- 10,940
- Canada
delete
Last edited:
1.04 update - Physics changes - Your impressions?
- Thread starter SillyBillyP
- 389 comments
- 40,028 views
- 12,018
- Indianapolis
- BrandonW77
In 'Murica a blonde is a woman with yellow hair and a blond is a man with yellow hair. Most 'Muricans don't know this though, I believe it's our only gender specific word.
In my limited experience so far 0 abs is much better in 1.04, even the racing brakes can be manageable if you turn the bias down. 👍
This mini update is a joke. I'm breaking loose in a 300hp car going straight on sport softs. I haven't complained much but this constant changing is frustrating. You can't even tune cars because the physics changes every few days. And it seems like they didn't even test this latest one in house. I'm not sure what they are trying to correct but I thought the physics were fine not too long ago. I didn't ever think gt could lose me as a fan but I'm getting pretty close
- 1,689
- NY
- SavageEvil
You need to give specifics, like course, car, suspension settings and track surface condition(wet/dry), tire condition if you just drove back onto the tarmac after a dirt trip. It's not impossible to break traction whilst accelerating and it can happen if you are on a bumpy course and your car is light with stiff suspension settings.
I'm not 100% certain but I do believe putting Racing tires on street cars is a terrible idea because in reality you'd have to drive around considerably to warm the tires up since a street car does not produce down force of a true race car, so you're basically riding on cold tires for a longer time than a race car would. This would only hold true if PD simulated tire dynamics with relation to aero, I mean this should explain why road cars don't get magical grip like they used to in GT5 when you slapped on Race Tires. Stick to street tires unless your car has near 100 set number for rear df and around 70-80 front df, else you'll spend a great deal more time trying to heat up your tires. Just my two cents on the race tire on street car issue.
- 1,210
- Sydney
Yea most people tend to say tyres in gt6 have too much grip so they recommend to run even very highly tuned in real life cars on comfort softs.
I tend to find even with sports soft I am loosing traction all over the place on cars set up for grip driving. For example on my 370z, which is a pretty grippy car in real life when tuned, the equivalent in gt6 with comfort softs is like driving on ice. Sports soft is barely manageable.
nasanu
(Banned)
- 1,429
- Australia
- nasanu
- nasanu
You also have the simple fact that street cars have suspension and drivetrain tuning for street tyres. Racing tyres will not slip where road tyres will and this means that right from the start the LSD settings will be wrong. And the more you increase grip the less the cars physical characteristics are the determining factor in that grip which means suspension setup will require changes also.
And the thing is I don't think much real world data at all as to what happens when you stick racing softs on a typical road car, I am not sure it has ever been done.
- 2,095
- Burke, Fairfax,
- GTP_STRIKER
- Xbox SUCKS
I looked over almost ever post on this thread, I have one question for all of you.
Who has bothered to look of the specification on the cars to see if they are true to spec, mainly in the weight disruption category?
I enjoy that I'm able to go full brake without lockup at speed with no abs until at low speed now, wet or dry. The area that needs attention is the weight disruption for all the cars. Yes I typed ALL the cars.
Who has bothered to look of the specification on the cars to see if they are true to spec, mainly in the weight disruption category?
I enjoy that I'm able to go full brake without lockup at speed with no abs until at low speed now, wet or dry. The area that needs attention is the weight disruption for all the cars. Yes I typed ALL the cars.
In rally sprints I race in it has been done a lot of times. If the car really is 'showroom stock' and runs proper racing/rally slicks:
1. the suspension simply stops working, some cars tend to tip over,
2. stock brakes become useless,
3. drivers and co-drivers fly off their seats in turns (I think racing seat and harness is the first thing to bolt into a car you plan on hooning in, but others have other ideas),
4. suspension/chassis twisting leads to accidents (load up a multilink hard enough and you start getting all kinds of funky dynamic geometry values, and don't even get me started on a MacPherson strut),
5. prolonged driving on said tires destroys the car (think cracking windshields, permanent loss of suspension geometry, broken gearboxes, diffs and driveshafts in million pieces, etc.).
