Automobilista 2 V1.5 Officially RELEASED - Now updated to V1.5.0.5

Without a video its a bit pointless to comment, because just a description leaves a lot of nuances out.

A car can do what you describe, in certain circunstances. So we need to see.

 

FWD race cars couldn't be farther away from FWD road cars in feel and behaviour. Naturally, since FWD road cars are completely useless for racing on a track. FWD race cars are set-up so the rear will "follow" the front around corners to prevent understeer. A novice can spin them inadvertently with ease. An expert can utilize that "twisted" set-up to corner faster and reduce tire heat and wear on the fronts. But one wrong move....

 

No, I did not say that an F1 car should stick to the road no matter the steering lock and speed (do you see that anywhere in what I wrote?). I said that a sharp application of steering lock in a fast corner will NOT result in the car understeering off the outside of the track the way our non-aero road cars might if we did the same thing.

 

This.

 

I just find it fascinating that the only explanation for disagreeing on physics/handling/realism in AMS2 people come up with is dishonesty with the implicit subtle subtext of being a fanboy who defends at all cost. Trying to understand an argument and maybe revisit your own thinking doesn't even seem to be an option. Being wrong? Impossible!

And btw, disagreeing and defending are not necessarily the same thing.

 

Maybe you could show the line where he said that, I can't find it. Pouhon is a slight lift in real F1 cars and it should be no issue for a 90's IndyCar. Blanchimont is flat out, even in heavy GT3s so I'm not sure why an open wheeler that weighs less, has wider tyres and much more aero should understeer.

 

Waiting for a annoucement because of my reiza addiction...

 

Well, I still have so much content to assess since 1.5 changes that I’m not anxious about it. What I can tell is at least for me the tire behaviour on cars seems more predictable to me, making easier to manage them on races. Let’s say I push more and overdrive a bit the car, I can see that tires start degrading in a predictable way ( at least in cars I tested (Ginetta gt4, stock cars 2019 and 2023 and F3.) I still didn’t have time to check old cars and F1 and Cart, but for me everything is predictable and due to this I’m feeling I’m much more consistent on long run lap times delta being much shorter than before. Also, I’m having a lot of fun trying different lines on wet conditions, it’s much more rewarding to drive in changeable conditions now than before, and the risk / reward approach on wet made me put the car on the wall sometimes due to kerb with less grip or due to acceleration on rubbered lines. Still needs fine tuning of course, but it’s really great already.

 

Let me remind you of what was said. I said:

You reply:

I don't want to be pedantic here, but simple logic dictates that you claim that a car with a massive amount of massively efficient downforce will not understeer off the edge of the track in a high speed corner if you crank the steering lock in.

What I am saying is simply this: yes, they do.

The current behaviour in AMS2 strikes me as very odd and should be looked at. This behaviour does not exist in AC, iRacing, RR, rF2 or real life, but it does exist in AMS2. Either all of those sims are wrong, or AMS2 is wrong.

On a general note: why is it every time people bring constructive feedback to the sim that we get the mobilization of some sort of evangelistic army to defend the holy pride and glory of AMS2? I bring this up for the betterment of the game, to improve the physics so that everybody can enjoy better physics. I wouldn't mind a constructive discussion about tyre physics, slip angles and whatnot or even the definition of 'cranking in the steering angle', but having my post ridiculed because 'teams spend millions of dollars' is not the way forward in this discussion.

 

See above.

Note my using the words "throw the wheels into the corner", as in (and perhaps this is where the confusion stems from), you throw maximum steering lock into the corner. Even an F1 car with its high downforce will either:
- Grip fast enough on the front tyres and spin you around due to oversteer
- Don't grip fast enough on the front tyres and go straight ahead due to the high slip angle and resulting understeer.

What AMS2 is currently doing is gripping briefly and then landing in a very unnatural 4 wheel slide that makes no sense to me. That is all I'm saying.

 

First of all, this is a discussion forum and I'm not part of a cult. If you start with that kind of polemic you're taking away any basis for an exchange of ideas.

Understand, you want to force the car into an extreme situation. I'm pretty sure all of the other games you mentioned have their flaws when it comes to physics beyond the limit. Renato has said repeatedly that AMS2 is on the more forgiving side of the spectrum once you're past the limit.

