick with it, and test the latency by weaving from side to side on a straight and adjust it (exit gpl, adjust settings, go back in etc) until the feedback is in synch with the car. As the rear steps out the steering should naturally tend to correct the slide for you, but too little latency & the car will oscillate out of control as it tries to correct the slide before it's happened. It took me about a week to get mine really 'right'. It's not the easiest ff to set up, but it's worth it imo. Malc.

Thanks Malc. I did read Alison Hine's description of the .ini setup, but wanted to be sure. My core file doesnt contain those lines, but the sample file did, along with other goodies. I'll just copy those lines into the core.ini. My last time running a FF wheel was back when Hard/Race Drivin' was new :) Damn arcade owner used to wince when he saw me walk in. I swear if i win powerball, my first homemade cockpit will be based on it ! This past Saturday, i retired my 3 year old Nas Pro Digital. After 3 major rebuilds, i ran outta pots and fresh springs for it and the bushing in the column is wasted. Otherwise, i could keep rebuilding it forever. A great cheapie wheel that got me through the end of TEN and my negative rank in GPL. This budget Momo FF wheel has a great solid feel to it. Gonna have to reinstall Rally Trophy i guess. Anyway, ive rambled. Thanks again Malc !

It takes a bit of getting used to and getting the settings right can require a lot of experimentation, but once you get it right, it adds a lot to the experience and may improve your lap times.

"Malc" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:WSHU9.4918$xE1.717144@stones...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> You need this little lot in your core.ini: > > [ Joy ] > allow_force_feedback = 1 ; Use FF if device has it > force_feedback_damping = 10.00000 ; force feedback damping coefficient > force_feedback_latency = 0.0650000 ; force feedback latency (secs) > max_steering_torque = 500.000000 ; steering torque in N*in giving max > device force

Just for the record, These settings are for a Logitech Wingman Force, the Joystick version of the original LWFF. They will almost certainly be useless if you try them with a wheel. Malc. GPLRank -39.15 Monster Rank -120.28

"Redmist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:avvnji$k0982$[email hidden]... > It takes a bit of getting used to and getting the settings right canrequire > a lot of experimentation, but once you get it right, it adds a lot to the > experience and may improve your lap times. I found that after several weeks of practice I was eventually quicker, and now I'd recommend it to anyone. But many drivers prefer not to use it, possibly finding that a high quality controller (where FF may not be available) is better than something more mainstream even with FF. This may be true, but sadly I'm not rich enough to find out ;-) Malc.

I'm currently using [ Joy ] allow_force_feedback = 1 force_feedback_damping = 30.0000 force_feedback_latency = 0.03500 max_steering_torque = 225.000000 This is with the Momo Racing wheel under XP Pro. I also have the overall strength set at about 85% in the profiler, but don't bother with that until you try the other settings. OS made a huge difference for me. Under 98 I needed to use 0.120 for latency. Probably somewhat hardware dependent too. Best to tune the latency yourself. Even though it is time consuming to do so it makes a huge difference to get it right. There aren't a whole lot of ill effects for getting it a bit too high, but too low will kill you in a tank slapper. "Malc" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:%oJU9.12908$4k6.1132115@wards...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> "Malc" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:WSHU9.4918$xE1.717144@stones... > > > You need this little lot in your core.ini: > > > > [ Joy ] > > allow_force_feedback = 1 ; Use FF if device has it > > force_feedback_damping = 10.00000 ; force feedback damping

coefficient > > force_feedback_latency = 0.0650000 ; force feedback latency (secs) > > max_steering_torque = 500.000000 ; steering torque in N*in givingmax > > device force > > Just for the record, These settings are for a Logitech Wingman Force, the > Joystick version of the original LWFF. They will almost certainly beuseless

Quoted text (8 lines)

> if you try them with a wheel. > > Malc. > > GPLRank -39.15 > Monster Rank -120.28 > >

My settings for the new MOMO on a high-end system are: Control Panel: 100% Overall 0% Spring (mandatory) 0% Damper (mandatory) 0% Centring (mandatory) Core.ini: [ Hack ] steer_ratio = 0 ; Enable low speed ratio override [ Joy ] allow_force_feedback = 1 ; Use FF if device has it force_feedback_damping = 150.000000 ; force feedback damping coefficient (40.000000) force_feedback_latency = 0.000000 ; force feedback latency (secs) (0.085000) max_steering_torque = 150.000000 ; steering torque in N*in giving max device force (225.00000) Try this combo and tell me the FFB isn't amazing. Marc "GMpartsguy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:qCGU9.669361$P31.499879@rwcrnsc53... > Ok. Ive finally bit the bullet and and dragged myself into the FF world. > What do i need to do to get FF working in GPL ? Will swapping the core.ini > with the sample .ini do the trick ? I know it was enabled in the 1.2patch. > Im guessing swapping the .ini files and change the 0 to a 1 in the new > core.ini too ?? > Thanks fer listening guys ! > >

"Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:zI1V9.6273$[email hidden]... > My settings for the new MOMO on a high-end system are: > > force_feedback_latency = 0.000000 ; force feedback latency (secs) No latency at all?? Now that's what I call a high-end system ;-) Malc.

I was able to hang on for 7.8 seconds. Did i win ?? :)

Do you understand what the latency value does in GPL? Setting it to 0.0 doesn't mean there is absolutely no latency (because even though on a high-end system it should be minimal, there will always be some), but rather that you want to disable the game's attempt to predict the upcoming FFB to compensate for the latency. This is always a fudge factor and it feels 100 times better with it turned off because although there will be a few occasions when my FFB is delayed by fractions of a second because real latency is occurring, I don't have the fudge factor wrongly guessing/interfering with the correct FFB the other 99% of the time. Marc "Malc" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:5k2V9.13070$4k6.1157816@wards...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:zI1V9.6273$[email hidden]... > > My settings for the new MOMO on a high-end system are: > > > > force_feedback_latency = 0.000000 ; force feedback latency (secs) > > No latency at all?? > > Now that's what I call a high-end system ;-) > > Malc. > >

Sorry, but my suggestion was serious (it has taken us old-timers many months to figure out the optimal settings for FFB in GPL)...and I have no idea what your reply implies...??? Marc "GMpartsguy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:XO2V9.54340$Dn.10057@sccrnsc03... > I was able to hang on for 7.8 seconds. Did i win ?? :) > >

Sorry Marc. I was just being a wiseass. It was a reference to the good ol' sport of bull riding (sick bastards). I actually did jot it down in my notebook along with a couple others, but mayhap i will give it a run before bed now that you have me curious. "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b63V9.7014$[email hidden]... > Sorry, but my suggestion was serious (it has taken us old-timers manymonths > to figure out the optimal settings for FFB in GPL)...and I have no ideawhat

Quoted text (11 lines)

> your reply implies...??? > > Marc > > "GMpartsguy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:XO2V9.54340$Dn.10057@sccrnsc03... > > I was able to hang on for 7.8 seconds. Did i win ?? :) > > > > > >

"Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:U43V9.7013$[email hidden]... > Do you understand what the latency value does in GPL? Setting it to 0.0 > doesn't mean there is absolutely no latency (because even though on a > high-end system it should be minimal, there will always be some), butrather > that you want to disable the game's attempt to predict the upcoming FFB to > compensate for the latency. This is always a fudge factor and it feels100 > times better with it turned off because although there will be a few > occasions when my FFB is delayed by fractions of a second because real > latency is occurring, I don't have the fudge factor wrongly > guessing/interfering with the correct FFB the other 99% of the time. That's a good explanation, and as I mentioned earlier, these settings have alot more to do with personal preference than anything else, much like the car setup you choose. Although I do get the occasional spike, I find that setting the latency to match the actual latency of my (fairly old) controller as closely as possible gives me better results. If I hit a curb at Silverstone, my controller tells me 'instantly', much like a real car would, but the trade off is that occasionally it feels like I hit something even though I actually missed it. Presumably your setting will give less (or no) false feedback, but the accurate feedback you do receive is slightly delayed. It's a trade-off either way. Malc.

> If I hit a curb at Silverstone, my controller tells me 'instantly', much > like a real car would, but the trade off is that occasionally it feelslike > I hit something even though I actually missed it. Presumably your setting > will give less (or no) false feedback, but the accurate feedback you do > receive is slightly delayed. It's a trade-off either way. I'm always amazed at how people can set their controllers to something like 35ms latency and actually feel that it makes a difference. Surely 35 *thousands* of a second wouldn't even be noticeable. I'm using 180ms and it feels quite good, but I do get the occasional spike when coming onto the straight at Watkins Glen. The thing that made the biggest improvement in the FF for me was turning the damping down from the default of 40 to 10. (LWFF)