Most people go for sports tires like Toyo R1R. It seems like slicks really work only on caged cars with braced racing suspensions.
- 1,211
- Earth
- TheLordSnowden
- LordSnowden
The more I read and the more I test, I just can't determine any comprehensive facts... At one point I thought I had it worked out, then I try a different car and the logic falls apart.
It's quite possible each car is truly unique in significant ways, despite how unlikely, or impractical that is in a game.
The real issue is if you follow the career events you're basically switching cars every few minutes, never really spending enough time to develop a bond or appreciation for any given car. And nothing really encourages or promotes developing that relationship unless you bought GT for the 'ultimate lapping simulator' but even that falls apart as arcade is the only place that records your time and you can't enable certain features...
I tend to bring everything back to career structure as that's the intended driver of motivation in nearly every game, but now, with nearly all arguments being based on a car in a given situation, countered by different cars just isn't adding up...
My test (after that long caveat):
Track: Daytona road course, mid day.
Cars: SLS AMG & R8 LMS
Brakes: On both cars 0-0 brake balance felt the most realistic. Why? Because you are at max threshold braking and your butt puckers as you hope the car decelerates in time for turn in, and if you're slightly early on turn in there is an even digressive transition from horizontal to lateral grip and you feel the car destabilizing but not 'braking' out of control. No real car suddenly flys out of control unless there is a mechanical.
Anything higher than 0-0 it's too easy to lock up at unrealistic speeds and you compensate with pressure creating the same effect as 0-0 but without the 'butt pucker' factor thinking you might have a hair more pressure to apply.
The difference in these cars? I won't go into the MR vs. FR debate but simply state that the FR is just more fun and predictable and that is critical when pushing limits to trying and eek out a few tenths here and there. A shame really as the R8 sounds great (relative to GT sounds) and I love the real car so I desperately want to like it.
Braking part 2: it's very realistic that tires lock independently but it's not realistic how it pulls your car in the direction of the lockup. In fact in reality the opposite happens (at speed) as the locking wheel 'glazes' quickly loosing nearly all grip and this is what cases 'flat spots' (racing tires) as the car needs to continue decelerating but the driver has a very limited window, if any at all to further release pressure to correct. Racing is very precise and if the driver did have that window then they where braking to early anyway.
Once this happens on the R8, it's gone if your using a controller. Turning up sensitivity helps a lot but leads to other twitchiness. More controllable with a wheel but still backwards.
AMG is more planted and feels more realistic as there is a clear difference in how weight transfer is handled. You can overlook the backward dynamics of friction because you still feel the car get upset but the tail isn't nearly as prone to swing around in the direction of the lock, it more evenly aligns itself to the direction of the car and is more controllable by steering inputs, effectively masking the flaw.
Tires: are they to grippy? No, but the rate of traction lose is too slow as you progressively loose grip, the most common issue in sims, as computational physics don't really work like they do in the real world when implementing tire models. It appears pd are simply going down the road of discovery here and they will learn the physics need to be 'flipped' to 'feel' more accurate as others have.
Remember Forza 4 stating 360 calculations per second with there physics model? For a proper tire simulation (including all factors like suspension, flex, camber, caster, DF, etc.) it's closer to 360 calcs per axel. The way I believe Forza achieved this was by simulating air pressure to temperature (stickiness) and flex to grip (footprint) formulated a linear value applied to main physics model. But I digress.
Lateral and horizontal grip feel quite good in normal circumstances in GT 6, but once something starts going out of either area, or they interplay, is where things start to fall apart. I'm rather shocked that 0-0 brake balance masks this quite effectively.
Aero: there is none. Aero in GT 6 is nothing more than a traction coefficient applied based on forward trajectory, not factoring weight. And this is likely why PP doesn't change anymore as it's no longer tied to drag, weight adding to mechanical grip, making steering more heavy, etc. And since a traction coefficient is still applied against base stats, not adjusted to other variables, its minimal to the PP system. Ironic how the pp system seems to reveal this.
