Automobilista 2 Custom Force Feedback - Overview & Recommendations

Fantastic feeling on my t818 using recommended settings. Have more confidence in the cars than ever before. Any t818 users out there, this is the one. Fwd cars are especially more enjoyable. Makes me wish Btcc was here instead of rf2

 

Thanks for the feedback, on medium and even powerful DDs (I am a Fanatec DD1 user) it feels great, the particular thing is that the inclusion of the rear wheels in the code not only balances the whole car and gives you the relative rear sensations, but also enhances strangely the front, the file among other things has all the active and non-castrated characteristics, it has the wheels resistances on both the initial and subsequent, it has the yaw, it has the lateral and longitudinal forces, it has a high front_drive_torque and it has the whole rear active, it has an uncastrated slip, in short it has all the characteristics active and not disabled or reduced, all with NO RELAX, and finally, all the effects are not lowered but rather pronounced (all elements that would normally cause problems in DD), but the result is instead coherent and informative as never before.
The car is alive and seems to change physics from one car model to another or rather interprets the basic physics well.
I specify this because in the second version of these Stakanov files we have even more basic nuances (relating to yaw, scrub and damping) and in the third version, if everything goes as well as it seems, the optimizations for each individual car will be implemented, each car will be how Reiza wants it.

 

Sorry for the late reply.
Base settings...
force 11nm
FFB filter, AUTO to try and emulate that feature in some DD wheels @Danielkart was talking about. Don't know if its the same or even remotely the same.
Damper i leave off
Angle 900

In game i use the recommended settings in the file. Some cars i have to turn gain up or use the per car setting.

 

Oh wow, i don't know much about this stuff but even just this alone... "- New "tyre_resistance & timing" now calculated on 5 moments and not on 3 (the functioning and the formula was misinterpreted in the previous files because it was unclear);"... should make a big difference if it is what i think it is.

Thanks and welcome back

 

I just tried it for the first time in the F-U G2 around Kansai GP. It gives me a lot of info ,but the steering is very hard and the kerbs give barely any feedback since it's peaking. I followed your recommended settings for a CSL DD, but they feel quite off. How do you think I can prevent these issues from happening?.

 

You are right, the anomaly is also detected here on the low range ... the force and the kerb needs to be recalibrated, you could continue to change cars and circuits to see if you continue to experience harshness or anomalies on the curb ... thanks regardless!!!

EDIT:
@Racinglegend1234 and for All
For the steering very hard reduce this 2 value ... from 1.000 to 0.750 or if necessary 0.500

or reduce only the first if at start (velocity 0) is ok

(velocity_res_scale 0.750) #How much velocity affects resistance. Works in combination with velocity_res_offset.
(velocity_res_offset 0.750) #How much resistance at velocity 0. Works in combination with velocity_res_scale.

We need to know if the problem on the kerb is only found in Kansai or if it is generalized... here with both velocities at 0.750 the steering no longer has a dive power and the curbs feel low but are noticeable.... but in other track and with other cars are or seem fine...let me know

 

This is the Modification that interests me most, as it’s applicable to ordinary base rFuktor .
I’m currently playing around with it implemented into my tune in Beta build.
I can see some positive results but need to massage a little over time .

 

Just did my first laps at Goiania Mixed (Merc 190E DTM) and it feels very good to me, specially the feeling at the rears and car balance. Wasted some time to setup slides 60-0-12-60 (from memory) and TM-TX CP (100 gain-100 constant-100 periodic-0 spring-0 damper).
Kerbs response is very good, except a no response going (on purpose) over kerbs in medium to fast corners to the right. Passing over kerbs at this specific condition gives a no response at all but a hard clipping signal followed to a normal responde when returning (over kerb) to the track. Could this indicate a clip detect prevention?
Hope this could help in any way.

[Edit] Very good FFB response for Fjunior @ Sudscleife

 

Hi @Kuku, without haste and if it is not disturbing when your tests will end on your file, could you communicate your 5 resistance and timing with which you will feel good? Thanks in advance...

