Assetto Corsa PC Mods General DiscussionPC 

  • Thread starter daan
  • 140,539 comments
  • 38,858,059 views
kondor999
Hey, you should check out the 2019 TCR's in Raceroom if you enjoyed that early Pcars Clio (I remember it too and you are absolutely right about how great it was before they dumbed it down). The one in AMS is also excellent.

I know this is an AC forum, but the Raceroom TCR's are a blast. You'll definitely learn to be careful suddenly lifting the throttle with those babies! Balancing those cars in the corners at a place like Spa is just amazing. Feels just like my old EG Civic race car. The same go-fast techniques work.
Click to expand...

I believe that Raceroom has the best FWD sim cars on the market..yes.
Having said that though I predominantly use AC, so have most likely just over come any 'issues' (as i do with all of them) due to simply playing it as a 'sim' simulating a 'real' simulator (like the ones F1 teams use), rather than a sim trying to simulate real driving....(not even sure i understand that when its written down!).....

Am i right in thinking you have driven old school Porsches?
Reason being is your lift off oversteer opinion.
For example.
RWD car with front engine likelihood of Lift off OS mid corner is medium chance.
FWS is very high chance
AWD is medium to nill
But a RWD rear engined car, Porsche, is very very high chance of lift off OS...

Add to that set up can induce more or less lift off OS.
Key is simply to use it as a tool via modulating throttle to induce rear 'steer', but never panic and lift off mid high speed corner indeed.

Basically anytime weight shoots to the front of the car rear loses traction / weight.... so if you have big aero that can avoid a dire situation...but not ideal.
But look you'll know this, I am rambling now...
 
safi hellie
DiRT is a good example for how some sim racers are just clueless to reality, as one example is the "OMG! it's arcade its so easy to go fast on snow in DiRT it's stupid!!"
Reality.... rally cars use special snow tires with studs in them that current rally drivers say offer more grip than when the rally car is simply on a gravel stage...(Craig Breen said this amongst others)

Anyway my point is more along the lines of

"I have been around that corner in a 1994 Alfa Romeo track focused 155 at 90-100 with old tyres and didn't kill any cats or end up in the gravel dead......................... so why on warm tyres in sim 'X' can i not go faster than 60mph in a 2016 GT3 car??....hmmmmm"
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure everyone knows that you get more grip with studs than on gravel. The issue is the 2 -3g peaks and whatever.

You just don't seem to understand my point: you didn't go hypothetically 90-100mph IRL, and you're not going hypothetically 60mph in the sim. Chances are you went 85mph IRL, and in the *sim* you're going faster with more slip, closer to the limit than you are IRL. In the sim you're pulling more G with more yaw. In the sim the car is rotating more, and often faster. You've just never done a direct comparison, so you go by feel, which like I said, without a clear mental image is extremely unreliable. You get a clear mental image via a real comparison. Do it and you'll be surprised.

EDIT: Oops, removed the old quote. Dunno how that got embedded here too.
 
VheEth
Hi. Does anyone have a working AI line for the Fuji Circuit (Tiago Lima version)? Thanks in advance. :cheers:
Click to expand...

Literally the first result in Google. :embarrassed:

Screen Shot 2019-09-10 at 9.33.56 AM.png
 
GzeroD
I see what you did there. сделать конверт Translates to 'make a conversion'


особенно кривя душой ?

(I'm just being a 'smart alec' with online translation.)
Click to expand...
Sorry, didn 't notice... You have to use a google translator, and he sometimes makes the wrong translation, and because of the built-in expansion sometimes inserts russian words in the text..:)
 
kondor999
Hey, you should check out the 2019 TCR's in Raceroom if you enjoyed that early Pcars Clio (I remember it too and you are absolutely right about how great it was before they dumbed it down). The one in AMS is also excellent.

I know this is an AC forum, but the Raceroom TCR's are a blast. You'll definitely learn to be careful suddenly lifting the throttle with those babies! Balancing those cars in the corners at a place like Spa is just amazing. Feels just like my old EG Civic race car. The same go-fast techniques work.
Click to expand...

I've develope racing sims using the ISI RF1 engine, so I do have access to the code and know how everything actually works.
Raceroom, Pcars, AMS are all just RF1, the internal physics engine is unchanged from gmotor2, its all down to fine tuning of the cars and tires physics model. F1 simulators runs RF Pro, which itself is basically RF1 but with a lot more access to the physics engine for the F1 teams to simulate the things they need.

Keep in mind that in a simulator, having accurate data does not always mean accurate feeling of the car. There are a limited amount of things a racing sim could actually simulate and there are compromises to be made in the physics to make the cars feel accurate.
 