Additionally, without the systems working together I believe this is where the MR cars get the short end of the stick and here is how... A MR car has a lighter front than mid-rear, just applying a traction coefficient doesn't transfer the weight so when decelerating from 150+ will always have the rear end still heavier than the front leading to it always swinging around, especially obvious if the cars angle of attack is anything but perfectly straight. Remember, aero isn't only up down, its side to side also, and most DF is generating from under the wing at speed, not the top.
And this can't be fixed with adjusting brake bias because no matter what you do, the rear end is decelerating slower than the front. Now, this leads into weight transfer, and my results are even more complicated there and less conclusive because that is an added value based on circumstance that can't possibly be correct if the core values of the mechanical grip and suspension aren't formulating correctly. The MR cars demonstrate this too.
In summary: we are all Dr's trying to diagnose a patient with several symptoms and no medical history of the patient to ground our findings and hypothesis.
Perhaps if we look at my early point, and each car is unique, then everything I wrote is garbage as it only a few cars are messed up, but those few cars are clearly popular so this brings attention and validity to the argument but not at a system level, but a per car level?
Perhaps car physics are good but environmental circumstances aren't being simulated? Perhaps PD are in fact reworking the whole thing and GT 6 has already reached its limit and they developed themselves into a corner or limbo...
But don't fret! Nearly all cars under 500pp feel pretty darn good! It's when things get faster, and there are more factors to consider that seem to be a bit off.
Regardless of all this, my appreciation goes to the tuners out there that do in fact understand dynamics enough to reverse engineer tunes to feel better, despite any logical numbers.
It's quite possible each car is truly unique in significant ways, despite how unlikely, or impractical that is in a game.
The real issue is if you follow the career events you're basically switching cars every few minutes, never really spending enough time to develop a bond or appreciation for any given car. And nothing really encourages or promotes developing that relationship unless you bought GT for the 'ultimate lapping simulator' but even that falls apart as arcade is the only place that records your time and you can't enable certain features...
I tend to bring everything back to career structure as that's the intended driver of motivation in nearly every game, but now, with nearly all arguments being based on a car in a given situation, countered by different cars just isn't adding up...
My test (after that long caveat):
Track: Daytona road course, mid day.
Cars: SLS AMG & R8 LMS
Brakes: On both cars 0-0 brake balance felt the most realistic. Why? Because you are at max threshold braking and your butt puckers as you hope the car decelerates in time for turn in, and if you're slightly early on turn in there is an even digressive transition from horizontal to lateral grip and you feel the car destabilizing but not 'braking' out of control. No real car suddenly flys out of control unless there is a mechanical.
Anything higher than 0-0 it's too easy to lock up at unrealistic speeds and you compensate with pressure creating the same effect as 0-0 but without the 'butt pucker' factor thinking you might have a hair more pressure to apply.
The difference in these cars? I won't go into the MR vs. FR debate but simply state that the FR is just more fun and predictable and that is critical when pushing limits to trying and eek out a few tenths here and there. A shame really as the R8 sounds great (relative to GT sounds) and I love the real car so I desperately want to like it.
Braking part 2: it's very realistic that tires lock independently but it's not realistic how it pulls your car in the direction of the lockup. In fact in reality the opposite happens (at speed) as the locking wheel 'glazes' quickly loosing nearly all grip and this is what cases 'flat spots' (racing tires) as the car needs to continue decelerating but the driver has a very limited window, if any at all to further release pressure to correct. Racing is very precise and if the driver did have that window then they where braking to early anyway.
Once this happens on the R8, it's gone if your using a controller. Turning up sensitivity helps a lot but leads to other twitchiness. More controllable with a wheel but still backwards.
AMG is more planted and feels more realistic as there is a clear difference in how weight transfer is handled. You can overlook the backward dynamics of friction because you still feel the car get upset but the tail isn't nearly as prone to swing around in the direction of the lock, it more evenly aligns itself to the direction of the car and is more controllable by steering inputs, effectively masking the flaw.