Why would you want to throw the car full throttle into Pouhon? Nobody in their right mind would do that in a race. Have you tried to make the corner just as they do IRL, downshift and lift slightly? AMS2 is pretty damn close to the real thing, especially when it comes to single seater physics if you just race.

if you want to see cars get sent to the next solar system just ram a car at full speed in iRacing. Is that realistic? No it isn't. Does it even matter? I don't think so. How are game devs supposed to code every single aspect of RL physics into a game to 100 % match reality to get the same result when you throw your car into Pouhon, Blanchimont or the Corkscrew?

 

As for better reading I have altered the chronological order of your post, just an FYI.

My reasoning is simple. As per the original post I was "messing around" as one does when bored. I was wondering which forces the FFB would communicate when applying an overly enthusiastic slip angle and then I noticed the unusual handling of the car. Tried it lap after lap to see if it was a fluke, but alas: it is reproducible. As for your proposal: I know how to drive a car, I have driven well over a thousand laps at Spa in anger in the years, and I mean the real thing, not in a sim.

Your whataboutism aside, the rapid application of high slip angles can be used to quickly heat up the front tires at the cost of high wear. It's used (irl) in wet conditions to heat up the front tires quickly, even in F1, although normally not at high speed for safety reasons. A way more common situation is where a person new to racing cars who doesn't quite understand the concept of slip angle and understeer gets into the car, gets to a corner with too much speed, turns in, notices the car doesn't turn in as far as he/she would like and they instinctively turn in more thinking that that would turn the car more. This thought pattern makes sense, but once you get past the optimal slip angle, any further rotation of the steering wheel actually induces understeer rather than decreasing it. The only way to combat understeer (when steering at the optimal slip angle) is to reduce your speed, but these people have no way of knowing that .

Given this situation, I don't think we can call the excessive application of steering angle (=slip angle) an extreme situation. Is it the wrong way to drive a car? Sure. Should the physics hold up in this situation? In my opinion? Yes. It is in the extremities of a physics model where you can find it's inaccuracies, similar to finding out the weak point of a mechanical model by applying stress to it. If a car handles unnaturally under certain circumstances, that simply means that some model or another, be it suspension, aero, tires or chassis or a combination of them is producing inaccurate results. What's important in this situation is that you can reproduce the findings and analyse which of the models are producing the inaccuracies and improve them to improve the overall experience of the sim.

Let me say it again: I bring this up for the betterment of AMS2.

Is this a serious question?

 

Oh now I understood what you're trying to say, and indeed that's weird, using excessive steering lock in high speed shouldn't make the car behave like that.

Might try to record some clips to test that today

 

Excuse me sir, it was you who brought up other games as your reference point, not me. Where's the whataboutism if I question the accuracy of your reference?

I don't know why you mention high slip angles to warm up your tyres. Were you perhaps warming up your tyres? I tried this a few times, it works perfectly fine.
Yes, it was a serious question. If you expect realistic physics in all possible situations beyond the limit of what a car is capable of, then you're asking just that. 100 % real life physics.

Imo, all flaws and imperfections aside, as long as physics and handling are natural and believable enough while racing, it doesn't really matter that much what happens if I throw the car under a freight train. (a little hyperbole)

 

I just tested the Gen 2 and it does indeed , just get into a four wheel plough in this extreme scenario.

 

No, they won't. Even if you had a death wish, which is apparently the ridiculous scenario we are clogging up the forum arguing here, and continue to apply full throttle while you are cranking in the steering lock, the car would more likely spin around as you yourself point out above. Spinning around is not the same as understeering off a corner (the way most road cars would if purposely accelerated at too high a speed through a corner). The original point was about understeering.

Look up some videos of current generation F1 cars falling off the track onto paved catchment areas. You'll see many variations, one of which is a four-wheel slide. The only time I have ever seen an F1 car career off the edge of the track at a corner is when it has suffered brake failure.

Regardless, I won't waste further time replying to this topic.

 

As if people haven't been critical about issues. What makes people talk past each other is that polemical and toxic nonsense that no discussion needs.

 

don't worry chaps I also had to google what "polemic" meant

 

I honestly didn't even fully understand the scenario he was describing. I don't think that anyone here is defending AMS2 blindly and completely irrationally, and yet people get accused of being untruthful because they disagree.