To Reiza: What physics do you actually want?

I'm not sure, part of it is in the game anyway like weight distribution, Max Power/Torque, Weight, etc., but yeah, that's possible of course.

 

Honestly when I try to do something about TT I normally land in the top 10, but still I don't hide my setups.
Anyway I agree that this should not become a d..k measuring contest and should rather be a bit more philosophical.
BY THE WAY: it would be interesting if a few bolts were tightened in the track limits on some tracks. The thing that really put me off TTs is that in many cases it is much more a game of finding where you can cut the track and how you can drift the car more than actually car driving craftmanship and that is what really left me a bit disgusted with TTs (e.g Spielberg experience was pretty awful).

 

A year ago I would have agreed with the opening post, but the last updates showed that Reiza has a direction. The physics are now very good. You should have driven the group C cars when they came out. They were awful, but now they are great eventhogh too grippy sometimes. Also what AMS2 does very well ist simulating how a car changes over the distance of the race. A race car should not feel the same all the time.
I don't understand People who say that PC2 in its final state is better than the curent AMS2: PC2 was abandoned by the developers in a beta stage and was kept alive by DLCs. Reiza is working constantly on this game. I had my times when I had to say that AMS2 isn't really good but right now its up there with RF2 and AC.

 

There are no NDAs involved for such cars, because devs dont get any data from mfrs actually. Even SMS, with all its money, had the physics dev basically scouring the Paul Frere Porsche book that i have looking for information for their old porsches.

 

Well i stick to my opinion for now, the group C cars in PCars2, with the special tire that they have as option in the setup menu are better than the Reiza ones, for now at least.

 

Agree. Whenever I raced AMS 2 in the past I cross checked it with PC2 afterwards and it was on par sometimes at most. The classic n vintage content always feels like hovercraft sliding over surface.
And who ever got AMS2 and PC2 installed can try and compare and taste both.

 

Well my first thought was you found an exploit and tried to hide it with this little known way of hiding your ghost.

BTW, i've been faster than you each time i've tried so you cant say this about me.

When someone reverts to the "conspiracy theorist" or "tin foil hat wearer" name calling only solidifies my first thought, they have something to hide...In your case you say its setups but it really leaves me wondering, if im faster without hiding anything in the setups or doing anything outlandish why are you so secretive about some magical fast setup?

 

Really?

 

Oh the things you read in some of these threads! Some folk should stop drinking before posting on this forum OMG!

 

Done the same more than once and never found PC2 to be better honestly. Far more sketchy, if nothing else just because there is no working LSD in PC2 as we all know by now

 

Yeah but if you run your Group C car with snow tyres and a geared LSD, it feels totally great /s.

 

Tell me, in what do your snipes contribute to the conversation?...

 

I would like to see Renato's grin in the face when reading this thread.
Keep it coming.

 

Humor in a completly too serious and rediculous thread.

 

Bit more suspension ffb feel
We need a few sliders in the ffb to make basic alterations to suit imo

 

By illustrating the absurdity of judging sim cars by whether they feel good to the average sim racer, never mind if said sim cars have anything to do with the real cars they're supposed to represent.

That PCars2 even bothers implementing multiple tyre compounds for historic cars is absurd when they rarely got even one of the compounds right. Consumer sims still work with limited technology and it's hard enough to get one car working properly on one specific tyre, let alone a bunch of different compounds. So instead SMS just threw in a bunch of different tyres and diff models (all flawed in their own way) and let the players mix and match them to maybe find something that "feels good".

 

Congrats Kuku - I give up.
Pretty respectable laptime.
I dont know how you are doing it - I cant go any faster
You must be using a secret exploit nobody knows about

 

And your point being...?

Its funny that you say that, yet, i didnt just say they "feel" right. They perform right. They look right. Hell even the laptimes are right.

Also, i havent seen the real telemetry of a porsche 962C to compare. Oh hold on a minute, maybe because there isn't one, right?... Oh wait, maybe you or reiza do have the data for the tires they use back in the day.... not that to? Oh...well surely we can compare laptimes at least right? Wait a minute, the corvette GTP is a full TEN SECONDS FASTER in AMS2 than its period rivals, nevermind the actual real car... oh..

Now i see the joke, its indeed a riot

 

Also, you want to talk about differentials? Well i dont know what diff is the BT52 using in game (seems to be a clutched LSD), but in real life, it used a cam and pawl, as well as all the F1s that are actually older than that car.

The cam and pawl had some degree of power torque transfer effect, never full, that got progressively less strong with use, and NO transfer/locking whatsoever on coast, and NO preload whatsoever.

So i guess reiza got that wrong in anything older than 1983

 

Hi Looked at this site(Ferrari 312T5 - F1technical.net - Ferrari 126C2 - F1technical.net) and found that there are F1 cars before 1983 that used lsd (if this site is to be trusted). Just wanted to let you know I'm not an expert on cars so take it or leave it.