Tires: are they to grippy? No, but the rate of traction lose is too slow as you progressively loose grip, the most common issue in sims, as computational physics don't really work like they do in the real world when implementing tire models. It appears pd are simply going down the road of discovery here and they will learn the physics need to be 'flipped' to 'feel' more accurate as others have.
Remember Forza 4 stating 360 calculations per second with there physics model? For a proper tire simulation (including all factors like suspension, flex, camber, caster, DF, etc.) it's closer to 360 calcs per axel. The way I believe Forza achieved this was by simulating air pressure to temperature (stickiness) and flex to grip (footprint) formulated a linear value applied to main physics model. But I digress.
Lateral and horizontal grip feel quite good in normal circumstances in GT 6, but once something starts going out of either area, or they interplay, is where things start to fall apart. I'm rather shocked that 0-0 brake balance masks this quite effectively.
Aero: there is none. Aero in GT 6 is nothing more than a traction coefficient applied based on forward trajectory, not factoring weight. And this is likely why PP doesn't change anymore as it's no longer tied to drag, weight adding to mechanical grip, making steering more heavy, etc. And since a traction coefficient is still applied against base stats, not adjusted to other variables, its minimal to the PP system. Ironic how the pp system seems to reveal this.
Additionally, without the systems working together I believe this is where the MR cars get the short end of the stick and here is how... A MR car has a lighter front than mid-rear, just applying a traction coefficient doesn't transfer the weight so when decelerating from 150+ will always have the rear end still heavier than the front leading to it always swinging around, especially obvious if the cars angle of attack is anything but perfectly straight. Remember, aero isn't only up down, its side to side also, and most DF is generating from under the wing at speed, not the top.
And this can't be fixed with adjusting brake bias because no matter what you do, the rear end is decelerating slower than the front. Now, this leads into weight transfer, and my results are even more complicated there and less conclusive because that is an added value based on circumstance that can't possibly be correct if the core values of the mechanical grip and suspension aren't formulating correctly. The MR cars demonstrate this too.
In summary: we are all Dr's trying to diagnose a patient with several symptoms and no medical history of the patient to ground our findings and hypothesis.
Perhaps if we look at my early point, and each car is unique, then everything I wrote is garbage as it only a few cars are messed up, but those few cars are clearly popular so this brings attention and validity to the argument but not at a system level, but a per car level?
Perhaps car physics are good but environmental circumstances aren't being simulated? Perhaps PD are in fact reworking the whole thing and GT 6 has already reached its limit and they developed themselves into a corner or limbo...
But don't fret! Nearly all cars under 500pp feel pretty darn good! It's when things get faster, and there are more factors to consider that seem to be a bit off.
Regardless of all this, my appreciation goes to the tuners out there that do in fact understand dynamics enough to reverse engineer tunes to feel better, despite any logical numbers.
- 302
- West Virginia
- 2,643
- Finland
- OdeFinn
@Lawndart, good points taken there, can't agree all, but most.
Brakes are one crazy thing, I have nearly 1milj km driven with real car and twice had jumped on brake close to 100%, or can say also at those two times are likely only times at I have used brakes over 80%. Probably you see my point already, in game people are using 100% pretty often, and if game brake is even nearly working as in real life, then those 100% brake bashers are just doing it "wrong".
100% braking in real life needs really heavy foot and huge amount of force applied to pedal, normal production car locks brakes also easily way before 100% is squished out from brake cylinder.
Making this user friendly by PD would be nice, but I can manage driving without pushing 100% brakes. Brake bias 0/0 is one solution to allow full smashing on brake.
Brakes are one crazy thing, I have nearly 1milj km driven with real car and twice had jumped on brake close to 100%, or can say also at those two times are likely only times at I have used brakes over 80%. Probably you see my point already, in game people are using 100% pretty often, and if game brake is even nearly working as in real life, then those 100% brake bashers are just doing it "wrong".
100% braking in real life needs really heavy foot and huge amount of force applied to pedal, normal production car locks brakes also easily way before 100% is squished out from brake cylinder.
Making this user friendly by PD would be nice, but I can manage driving without pushing 100% brakes. Brake bias 0/0 is one solution to allow full smashing on brake.
