Automobilista 2 Custom Force Feedback - Overview & Recommendations

Good morning.

I have watched this thread like a lot of people and although I haven't posted on a regular basis . I have tested a lot of the files and now think that 4.5 can make me move from 31.

In looking at the ffb file i don't look at graphs or delve into the file, and cant give massive flowing feedback, I don't tune or have buckets of skill, I drive by feel and above all else need to enjoy the experience

When I assess the ffb I'm looking for

1 to feel at ease
2 confident that when i turn in the car is going to point/go where in general i plan it to do so - sometimes there is a mismatch between input, sensation and result
3. experience of road feel
4. to be able to drive side by side around a corner knowing i can make it
5. when travelling in a pack that my actions are fed back quickly enough to influence my driving - see point two above
6. i feel connected to the car
7 i should be confident with a new car on a known track after a couple of laps (not necessarily fast but confident)

As a dd2 user, i have really struggled with this game, just like pc2 (which was past its life point when the DD2 came out) and haven't felt like putting the time into it, however, 45 and the recent updates are changing that, so thank you

For those interested my settings are

In game

G -32 -
LFB -0 - 10 - as this is now directly related to Gain & Damper settings i suggest you start at zero and sort your G & D settings first then use this as a fine-tune
FX -50 - fx is definitely needed as at zero there is no road feel
Damper - 32

You can then on individual cars use LFB or the on the fly overall gain button assignment

On wheel

FFB - 75
Lin - off
NDP - 20
NFR - 8
NIN - 6INT - 3
FEI - 100

I did try lower/higher wheel ffb game gain/damper lfb. With different combinations, you can pretty much get the same result so don't hunt around too much for differences in combinations.

Have fun

 

Having played around with 4.5 exp , I still ultimately think I will stick with my earlier 4.4 tune, as it just feels more accurate and detailed .
I dont get on with the springy feel and its somewhat dampening effect on rack feel with 4.5 .

and as @Stakanov has covered , there is something weird going on with it seemingly making its own ratio's . I also noticed its making the Telemetry display flicker for some reason.

Two versions of my tune posted below for those that might want to directly compare and make there own assessment of what centering works best for them.

edit :
refined files down the page

 

@Kuku Maddog
Maybe take a look at these settings and see if you can smooth the rack down a bit.
# Smooth slightly
(rack_momentum (smooth rack_momentum 0.016))

 

there is not anybody?

 

anybody what ??

 

Do you mean there are not many racing online? Or something else?

 

KUKU i just tried out your file.
1. i dont know my settings , so no worries
2. its GREAT how how this has evolved.
3. for me it almost feels real when driving over curbs etc
4. losing grip came suddenly in one corner, i guess i was too fast

 

thank you all for your hard work!

 

I see others do not like the 4.5 exp file. I for one think its great. I am racing at 2005 at Jacarepagua in the merc gt1 and I got to tell you, I may not be here daily to update - because I am not having a single issue on a TX wheel base and a solid wheel option - but its really good for me.

I can go harder and feel the physics etc better than ever before, still. All cars. The cars where this FFB is not good are just those cars where the physics seem to be lagging behind. But I have used this file with so many cars, I am talking 30+ as I have been playing and testing tracks which until the last few versions I have not wanted to race hard in several cars (owing to AI and difficulty) but now I am. Thats not saying its an easier file - I am saying its just so on-point and the steering is 'sure', so its cool.

In AMS2 on lesser wheels and all that, one has to appreciate, and this goes for me a little on a TX base compared to a dd1, in other games the grip imagine is in the center of this minimal/rudimentary mock-up and the analogy is a crop-plot or what we call dirt mounds in a field.

Old style

____OO____ (O= grip+grip fall-off and "___" is the physics on either side of you constantly working on you, yes, but also "___" represents the road, which also goes under the "00", moving like an 80's computer game on the screen, you move left and physics are felt on left pushing you back in accordance, you move right etc... and if you go too far at anyone time it 'snaps' when grip is lost, etc... "___" = road or surface) When you turn too hard or go outside the "00" you will spin out.

So imagine plants in rows, and the rows moving like a snake as the track winds its way around. The O is the grip and on either side of the O is where the physics come in, and its always bending like a snake. The above is the old style of gaming engine where it will not allow for a LOT of physics processing if you want to go wider and your older wheel will suffer because the un-realism is more pronounced the wider you get to feel the movement; so it gives you the sense of a car/road but over a shorter amount of parameters and distance to reduce the computational needs etc.

I have been saying this forever to people - and one of my first messages on here (to which someone told me to do not say that; I think he misunderstood me - I was talking about aiming for between a certain type of title, which may have been a bad analogy because he may have thought I didn't want a sim; nah its not that, a different kind of game which is finally more here)... well in those titles the grip falloff model is higher and everything is based round that. We know this because well I knew it already in many ways but the lead dev actually was talking about it the other day on the AMA. So refer to that over this for a more rounded discussion.