EvilGloomy
I've develope racing sims using the ISI RF1 engine, so I do have access to the code and know how everything actually works.
Raceroom, Pcars, AMS are all just RF1, the internal physics engine is unchanged from gmotor2, its all down to fine tuning of the cars and tires physics model. F1 simulators runs RF Pro, which itself is basically RF1 but with a lot more access to the physics engine for the F1 teams to simulate the things they need.

Keep in mind that in a simulator, having accurate data does not always mean accurate feeling of the car. There are a limited amount of things a racing sim could actually simulate and there are compromises to be made in the physics to make the cars feel accurate.
Click to expand...
Which is why I find it a bit funny when people start talking about some inherent huge differences in the titles' higher level physics. To my understanding, it's almost (Completely?) the same between all of the gmotor titles.

Although I will say that GTR2 felt VERY different from rF1 when just comparing content to content and mods to mods, even if the higher level functions are more or less the same. But I will admit I never devved the exact same car in GTR2 and rF1 to compare honestly: it'd probably be closer than expected.
 
Most of the code changes are in the graphics engine and system menu, the rest have some fixes and improvements here and there, but it is mostly the same. PCars in fact was praised with the AI and the funny thing is that they have not changed a single line of code from the RF1 AI. It was all down to building the ai files that modder have the same access to.
 
EvilGloomy
Most of the code changes are in the graphics engine and system menu, the rest have some fixes and improvements here and there, but it is mostly the same. PCars in fact was praised with the AI and the funny thing is that they have not changed a single line of code from the RF1 AI. It was all down to building the ai files that modder have the same access to.
Click to expand...

So SMS call it the madness engine, but in truth PCars 1 was shift 3 then?
And them selling AMS use of madness engine, means that really for AMS2 it will actually be using the same engine as AMS?

Ian Bell really is an evil genius...

I can see rf1 in AMS and RR....but not so much in PCars 1 n 2..

You sure madness engine isn't a stand alone engine?

I haven't a clue other than shift 1 / 2 and PCars 1 and 2 are very similar...
 
Ford Spec Racer

"The Ford Spec Racer comes to Assetto Corsa, a classic school and casual racing car that brings unforgettable races every time. Mostly known in iRacing, this guy is a MUST if you love online racing, or just having fun racing against others. Keep in mind this one is based mainly on GEN2, may in the future we bring the GEN3 but it depends on this one reception." - Daniel Jimenez

https://www.racedepartment.com/downloads/ford-spec-racer-for-assetto-corsa.28643/

upload_2019-9-10_13-57-0-png.323967


upload_2019-9-10_13-57-50-png.323973


upload_2019-9-10_13-58-5-png.323976
 
GrauerWolf
I know it's an old problem with the SCCA/GTO Camaro, but I can' t find the solution anymore. Can someone help again?..
Click to expand...


That'll be a typo in suspensions.ini. BASEY= will be missing or corrupt in some manner.
And the driver animation files are missing.

T̶w̶o̶ ̶T̶i̶c̶k̶s̶ I don't have the car so can't fix it.

Download the IMSA version, otherwise identical but it works.
 
Last edited:
Blamer
my 2 cents that worth nothing...
I really like r3e for the physics, pc2 for the graphics, I also play DR for some gravel
but then I use AC and I love its FFB and that alone is worth my simdriving experience.
Click to expand...
I agree with all that. In the end, these are just games and the FFB quality makes things a lot more fun with AC. If PC2 had decent FFB, I'm sure I'd play that a lot more. I always end up gravitating back to AC due to the sheer variety of fun-to-drive cars available (especially the older ones like Bazza's AC Legends series).

EvilGloomy
I've develope racing sims using the ISI RF1 engine, so I do have access to the code and know how everything actually works.
Raceroom, Pcars, AMS are all just RF1, the internal physics engine is unchanged from gmotor2, its all down to fine tuning of the cars and tires physics model. F1 simulators runs RF Pro, which itself is basically RF1 but with a lot more access to the physics engine for the F1 teams to simulate the things they need.

Keep in mind that in a simulator, having accurate data does not always mean accurate feeling of the car. There are a limited amount of things a racing sim could actually simulate and there are compromises to be made in the physics to make the cars feel accurate.
Click to expand...
That's exactly my point. You can have all the data in the world, but if the physics engine isn't perfect (and none of them are), the car isn't guaranteed to then behave like a real car.

The best simulated cars I've driven have been ones where the modder worked closely with an actual driver to ensure that the end product drives properly.

Bazza (for instance) has a young guy who's won several racing series (and is now an instructor) testing his vintage touring cars. Shaun Clarke got direct feedback from a real Seat Cupra TCR driver to ensure his car was handling properly. The GMP guys reached out to real owners/drivers of the NA2 Honda NSX to confirm the handling characteristics of their simulated version. IER had a Daytona Protoype driver give them feedback on their DPi's.