- 1,211
- Earth
- TheLordSnowden
- LordSnowden
Hey OleFinn, I was carful to keep my points grounded in race cars. It's more about max threshold breaking than percentage of application of brakes. No car that has any business going over 120mph, can lock up at over 80mph-ish, or I've just never really tried it but my own max threshold braking is 'force' is somewhere around 100lbs...
0-0 does allow for max pressure to a point the breaking doesn't allow more force application (simulating max pressure limits, like the peddle is on the floor) and doesn't lock up, a feeling you get quite frequently on a racetrack. Sure you can limit the range of motion yourself in game but locking up isn't the result of max braking, in fact your pads are more likely to 'glaze' than lock up in a race car and that's a terrifying experience as the harder you press doesn't mater, you just keep loosing deceleration.
If I was comparing street cars to race cars in the same circumstance, everything happens earlier on a street car. A street car is more likely to get upset and go ass end first into an Armco before it locks up. Street cars loose nearly 50% of their effectiveness in their system (expanding brake lines, master cylinder over loaded, lousy pressure and hydronic distribution, crap fluid not handling high temperatures, etc.
Brake fade is the real issue in street cars operating at high performance levels combined with overheating leading to glazing of pads... If in fact it was able to sustain the abuse and that's a best case result. But the reality is many other things fall apart prior to that and now its time for a story!
Here is my real story when I thought it would be cute to take my road car on track one evening after race practice. Two laps in, I felt the brake fade, heading for T11 at Sears, went for the brakes, and they weren't there (50% less than expected)... Peddle was on the floor and I was along for the ride... Just for further context, It was an 04' 350z with Brembo brakes with slotted AND drilled rotors.
I learned to not skimp on steal bradded break lines though that would have only netted me maybe one more lap.
To be fair, I drove it like a race car and not a track day queen, and nearly threw it away had I not the experience to know when, how, and where to react and ease on the e-brake, and release it to induce a lateral slide... And that it was the shorter T11 not the full GP layout.
Street car brakes are all garbage on anything costing less than 80k... Actually Evo's and STI's might contradict that... But I'll save that story for another day...
Not sure it matters that much but it was a Ferrari 240 that handled just fine a few days ago on sport hards. BTW, sport tires are not racing tires that you have to get heat in. I also wagged a fishtail 2 or 3 times like I was on ice around 40mph with no throttle so it seems that the terrible low speed physics from GT5 are back. I've been racing for over half my life and am a mech engineer and am often in the top 50 in the USA when I actually have time to spend in a trial so I'm not new to how cars should handle. My point is simply that the physics are crap and even if people don't think so, it's even more frustrating that they change all the time. If these are going to be the physics that they use, then fine, I'll get used to them but once I get used to these new slip and slide physics, they'll change it again. I didn't pay 60 dollars for a year long beta test.
- 481
- Minne-snow-ta
- Nukedogger86
- nukedogger
The thing I've noticed, is with 1.04 is all tires were downgraded by 2. In order to get a matching time on sport hards, now require sport softs. The mustangs now are un driveable tail happy and undetsteering piles, where as in 1.03 you could control them well. Even a fwd car has major issues. PD please fix, the game just isnt fun any more. Every update you come up with the closer to gt5 physics we become, I already have gt5, I don't need a 2013 version of it.
Pleae fix your physics for gt7 beta I mean gt6
Pleae fix your physics for gt7 beta I mean gt6
ITCC_Andrew
(Banned)
- 18,532
- Kitchener
So glad I found a place where people aren't discussing super bowl. 
Did FF car physics change? I've only driven an FF car (ITCC-spec Honda Accord) and an FR car (Nismo GT-R) since the update, and I've not found any differences.
Especially the Accord felt perfectly fine.
Did FF car physics change? I've only driven an FF car (ITCC-spec Honda Accord) and an FR car (Nismo GT-R) since the update, and I've not found any differences.
Especially the Accord felt perfectly fine.
