Automobilista 2 V1.0.5.5 & Nurburgring Pack RELEASED, now updated to V1.0.5.6

Simmo99x it would be more appropriate to be respectful in your comments.
McLaren 720 runs now on the GP track a high 1:56 with skilled people on a real quali (recently raced with someone with esports teams experience and his pole was 1:56:9). The time trial times make no sense because those times can't be achieved on normal racing as fuel, track rubber and ducts/radiators are cranked to the max. I would ignore the World Records and time trials because it's not real conditions, it's actually bull**** IMO. Plus probably the records you see on the GP layout (but also on the Veedol layout) was likely done before the latest updates where McLaren lost a good couple of seconds there. If I remember correctly last time I saw the time trial boards for the GP the first Merc was around 2s slower.
I don't race the Veedol as I don't like it so i don't comment on that cause I don't know.
McLaren is IMHO a touch slow Mercs and Porsches IMHO are way too slow at least at the GP layout.

 

Online race, first car contact with opponent and my FFB is gone.

 

Maybe this little tool,where you can watch and deinstall old or wrong not used USB devices can help with FFB problems on wheels.We had this in Raceroom with some Thrustmaster wheels to find out where the problems are with flatspots causing wheel to react strange.
USBDeview

 

Yeah I agree too it is terrible that @Simmo99x does try to use some humour here.
Is it possible to report it?

 

Look I'm not trying to cause any harmful comments, but I just tested the cars yesterday, and i can do the exact times in TT/Qualy or even the online races, in fact sometimes quicker.
I usually run default setup anyway, so the ducts/radiator/fuel are literally not changed in a race setup.
I can prob find another 1-2sec with an over the top tune/setup for a 1 lap flyer.
I've raced Esports for the last 10 years not that has anything to do with how much faster a car is in a certain class, I'm just trying to show Rieza that the Mclarens can be exploited to the point that i'ts just stupid.
How can you run a league or Esports competition when the other cars are not even in the same class.

 

Reiza!

 

Hi Reiza,
everything is really great, but I think F-Trucks need a little bit rework.
I don't know and understand what doing wrong tire temps are always exploding with an extremly hot middle temp. There is no way to avoid this. I don't think that this is by nature.
I hope you can spend some time to them in the future, thanks a lot.

 

I understand that this is not your point but I have a suspicion that even if it is not shown in the setup menus on LB then both ducts and fuel are mandatory minimized.
I have often seen setups from some more or less alien LB setups with full fuel and ducts.
And conserning my own setups then even when I manually minimize fuel and ducts there is more or less no difference in speed/laptimes compared to full fuel/ducts

ByTheWay: I talking about LB mode here

 

Hello, I'm planning to buy AMS2 but before that i wanted to know how good/bad aerodynamic physics are ?
I didn't buy AMS2 YET because now only they have added something that really interest me i.e GT cars and NORDSCHLEIFE.
Is there a Blog post where aero physics is talked about ?
What are your experiences ? Does underbody aero gives realistic results?
Moreover Is there a blog for tyre physics ? i would like to read that as well.

 

For tyre physics this is pretty old Madness engine SETA tyre model explanation page but it can give you some idea at least. Since AMS2 is based on the same engine, all that is said in this article should be covered and maybe more.

Inside Project CARS Seta Tire Model – WMD Portal

Generally speaking with Madness engine tyre physics it is not about actually physics modeling anymore but more about what parameters you put into it. You kind of develop a tyre yourself with it.

For underbody aerodynamics I think there was some pretty believable measured telemetry figures on how for instance rake affects aerodynamics in the engine on PCARS2 forums years ago. Possibly somewhere in this thread:
Pcars 2 Aerodynamic Model

 

I agree BOP is bad right now. But rather because the other two cars are a "bit" too slow...

 

Thanks for commenting. Unfortunately i already read that article about tyre. I was hoping on more info on how AMS 2 is doing things. like much more they extracted from this SETA tyre model.
Obviously i'm not asking for confidential details, if you saw blog post in assetto corsa forum , something like that.Same for aero physics, i want to know how aerodynamic is being taken care of.
What are knowledgable people in this community telling ?
I will still most probably buy AMS2. these info would have made me more confident about the purchase.
I only look for core things in any simulator
•How complex,detailed and realistic vehicle dynamics are

•how good they sounds

•Track accuracy

•graphics thats all.

Core stuff only ,other extra things i really don't care. even about A.I. i don't care.

 

I think we are not there yet and the devs haven't had time to do blogs posts about very small details. Also many cars are still subject to changing, although I think for instance GT3 cars do not need much tweaking anymore.

However, if you are short of cash, I'd wait for a year for AMS2 to mature. If not, have a plunge and see for yourself! I've been playing computer based simulators as long as they've existed, and I've learned that they all have something they do better than others, and that there is no perfect simulator yet. So I get them all!

 

Just buy it, give it a try. If you don’t like it, get a refund.

 

I'd wait, AMS2 is really still in a beta phase, the FFB feel and physics change from patch to patch.

 

I checked blog entries on ACC forum about the latest tyre model and aero changes in ACC (some function in them being now nonlinear versus linear before) and I get what you meant by more details.

And no, there is no information like that available in any one specific place.

There has been some bread crumbs lately regarding tyres for instance where the slip angles were mentioned being fully dynamic now (if I remember it correctly) but it was just one mention in one veeery long thread. From it I understood that there was some particular helper system in place for tyres that would have been removed. But again, I'm trying to extrapolate too much information out of one or two sentences. (And I have absolutely no idea whether it was always there or whether it was optional or not before.)

Anyways, considering that every patch comes with some changes to underlying tyres, being it lat. and long. slip directly, sidewall stiffness, tyre width, or aforementioned dynamic change, there would probably be too much information to spread around at this early stage of development.

But it can also be seen as strength; By jumping into AMS2 now you get a work-in-progress product, but at the same time you get a work-in-progress product. I found WMD developer forums (PCARS1, PCARS2) interesting then, and I still find AMS2 development interesting now. The experience you gain from going through iterations at fast pace also helps reading into other simulators and what they might be doing differently and why, worse or better.

 

Thanks for replying y'all. I guess i will just have to dig in and see for my self.

 

Absolutely, if you are at all interested in simulation gaming, it's fascinating to have the opportunity to observe the title evolving. If you don't buy into it until it's 'perfect' you have missed out on so much. For example, ACC is a decent sim these days, but when it was first released in early access, even at v1.0 it was terrible - only one car and track, that wasn't even nice to drive. However, by being around and seeing the progress made you get an appreciation as to what an excellent piece of work it has become.
AMS2 has much more to really enjoy even at this stage and has even greater potential. Once you've bought it you can keep popping in, if you don't like it, come back later, if you do, come on in and join the fun.

 

Just dont go into a wrong path by comparing AMS2 to ACC. How people come to a comparision both and if they do this why not comparing it to also F1-2020 is beyond me? AMS2 is a motorsports simulator while ACC is Blancpain GT series simulator. As the Kunos devs said it is much less complicated to achieve that kind of simulation than AC since you only have to deal with similar GT cars.
Within AMS2 you have lots of cars and the underlying physics engine should take care each of them seperately. It is like comparing olympics by only taking swimming into consideration. If you are only motivated to run with GT cars than AMS2 will not help much but even so you will find the feeling of your steering wheel more satisfactory imo, because while i was first playin ACC than switched into AMS2 I've felt like that and surprised what my wheel was capable of all the time.

 

Actually, i have found out that ACC physics are actually not realistic.
I would say RF2 is at top despite being little bit slidey even still the flaw i found in ACC is way to big.