In AMS2 its more like

_____00000______

You can appreciate in the above that the 'more' you have of something the worse an older wheel may do in terms of feeling all the forces from the far left to the right, so the bad points may be more pronounced.

I am not saying an older wheel is not a good thing to have, rather I am saying that when it comes to the steering etc, I think the current 4.5 exp file is so good, because it adheres to the reality of the latter, and also it feel like actual rubber on a road surface.

So, for example...

x____x__00000__x___x

Where x is, is where it skips and grabs. The second model is much closer to reality... because its more real across a wider distance, just like a road would be. Yes speed may reduce the usable width of driving, but the truth is, older titles like to 'limit' physics more because of the older tyre model and the constraints of computer processing power and the equipment available back then. Its not necessarily a bad thing, but the new tyre model and physics in the madness engine seem to allow for a more expansive simulation across more of the road, without the snappy feel.

The grip fall off in older titles is more snappy I am trying to explain - and its probably why older wheels get along better with that. Cars behave more real in AMS2 in a variety of ways I do believe.

And the 4.5 exp file is a good thing. Yes we know in the SETA model it has more physical characteristics and its got more to it than other models, but I am on about how the game engine interacts with that and anything else to give a more expansive feel.

I am sorry if my description is a bit off or my words are not the same others would use, but I hope people see what I am getting at. The 4.5 exp file seems to be moving in the right direction.

__________________________

End message: what follows is a separate point in relation but not about exactly the above.

When you think about it, which I always understood - it makes a LOT of sense for.... hmmm? 4 company's to talk down this game and engine, tire model etc and pan it? I am not going to accuse anyone of anything, it is what it is, but now its here, instead of other terms, we can talk about how 'credit where its due' and all that kind of stuff over corporate shenanigans which help facilitate sales where you know in the future a significant alternative on newer tech is inbound; it will be at some point, so in the spirit of sales they do their best to alleviate the trickle of sales moving away - controlling the flow; I just look at where the info is going and leaving, where the flow is going to and leaving... and where the money is going to and leaving.... I am not calling anyone or thing out, in fact by the amount of this paragraph people may assume it has significance - NO... I am just saying it would not surprise me if devs come to comments sections on youtube to 'gently rib' the competition. And this could be fueling our misunderstanding of the limits of hardware and engines and tech etc.

We did reach a turning point after all through a combination of things, where we can now say with authority on some things "give ams2 credit where its due". So everyone in here has been of a help to that. Its went from 'nah it won't do anything', to 'it might do something one day'... to 'the game IS doing something', so hopefully the title can kick on from here.

 

hello, for high end 4.5 file can i use csw 2.5? or do i use regular file?

 

There’s is only one file

 

thanks for the reply, on page 146 there was a high end file posted for 4.5, this differs slighty from regular one. is it fine if i use either? also in general in this form is the csw 2.5 considered high end? i bought the game yesterday and i am still learning, thanks for the help

 

Yes it would be , but it’s kinda one file for all, 4.5 is the latest file ( semi experimental) and 4.4 is the previous that shares the same core values just with a different centering setup. Both can be used without issues. It’s just a matter of what you like the feel of better and the difference is only subtle.

 

I'm on 4.5. How can I reduce the rotational "shaking or rocking" (not vibrating) on straights like Bathurst's where it is quite prominent and some other tracks I can't remember right now. The only thing I like more about the default ffb is this one aspect. Hopefully there is a line/setting in the ffb file that can reduce this.

 

If its a rather light car, you can reduce the weight affecting the "bumpiness" , (bump_feel_follow_weight 0.30)

 

does any t300 user think that 4.5 is better?

 

i have reduced this to .10 and it is still quite bumpy, i use 40fx, and 65 gain. also is there a way i can increase slip feel, i cannot really feel it with all the bumps.

 

for more obvious or earlier slip feel, you can change the line (long_factor 1.0)
I run 1.1 or 1.2 for example
bumps tuning - you can turn down either micro_bumps_scale or large_track_bump_scale or both

 

I have slightly refined my tuning, and made both 4.4 and 4.5 for those that want to compare.
Refinements are mostly minor .
biggest change is a reduction in torque pulling for front wheel drives., I have done loads of laps in Mini's etc today and find it too intrusive and effecting exit line at default.

 

is this ffb file more bumpy than default in genreal? i cannot get the smoothness of a modern f1 car down to the level of default. i have lowered the bump setting to 0.1. i am fine with it, i just want to make sure i am not messing up something with the tuning i have done.