- 1,689
- NY
- SavageEvil
Nice credentials but I have no idea what that is supposed to actually mean in the grand scheme of things. I found absolutely no difference in the physics from 1.03-1.04 aside from the AWD fix in the second patch I don't know about any other changes since I post nearly the same times of faster as I pretty much never change tires on any of cars, all but two have more than one set of tires. You're referencing a MR car which will have off throttle oversteer, perhaps you are confused about the physics and they are actually more refined than previous. The brake balance was fixed so that it works in all modes identically. In fact when the AWD was temporarily rear wheel drive, I was posting faster times with my R8 V10 FSI...lack of understeering helped that car greatly.
If you're getting different times and then there are other people who aren't posting slower times, then what do we have? Who is wrong and who is right? If you can prove that all cars are having low speed problems then you'd have a point but just one MR car you claim is having issues with low speed does not constitute a physics change which based on the thread in this forum shows that most people are suffering from the placebo effect and the rest are confusing other changes with physics. I say go test out more cars to be sure since one car driving off to you today is not sufficient enough to claim that the physics changed, since physics are global and would effect a great number of cars if it is changed.
I'm not talking 1.03 vs 1.04. I was fine with 1.04. I'm talking initial 1.04 vs whatever that mini update did. I'm guessing they were trying to fix the awd bugs and off course issues and it affected other things. I know how to drive a MR car. I said that the car was fine a few days ago on lesser tires so you're missing my point. Biweekly changes to physics makes a garage full of tuned cars worthless and it's annoying. I'm sure I could have my 240 handling nicely again but this crap gets old. And if gt5's terrible low speed physics are back, I'd really be upset.
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
My Top Fuel Turbo Civic replica works fine, drive exactly like in 1.03 
- 28,471
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
No offense but this problem is yours not the games. I've tested and tuned several cars driven before and after the update and there is no change in laptimes.The thing I've noticed, is with 1.04 is all tires were downgraded by 2. In order to get a matching time on sport hards, now require sport softs. The mustangs now are un driveable tail happy and undetsteering piles, where as in 1.03 you could control them well. Even a fwd car has major issues. PD please fix, the game just isnt fun any more. Every update you come up with the closer to gt5 physics we become, I already have gt5, I don't need a 2013 version of it.
Pleae fix your physics for gt7 beta I mean gt6
You must not tune your cars (suspension especially). There is clearly a difference.
- 28,471
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
No there isn't and yes I tune, see the link below to my garage. I am driving the exact same car pre and post 1.04. Nothing changed except the update. Doesn't matter if you're driving stock or tuned if you drive the same car before and after and there's no change in lap times, then physics didn't affect laptimes significantly, and certainly not two or even one compound's worth.
Last edited:
- 1,689
- NY
- SavageEvil
I'm saying you need to check more cars, because my garage has 180 cars and 90 of those are MR cars. I drive those things a lot and last night I took out my GT40 '66 just see if there is an issue and using a DS3 no less, the car felt fine in fact it felt more composed than I remembered from 1.02 and mind you everything was stock settings aside from the exterior body mods, it's been modded on the exterior since 1.01. I feel nothing different from 1.03-1.04 even with the two stealth updates they had. The first update fixed the AYC on mitsubishi Lancers and the second fixed the Torque Distribution because the fix for the AYC zeroed all AWD cars default units to full rear bias(which to my delight made the R8 drive like a dream).
I checked your post and the problem you said about a 40mph loss of control while not being on throttle, sounds like a LSD problem, if you are off throttle then the only mechanical part with ability to do anything is the LSD. Can you consistently pull off the issue at low speed, is your LSD stock? I always drive cars in stock form since this would be a tell tale sign if anything in the game has changed in the base physics and not applicable parts which are just plug ins to the physics engine they don't change the physics but they alter the reaction to physics on the vehicle in question. Physics are a global thing in GT6, so a change would affect all the cars and not just one. Take your car, drive it on stock settings see how it handles, then take note of that. Then add the modifications you want and see what changes. It's too soon to make sweeping statements that the physics are crap because of one car, that makes no sense at all to even jump to such a conclusion. Attack the problem with logic, remove all anomalous entities then work your way up and you should be able to find out the issue.