I forgot, on the original base of Karsten I recommend you deepen the "Load_Norm_wheel" variable, the transition from static value 250 to the dynamic one based on the FL, FR_RL_RR_LOAD produces a positive turning point and a boost not a little in the sensations ... not necessarily you have to look at the modified one that we apply for now in the ATMOS who is temporary, take a look at the original Old_Raw files and Immersive files of Reiza

Hey @newtonpg thanks .... very useful feedback, this area of code of the Karsten file dedicated to the curbs has always been a little esoteric, the curbs code mixes with the micro bumps Code and both then with the smoth for the curb and the bump ... are two blends and sometimes it takes little to blow up a single aspect ... from the setting of these variables, however, the feedback of the sensation of the road changes and its noise does not change only what the variables indicate. Also I complicated my life with 4 variables

Your explanation has been very useful, the fact that it warns this lack over kerbs in medium to fast corners and only on the right side, suspicious of me and makes me think of an error in the code ... I will recharge and deepen ... thanks again!!!

 

@Stakanov
Medium to fast right corners are characteristics of Goiania. I can'T say nothing about turning left.
And sorry as I could've write curbs, not kerbs.

 

@newtonpg but what excuses , of course you could have written curbs instead of kerbs, but the problem is still me as I suck at the English language and I use Google Translator ... sometimes on other occasions it made me risk my life because it translated the meaning of what the'interlocutor told me, we argued, but the funny thing is that I also remained convinced that I was right . . . thank you again.

 

@Stakanov, maybe the problem on curb are presente becouse in details are missing this lines of code...

(fl_details (spring fl_details_pos 80000 0.1))
(fr_details (spring rl_details_pos 80000 0.1))
(rl_details (spring rl_details_pos 80000 0.1))
(rr_details (spring rr_details_pos 80000 0.1))

also, perhaps it is better to lower the spring to a lower value from 80000 to 50000, evaluate it yourself!!!

 

Thank you, maybe you're right, evidently during the cleaning and publication of the files I missed these 4 lines ...

EDIT:
The corrcts missing lines are this, you are right!!!!

Spoiler: Missing lines

(fl_details_pos fl_details_pos)
(fr_details_pos fr_details_pos)
(rl_details_pos rl_details_pos)
(rr_details_pos rr_details_pos)
(fl_details_pos (+ fl_details_pos (* (- fl_details fl_details_pos) (power 0.001 dt))))
(fr_details_pos (+ fr_details_pos (* (- fr_details fr_details_pos) (power 0.001 dt))))
(rl_details_pos (+ rl_details_pos (* (- rl_details rl_details_pos) (power 0.001 dt))))
(rr_details_pos (+ rr_details_pos (* (- rr_details rr_details_pos) (power 0.001 dt))))
(fl_details_pos (max fl_details_pos fl_details))
(fr_details_pos (max fr_details_pos fr_details))
(rl_details_pos (max rl_details_pos rl_details))
(rr_details_pos (max rr_details_pos rr_details))
(fl_details (spring fl_details_pos 80000 0.1))
(fr_details (spring rl_details_pos 80000 0.1))
(rl_details (spring rl_details_pos 80000 0.1))
(rr_details (spring rr_details_pos 80000 0.1))

I'll do the tests tonight to evaluate the amount of spring to apply and replace the first file published here ...

thanks for the info

 

If I want to try this, where in your file should I put them?

 

Here if i not mistake start line is 1040 .... but insert whithout the symbol #

 

This helped fix the hard steering in the center of the wheel. Thanks

 

Hello again. I added the details code and it help quite a bit, but the steering is still very stiff when I choose 0.5 instead of 1.0. I tried the F-U G2 and Cadillac LMDh in the beta around Kansai and Adelaide and what I noticed was stiff steering and a lot of clipping when going over kerbs through S1 at Kansai. I also got this graph which I think seems wrong since it seems to not have everything even

Edit: the F-USA 2023 around Adelaide feels quite nice

 

Yes some cars are very light on the FFB while others really make you work. Perhaps the "weight section" needs to be recalculated?

F-jr is very light on the FFB while F-high tech feels a little stiff but pretty good

 

I would think so. Maybe the multiplier needs to be lower for heavier cars since I tried the V8 Supercar and it was very hard

 

I'm very curious what you will be able to do with this file. Can't wait to find out. Let me know if you need a tester.

I really liked what you did with turning the damper slider into suspension scale