"Damien Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b0520r$lao1g$[email hidden]... > I'm always amazed at how people can set their controllers to somethinglike > 35ms latency and actually feel that it makes a difference. Surely 35 > *thousands* of a second wouldn't even be noticeable. I'm using 180ms andit > feels quite good, but I do get the occasional spike when coming onto the > straight at Watkins Glen. I'm no scientist but I understand that your eye-hand reaction time is typically 0.3 seconds or so. If you don't use FF this is as good as your reactions are likely to get, and you have to 'predict' the rest. However, your hand touch reaction time is more like 0.1 to 0.05 seconds, so you instinctively react to feel more quickly than seeing something, thinking about it, then acting on it. This makes sense to me. To test this, get someone to hold a ruler vertically at arms length. Put your hand around the bottom of the ruler, ready to grip it but not touching it. When they let go of the ruler, you catch it, and measure the distance it travelled. You can work out your eye-hand reaction time from this since the ruler will fall at 32ft/sec/sec (9.8 metres/sec/sec). To test your touch reaction time, close your eyes, do the same test, but this time with one of your fingers just touching the ruler so you can feel when it starts to move. You should find that you will catch the ruler much sooner if you can't see it. Of course if you try this test by yourself (you both drop the ruler & catch it) you will know when it will fall. That's your prediction time, and it's essentially zero of course. There's probably loads of more scientific tests for this, that's just the only one I can think of right now. Malc.

"Malc" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:WtoV9.5515$xE1.813438@stones...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> "Damien Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:b0520r$lao1g$[email hidden]... > > > I'm always amazed at how people can set their controllers to something > like > > 35ms latency and actually feel that it makes a difference. Surely 35 > > *thousands* of a second wouldn't even be noticeable. I'm using 180ms

and > it > > feels quite good, but I do get the occasional spike when coming onto the > > straight at Watkins Glen. The other point is that it takes a certain amount to time for the FF message to be sent from the PC to your controller. It can't be instantaneous because the electrical signal has to travel down the wire to the motor, the motor has to overcome inertia and accelerate up to speed & so on. I understand that newer controllers can have a lower latency through improved motors and more efficient programming, but the signal still has to travel down the wire so it can never be zero. The controllers I use are 3-4 year old technology, and so I assume if I bought a new model, I would need to reduce my latency setting to compensate. Mine is currently 0.065 seconds, but judging from other posts here, the new momo might only need a setting of 0.02 seconds for example. That's not _my reaction time, it's the _controller's reaction time. Malc.

"Damien Smith"

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > I'm always amazed at how people can set their controllers to something > like 35ms latency and actually feel that it makes a difference. > Surely 35 *thousands* of a second wouldn't even be noticeable. I'm > using 180ms and it feels quite good, but I do get the occasional spike > when coming onto the straight at Watkins Glen. > > The thing that made the biggest improvement in the FF for me was > turning the damping down from the default of 40 to 10. (LWFF) > >

with latency THAT high my Momo will spike/jerk hard at every odd texture border. Driving like that is muy hard. dave henrie