- 1,211
- Earth
- TheLordSnowden
- LordSnowden
For anyone who read my tome's above, I discovered something remarkable.
Follow my own assumptions above I decided to be creative, and if I was half right about what's wrong with the physics, then I should be able to compensate in some way...
So considering all of the R8 LMS behaviors and knowing it needs to be more stable I thought I would try and force it by raising the front end in hopes of creating more dive and absorbing more of the energy from the rear... Sort of like a teedertoter (sp?) I flipped ride hight and added more spring travel making the front higher than the rear (f60 r50) and BAM, its a totally different car... I was shocked how something so small had a huge effect and now I can brake at speed in a closing radius turn predictably, every time.
There is a trade off as it reduces your turn in (perhaps some aero is at work as it could be lifting the front at speed, reducing the effect of the splitter) and if I don't run the perfect line in Daytona's oval then I'll need to lift to not drift into the wall. It's still unstable mid turn but easily controllable.
And I don't think there is a bug flipping front/rear settings as this result was predictable, and the side effects are likely what would happen in real life... Just don't put Webber in your car on LeMans.
Now I'm no tuner but I can look at a tune and get an idea of what the tuner is trying to do, and with this discovery I went looking for tunes that might be doing just that, more for validation than anything else, and I discovered @praiano63 was doing this on the R8 LMS, and this tune is OLD (from December)... So I adjusted to the rest of his settings and bingo...
Now I have a new 'game' buying all the cars he tunes for and building out my garage.
So if you, like me, love the LMS R8 then this is about as close to enjoying it as you'll get until PD work out the rest of the physics (DF, Aero, camber, etc) and maybe @pariano63 might be kind enough to compare his own findings to my assumptions in easier posts above.
Follow my own assumptions above I decided to be creative, and if I was half right about what's wrong with the physics, then I should be able to compensate in some way...
So considering all of the R8 LMS behaviors and knowing it needs to be more stable I thought I would try and force it by raising the front end in hopes of creating more dive and absorbing more of the energy from the rear... Sort of like a teedertoter (sp?) I flipped ride hight and added more spring travel making the front higher than the rear (f60 r50) and BAM, its a totally different car... I was shocked how something so small had a huge effect and now I can brake at speed in a closing radius turn predictably, every time.
There is a trade off as it reduces your turn in (perhaps some aero is at work as it could be lifting the front at speed, reducing the effect of the splitter) and if I don't run the perfect line in Daytona's oval then I'll need to lift to not drift into the wall. It's still unstable mid turn but easily controllable.
And I don't think there is a bug flipping front/rear settings as this result was predictable, and the side effects are likely what would happen in real life... Just don't put Webber in your car on LeMans.
Now I'm no tuner but I can look at a tune and get an idea of what the tuner is trying to do, and with this discovery I went looking for tunes that might be doing just that, more for validation than anything else, and I discovered @praiano63 was doing this on the R8 LMS, and this tune is OLD (from December)... So I adjusted to the rest of his settings and bingo...
Now I have a new 'game' buying all the cars he tunes for and building out my garage.
So if you, like me, love the LMS R8 then this is about as close to enjoying it as you'll get until PD work out the rest of the physics (DF, Aero, camber, etc) and maybe @pariano63 might be kind enough to compare his own findings to my assumptions in easier posts above.
- 11,660
- GTP_Orido
You should try my R8 LMS tune Easy 1:23 at Brands Hatch GP and 2:05 at Bathurst with only LSD and suspension tweak ( stock everything else )
Easy 1:23 at Brands Hatch GP and 2:05 at Bathurst with only LSD and suspension tweak ( stock everything else )I haven't played the past few days and was only in my 240 when I noticed the problems and then I stopped. I don't "NEED" to go check a bunch of cars to determine that something is wrong. If one car is wrong, then something is wrong in my book. And it does not have a stock LSD. As I've stated before, I know how to tune cars. Mentioning that it's an LSD problem tells me that you're basing logic on a video game and not real life. Outside of being on ice, there is no suspension/lsd/whatever setup in the world that would allow fishtailing (especially a light car like the 240) under no throttle/braking at such a low speed. A snap-back, yes...fishtailing, no. The lateral force on the tire is not high enough and the center of mass should have already recovered. I thought the low speed physics were much better in the game previously but they are reverting to GT5.
