Physics discussion thread

There's enough alignment in this thread from multiple people to suggest that there is most likely something to be investigated here.

For those who do experience this feeling, would you be willing to share your full settings?

So that would be screen shots or video of:
- Your camera and view settings, including head movement etc.
- Your FFB settings, whether using custom files etc. plus information that relates to your equipment being used, and whether or not you get the same using Default/+
- Details of the car being used
- The car setup
- The session settings used
- A detailed description of your particular experience, the things you're seeing and feeling. This bit is where a video is priceless.

Essentially, all the information so that a 3rd party can jump in the game and setup as close to an exact duplicate as possible to try and replicate the feeling of what is being described.

If we can replicate it then we can isolate it, and if we can isolate it, we can understand it and advise/help more people enjoy this amazing game.

All the best
Andy

 

FOV is 100% depending on your rig setup anyway, not sure how you want to judge if it is a "ridiculous" or "realistic" setting when the monitor size/setup and distance to the monitor is unknown, these settings might be either and it is impossible to tell from looking at a video.

 

I don't drive with my nose pressed against the wind screen and the steering wheel inside my abdomen. It's not surprising that the car appears to swing too wildly in corners when using such a view. It's only a video--many ways to edit or distort it. But if the original view of the person sitting in their rig is the same as in that video, it is not suitable for any physics-related commentary.

 

You have absolutely no clue about the setup the person recording these videos is using. Maybe they drive on a 20" monitor or a 60" TV screen, maybe they sit 40cm away and maybe they sit 90cm away or anything in between. All of it influences the correct settings of the FOV and you simply can not tell from watching the video if the setting is realistic or ridiculous.

 

No, if your chin is on top of the steering wheel rim, or pressed up against the wind screen, your view settings are not correct and the turn pivot point will be out of whack. An unrealistic turn pivot point is the easiest way to distort your perceptions in a sim. We know how far in front of us the steering wheel should be, and it is probably the only consistent element across most vehicles, and how much of the wheel we see through our peripheral (upper and lower) vision (since we have a physical one in front of us)...try setting the view so it matches reality instead of an FOV formula and you might be surprised how well you can control vehicles in a sim. Your brain responds to what it sees on the screen, including memory of sitting in and driving real vehicles. Adjust accordingly....unless you have a super-elaborate surround cockpit that can actually simulate your entire range of peripheral vision and place all the controls close enough to the screen that formal FOV calculations will equal reality. Very rare that any of us have that sort of configuration.

Like lowering centre of gravity, immense amounts of time and money are spent to put the driver as close to the turn pivot point as possible--because that's where natural control of the vehicle by a human is optimized (See McLaren F1 history of the central seat position as an example). Drive a Caterham or old Corvette where you are almost sitting on top of the rear axle and realize how different that feels to a mid-engined single-seater versus a bus where you are sitting in front of the front axle. The video of AMS 2 above we are referring to reminded me of one of those buses. It would be impossible for me to play the game like that--regardless of screen size, screen proportions, triples, curved, flat, etc. It's just wrong to the point that you cannot expect brains to process it as realistic.

 

I think that most of us would at least agree, that in terms of the GT3s , that there’s a clear difference in the way TC is implemented in Ams2 vs many other sims .

I believe this contributes a lot to this whole debate.
It’s a semi generic approach that doesn’t allow for the same levels of control in settings as others might .
The way it works at default settings is very much the same as one of my daily drivers , I would say it behaves exactly the same as irl …. But this is a road car of course.
it allows a certain amount of wheel spin on the unloaded rear wheel, before limiting the power to the whole rear axle .
This does lead to an initial spike of extra rotation . And it’s interesting that choosing to go lower or even higher on TC can balance this imbalance in wheel speeds , by either allowing the loaded side to spin a bit too, or limiting the unloaded side enough at higher levels to not generate that period of one wheel spin.

At lower settings you generally get less rotation on exit as a long as your controlled on the throttle to not induce wheel spin .

How other sims do it and how it is irl is a question that not many can answer and the ones best placed to say as the set up of the systems is done by the engineers and will vary across different teams , And these irl/sim crossover drivers tend to not go into much detail about it .

I’m not that convinced by the way Lmu does it , with both TC and ABS being quite convoluted and having an over dramatic effect on the handling of the car , changing the ability of a car to turn a lot or not at all just by a change in ABS and TC seems a bit exaggerated as it affects this even if in a coast state where neither system is involved.

So in summary I believe that there’s scope for improvement or deeper levels of adjustment in how the electronic aids work in Ams2 which could drastically change the perception.
But currently it works in a predictable way, and throttle control even with higher TC greatly reduces over rotation.
Other claims of sliding especially on corner entry and instability mid corner Is simply drivers braking too late and then coming off the throttle at the wrong time , significant shifts in weight in quite heavy cars imo.

 

Hence why I said first tests of these things always need to occur with no aids and especially TC=0. That way we can possibly get to a point to conclude that it is the design of the TC in the game causing some or all of the issue for people.

 

You are confusing FOV with seat position apparently, because FOV does exactly what you say you want and it has to be adjusted to your setup to deliver that, but according to your logic there is exactly one correct FOV setting for everyone regardless of his setup.
Because FOV does not affect whether "your chin is placed on top of the steering wheel rim"(that is what seat position does), it takes into account what your screen shows with how you are actually sitting in front of it to provide the most natural way to display possible.