What I have found is that you can have a high latency correction or a high damping coefficient in core.ini, but not both. I prefer using ample latency correction in order to get the steering torque right, and don't even particularly like the feel of a high damping coefficient. Marc has gone in the opposite direction - he likes the feeling of a high damping coefficient, and therefore any amount of latency correction is going to feel bad to him. If you try to use both a high damping coefficient and a high latency correction you get lots of prediction errors and spiking. As I understand it GPL normally sends only a force and a constant damper effect to the wheel. The constant damper effect is like a preset "heaviness" of the wheel and is not related in any way to the damping coefficient that you set in core.ini. This constant damper effect is what Marc is turning off by setting damping to zero in the control panel. The damping coefficient in core.ini OTOH is used in the GPL physics model and is applied to the force that is sent to the wheel. GPL apparently calculates the aligning torque on the wheel due to lateral force, then algebraically adds a force based on the damping coefficient, then divides and if necessary clamps the value by the max_steering_torque value. If you keep the damping coefficient low you are mostly feeling the force generated by the aligning torque - the "grip" of the tires. If you raise the damping coefficient very high the damping force becomes much larger than the aligning torque, but the total still gets scaled and clamped to the same maximum value. So as a result the aligning torque becomes barely noticeable and you are mostly feeling the wheel's resistance to turning, which is a function of friction and weight transfer. The two effects are similar and both depend on grip and weight, but damping always opposes the *motion* of the wheel, whereas aligning torque will normally be a function of the wheel's *position* relative to the current direction of motion. Because of the difference in the nature of these two effects they seem to have both different dependencies on latency and different sensitivities to latency correction. For the damping it seems to hardly be noticeable if you use too small a latency correction, but you get huge errors if you use too much. The aligning torque OTOH feels very wrong if you don't use enough latency correction, but does not seem to suffer from over prediction. So which is right? Damping gives you feedback on the weight transfer effect due to acceleration and deceleration. Aligning torque gives you feedback on the slip angle and grip level of the tires. Ideally you would like to be able to mix both together in realistic proportions. Personally I think aligning torque tells you more about what the vehicle is doing, but some might feel that high damping is more realistic. If you calibrate your latency correction using the "weaving down the straight" test and you get a very small number, say around 50 msec or less, you can use fairly strong damping and suffer no ill effects. But if you get a large number, say over 100 msec, you will probably have to choose to either use high damping and no latency correction or turn the damping coefficient way down and use the correct latency correction for the aligning torque. Marc's damping setting just seems off the scale to me though and at that level I think that any amount of latency correction will create problems. With two different wheels, a Logitech Formula Force GP and a Logitech Momo Racing, I had to use a latency correction of 120 msec under Windows 98. With that setting almost any amount of damping felt wrong. For that situation I set the damping to 1 with the FFGP and I think I shut it off completely when I went to the Momo. Since getting XP Pro I have been able to turn the latency correction down to 35 msec. Everything else is the same, all I did was change OS, but apparently this made enough of a difference in the system to improve the latency dramatically. With this lower latency correction I have found that a damping coefficient of 30 feels about right, with both wheels. So the two numbers are definitely related and that, I believe, is why Marc's settings feel great to him and our totally different settings feel fine to us. "Damien Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b0520r$lao1g$[email hidden]... > > I'm always amazed at how people can set their controllers to somethinglike > 35ms latency and actually feel that it makes a difference. Surely 35 > *thousands* of a second wouldn't even be noticeable. I'm using 180ms andit > feels quite good, but I do get the occasional spike when coming onto the > straight at Watkins Glen. > > The thing that made the biggest improvement in the FF for me was turningthe > damping down from the default of 40 to 10. (LWFF) > >

You are correct...and I can't remember the last time I felt any delayed reaction in GPL (at a constant 36 fps). Marc "Malc" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4zcV9.5318$xE1.774273@stones...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:U43V9.7013$[email hidden]... > > Do you understand what the latency value does in GPL? Setting it to 0.0 > > doesn't mean there is absolutely no latency (because even though on a > > high-end system it should be minimal, there will always be some), but > rather > > that you want to disable the game's attempt to predict the upcoming FFB

to

Quoted text (17 lines)

> > compensate for the latency. This is always a fudge factor and it feels > 100 > > times better with it turned off because although there will be a few > > occasions when my FFB is delayed by fractions of a second because real > > latency is occurring, I don't have the fudge factor wrongly > > guessing/interfering with the correct FFB the other 99% of the time. > > That's a good explanation, and as I mentioned earlier, these settings have > alot more to do with personal preference than anything else, much like the > car setup you choose. > > Although I do get the occasional spike, I find that setting the latency to > match the actual latency of my (fairly old) controller as closely as > possible gives me better results. > > If I hit a curb at Silverstone, my controller tells me 'instantly', much > like a real car would, but the trade off is that occasionally it feels

like

Quoted text (7 lines)

> I hit something even though I actually missed it. Presumably your setting > will give less (or no) false feedback, but the accurate feedback you do > receive is slightly delayed. It's a trade-off either way. > > Malc. > >

OK...I get to now. So tell us your impressions... Marc "GMpartsguy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4e4V9.684417$%[email hidden]... > Sorry Marc. I was just being a wiseass. It was a reference to the good ol' > sport of bull riding (sick bastards). I actually did jot it down in my > notebook along with a couple others, but mayhap i will give it a runbefore

Quoted text (20 lines)

> bed now that you have me curious. > "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:b63V9.7014$[email hidden]... > > Sorry, but my suggestion was serious (it has taken us old-timers many > months > > to figure out the optimal settings for FFB in GPL)...and I have no idea > what > > your reply implies...??? > > > > Marc > > > > "GMpartsguy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:XO2V9.54340$Dn.10057@sccrnsc03... > > > I was able to hang on for 7.8 seconds. Did i win ?? :) > > > > > > > > > > > >