If you don't like the updates, tough. I'm pretty sure the idea is to improve the game and improve realism, not pander to the bookoos of Prestige Worldwide tuners. I'm fairly confident that even Kaz himself isn't concerned with your now "ruined" garage full of bogus tunes. I figure updates can affect physics in general (e.g. polar moment of inertia calculations) or even tuning changes (e.g. damper tuning effects). I primarily don't tune (waste of time with the flawed system in current form) and have not noticed a significant change in physics since day 1.
- 1,211
- Earth
- TheLordSnowden
- LordSnowden
Well, there is a perception things are changing, but are they really? The verdict is still in the air. But there is a fundamental issue if the core foundations of a game change without some heads up, or even creating the perception without any announcement otherwise. Ancillary systems can change as much as a developer likes, but core systems that affect the very foundation of the game should not, and most developers know this, its a cardinal rule.
I can't say for certain anything changed, but for the 4wd mechanics to get messed up proves someone was doing something under the hood...
Just imagine if COD changed their shooting mechanics, and without warning, all hell would break loose. Imagine if they simply changed the 'auto targeting' dynamics and everyone thought they changed the core shooting mechanics? Oh lord all the media outlets and professional players would go bonkers claiming all sorts of foul regardless of the facts...
I can't say for certain anything changed, but for the 4wd mechanics to get messed up proves someone was doing something under the hood...
Just imagine if COD changed their shooting mechanics, and without warning, all hell would break loose. Imagine if they simply changed the 'auto targeting' dynamics and everyone thought they changed the core shooting mechanics? Oh lord all the media outlets and professional players would go bonkers claiming all sorts of foul regardless of the facts...
- 1,528
- Melbourne
- Conza_No1
I'm going to post twice, right now I'm talking about the online physics (I'm hoping Seasonal TTs are using online) with a DS3, in a couple of days I'll have access to my G27 where I can compare the online and offline physics there.
So far, the Seasonal TTs are just horrid with my DS3, I can barely make silver, let alone gold, I'm sure if I sat there for 50 laps (and didn't kill someone in the process), I might be able to get a gold time eventually, but coming from every update before 1.04 on GT5 and GT6, where I'd do the TT and make Gold on the first or second flying start, this seems like a huge change, and imo, a big step backwards, cars are understeering a heap more, then when you go to neutralize it with more gas, its just bang into oversteer (GT-86, Mercedes VGT, XKR-S, and definately the Vette concept thing).
I guess the only fair comparison is to see in a day or two if I can beat my current DS3 times with my G27, AND, how much faster I am (hopefully) offline on the same tracks with the same cars, as I am online in the TTs. Honestly, I hope its all the same and I'm just as slow, but with the G27 I can atleast make gold on the seasonals, because I would really dislike a disparity between Online and Offline phyics for Seasonals (happy for this to all be in my head as well).
So far, the Seasonal TTs are just horrid with my DS3, I can barely make silver, let alone gold, I'm sure if I sat there for 50 laps (and didn't kill someone in the process), I might be able to get a gold time eventually, but coming from every update before 1.04 on GT5 and GT6, where I'd do the TT and make Gold on the first or second flying start, this seems like a huge change, and imo, a big step backwards, cars are understeering a heap more, then when you go to neutralize it with more gas, its just bang into oversteer (GT-86, Mercedes VGT, XKR-S, and definately the Vette concept thing).
I guess the only fair comparison is to see in a day or two if I can beat my current DS3 times with my G27, AND, how much faster I am (hopefully) offline on the same tracks with the same cars, as I am online in the TTs. Honestly, I hope its all the same and I'm just as slow, but with the G27 I can atleast make gold on the seasonals, because I would really dislike a disparity between Online and Offline phyics for Seasonals (happy for this to all be in my head as well).