 

I used both terms in the original message. You can destroy any sense of realism with either or both settings. That's the only point I am making.

 

Here's something interesting:

I came across this topic through a simple question: Why does the TC in the GT3 class seem to have such a reduced effect, even when set to the maximum possible?

It's something that has always caught my attention in AMS2, regardless of any other feature. And, at least for me, it's 100% what gives me the feeling that the car is disconnected from the surface: excessive oversteering.

I've always thought that the TC in this game, and how it's implemented, is what fundamentally sets it apart from others.

Reading and understanding a little more about how things work in the setup, however, I understood that the biggest problem isn't so much the TC, but how the cars' differential settings have a significant impact on its performance.

In a car like the BMW GT3 with the default setup, I can rotate (and even easily spin) by being a just a little more aggressive on the throttle in third gear, even with the TC at maximum.

Now, if I adjust a few things in the differential, like preload and clutch ratio, I get a car that has a certain rotation on curves, but a much more effective TC. In fact, with these aforementioned setup tweaks and the elimination of excessive oversteer, I've come to consider the AMS 2 GT3s very, very good.

 

In my opinion, Reiza would have been better off continuing to develop AMS1, with its perfect FFB and physics, which eliminate any issues with drifting and other problems mentioned. Update the graphics and improve or implement online capabilities, perhaps make some UI adjustments, and you have a perfect sim. Essentially, RF2 has also been developed into LMU, where many praise the FFB, physics, and graphics.

 

You can make these adjustments, and they will do what you want them too, but you will also be 2-3 tenths slower out of the corner and down the following straight.
There is always a trade off to making a car easier, there’s also the benefit of making less errors to mitigate those losses. So it comes down to individuals either adjusting to the car, or adjusting the car to themselves.

 

There is definitely argument that "floatyness" of cars is very subjective. So here is my subjective opinion.

AMS2 front feels too strong compared to other sims. And with that I mean, I very rarely make a mistake of applying throttle too early out of corner, you can always steer out of corner. For me it makes the feeling that rear is always in slip angle as it tries to keep up with front. Have to say that with every update since 1.6 the feeling has improved for the best, by having more grip in rear, and the angle at which you exit feels tighter. But MY(I point out MY because its personal opinion) issue with front grip still stands.

The way I would describe how it would feel good for me is like this. Currently I absolutely love how under heavy breaking it feels my rear "unloads weight from rear tires", front gets loaded , I can feel weight transferring, car squirming depending how hard you hit the break, its great. It does give floaty rear in corner entry(trailbraking), that I think is realistic and give depth to driving. But after I start applying throttle, I don't feel weight transferring back to rear and unloading front tires, which would give more understeery feeling. Addition to that it should lead to more rear grip and traction as rear tires get more weight on them. The current feeling is that weight transfer stops somewhere in middle and front tires never unload when on throttle, witch gives this feeling of very strong front grip in this game.

Currently adjusting setups is all about giving enough rear grip and its very very rare that I would need to adjust to give me stronger front. If AMS2 would have slightly more limited front grip by unloading it on corner exit, IMO would lead to more interesting setup changes which would lead to find compromises in front to rear grip balance, which would lead to more depth in driving, particularly corner exits.

Does this have to be ACC levels of understeer? Absolutely not. I think ACC is pretty much polar opposite of AMS2, where in ACC absolutely everything(driving and setups) is dictated by overcoming understeer. Just slight improvement in unloading front tires so it makes it crucial to be on throttle at the right time.

 

Sorry, you misunderstood - the cars felt floaty in AC, not AMS2.

 

I'm gonna steal that post and post it to the beta physics discussion thread; it's absolutely bang on the money.

 

Anyway, you know my stance on Ams2 and GT3. But I don't think it'll do any good. It will stay the way it is. And it will continue, with many people complaining about it, others not. Personally, I don't try to race GT3, so that's it for me.

 

I think you described this very well. Even with major setup tweaks, it's hard to get the car to unlead a lot of the front load when you get on throttle and it doesn't happen that fast (though this I think you can impact with setup changes more, the fronts just keep having enough grip on slow to medium speed corners, but you also get grip faster to the rear).

I'm going to add couple of past comments from Renato related to this subject (added when 1.6 was released)



(read the whole thing, that's just small part: Automobilista 2 V1.6, IMSA Track Pack, Endurance Pt2 & Lamborghini DLCs RELEASED (V1.6.3.6 Live Now) + read the following comment from Dicra too)

and this:

(Automobilista 2 V1.6, IMSA Track Pack, Endurance Pt2 & Lamborghini DLCs RELEASED (V1.6.3.6 Live Now))


So there is plenty of things for me to agree with Renato as well with the critique. Nobody has this perfect and there is always some room for improvement .

As a overal package, I find current AMS2 is most enjoyable to drive overal, I even like driving the GT stuff over the other sims I have played, even with some apparent flaws (I take rather have less front limitation thant more, it's just boring and tedious to me to drive chronically understeery car). I also think it's improved since that 1.6 release (but honestly I don't find the changes to these cars that dramatic since that).