I don't think you need to find someone who's driven the exact car in question - just someone who's got some (even a little) track experience. I know one modder (Richard Wilks) who does amazing work by closely examining on-board footage of the cars being driven on track and then combines that with his own karting experience.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
safi hellie
So SMS call it the madness engine, but in truth PCars 1 was shift 3 then?
And them selling AMS use of madness engine, means that really for AMS2 it will actually be using the same engine as AMS?

Ian Bell really is an evil genius...

I can see rf1 in AMS and RR....but not so much in PCars 1 n 2..

You sure madness engine isn't a stand alone engine?

I haven't a clue other than shift 1 / 2 and PCars 1 and 2 are very similar...
Click to expand...

Madness Engine is just RF1 with an overhaul in the graphics engine. Noticeably with DX11 and VR Support, which are both something AMS needs. So instead of developing it themselves, all of that was already developed with pcars and due to the fact madness is really just RF1, porting AMS content to the updated engine would be easy and all of the physics features AMS prefer could stay in tack with little to no modification. Reiza saved alot of development time and money by using Madness, what I was most surprise was that SMS allowed the use of the Madness to its competitor!

kondor999
I agree with all that. In the end, these are just games and the FFB quality makes things a lot more fun with AC. If PC2 had decent FFB, I'm sure I'd play that a lot more. I always end up gravitating back to AC due to the sheer variety of fun-to-drive cars available (especially the older ones like Bazza's AC Legends series).
Click to expand...

AMS just runs the rf1 realfeel plugin and called it a day LOL, the realfeel plugin is what PCars needed. With my experience, you could easily build the best feeling sim just by using RF1 with very little modification, and to look as good as AC with shader patch, all it need is to port the code from DX9 to DX11 to access the graphical features. The engine itself is built much more thoroughly compared to AC. Day and night cycle, weather, sun position and all the cool stuff from SOL was something that RF could do since the beginning. Also race features like flags, safety car, different type of starts are all there in the RF engine where something basic like that is still missing in AC.

kondor999
That's exactly my point. You can have all the data in the world, but if the physics engine isn't perfect (and none of them are), the car isn't guaranteed to then behave like a real car.

The best simulated cars I've driven have been ones where the modder worked closely with an actual driver to ensure that the end product drives properly.

Bazza (for instance) has a young guy who's won several racing series (and is now an instructor) testing his vintage touring cars. Shaun Clarke got direct feedback from a real Seat Cupra TCR driver to ensure his car was handling properly. The GMP guys reached out to real owners/drivers of the NA2 Honda NSX to confirm the handling characteristics of their simulated version. IER had a Daytona Protoype driver give them feedback on their DPi's.

I don't think you need to find someone who's driven the exact car in question - just someone who's got some (even a little) track experience. I know one modder (Richard Wilks) who does amazing work by closely examining on-board footage of the cars being driven on track and then combines that with his own karting experience.
Click to expand...

From what I notice around the web, there are a lot of myths in Sim Racing. You really don't need too much data to make the car feel realistic. The main purpose of the simulator is for car manufacturer to simulate their data, but that does not necessary make the car drive 100% like a real one. I've worked with many race drivers, teams over the years and I've let them try with some generic physics plus actual data in where its needed, which is suspension, weight balance/inertia, engine out put, gearing and dimension. They are already impressed with the experience and how the car drive in the sim. Not to mention, very easy to drive for beginners in sim racing. Sound is also another very important aspect of a realistic feeling car.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I dont know if many will agree with this but I'm comparing ACL prototypes with their counterparts by Legion and I prefer the ACL version. They are just so great. Of course Legion's are very good.
That Chaparral at Imola 72... :dopey:
 
Sharing a mod? Host it on GTPlanet Downloads. Free, public hosting for files up to 10GB in size.

Similar threads

OH1955
  • Question
Anybody got Oakes Field (Nassau) for Assetto Corsa?
Replies
5
Views
6K
OH1955
OH1955
S
Logitech G Pro wheel settings Assetto Corsa
Replies
0
Views
810
Shah1
S
GTPNewsWire
Assetto Corsa Modder Creates Real Road Circuit Using Photogrammetry
Replies
16
Views
14K
Perico Lospa
Perico Lospa
Famine
Assetto Corsa Competizione Ultimate Edition Now Available on Steam
Replies
8
Views
3K
Apocalypse211
Apocalypse211
Famine
Assetto Corsa EVO: Everything We Know So Far
Replies
23
Views
3K
o000o
o000o

Latest Posts

Back