1. Do you need support for Assetto Corsa Competizione? Please use the proper forum below and ALWAYS zip and attach the WHOLE "Logs" folder in your c:\users\*youruser*\AppData\Local\AC2\Saved. The "AppData" folder is hidden by default, check "Hidden items" in your Windows view properties. If you report a crash, ALWAYS zip and attach the WHOLE "Crashes" folder in the same directory. Do not post "I have the same issue" in an existing thread with a game crash, always open your own thread. Do not PM developers and staff members for personal troubleshooting and support.
  2. As part of our continuous maintenance and improvements to Assetto Corsa Competizione we will be releasing small updates on a regular basis during the esports season which might not go through the usual announcement process detailing the changes until a later version update where these changes will be listed retrospectively.
  3. If ACC doesn't start with an error or the executable is missing, please add your entire Steam directory to the exceptions in your antivirus software, run a Steam integrity check or reinstall the game altogether. Make sure you add the User/Documents/Assetto Corsa Competizione folder to your antivirus/Defender exceptions and exclude it from any file sharing app (GDrive, OneDrive or Dropbox)! The Corsair iCue software is also known to conflict with Input Device initialization, if the game does not start up and you have such devices, please try disabling the iCue software and try again. [file:unknown] [line: 95] secure crt: invalid error is a sign of antivirus interference, while [Pak chunk signing mismatch on chunk] indicates a corrupted installation that requires game file verification.
  4. When reporting an issue with saved games, please always zip and attach your entire User/Documents/Assetto Corsa Competizione/Savegame folder, along with the logs and the crash folder (when reporting related to a crash).

Discuss rFactor2

Discussion in 'Chit Chat Room' started by Ace Pumpkin, Sep 16, 2016.

  1. Rastas

    Rastas Rookie

    Are you an dev?
     
  2. liakjim

    liakjim Alien

    It doesnt make sense because you have 400cycles/sec to calculate physics. 2400 is 6 times that number. When do you suppose to calculate this, when you have less cpu ticks for physics?

    Στάλθηκε από το LenovoA3300-H μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
     
  3. Well since 2400 happens to be 400*6.. then simply:

    Code:
    void Car::update(float deltaTime) {
        const float tyre_delta_time=deltaTime/6.0f;
    
        for (int i=0;i<6;i++) {
            updateTyres(tyre_delta_time);
        }
    
    }
    
    :)
    Of course it is WAAAAAY more complex than that in real life when it comes to gathering the generated forces and their effects but that's the general idea.
     
    Dookie, SunBro and Fremen_78 like this.
  4. liakjim

    liakjim Alien

    Still, the interaction between tyres and the rest components of the car need to be happening at 400Hz. Right?
    So if a tyre ( if calculated at 2400Hz ) interacts with the tarmac , the suspension and forces will be still being calculated at 400Hz , right? And if FFB is at 400Hz, the user will feel the 400Hz. Maybe we need better explanation.

    Στάλθηκε από το m2 note μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
     
  5. probably yes but def not the right forum to ask how RF2 works internally :p
     
    Fremen_78 and liakjim like this.
  6. marmagas

    marmagas Gamer

    Usefull info from devs is always welcomed and appreciated!:)anytime+everywhere!
     
  7. Andrew_WOT

    Andrew_WOT Alien

    Is there any reason to drive physics engine at a higher rate than FFB, you skip samples anyway.
    iRacing would be prime example of the great mismatch between two.
     
  8. Stereo

    Stereo Alien

    Well you have to run the physics at a high enough frequency for it to remain stable (here stable is a mathematical term, the opposite is unstable which generally looks like crazy oscillations or exploding)

    The actual necessary frequency depends on both the solver and the parameters, for example harder springs (eg. tires are a stiff spring, so are the actual springs on high-downforce cars) need higher frequency, and a simpler solver also needs higher frequency. The more complicated solvers don't really apply to sim racing though because they're for fixed equations, not "user inputting controls in realtime"

    I'm not sure what RF2 does with the extra timesteps on tires but it could also be related to the contact patch moving around the radius of the tire - after all at 400Hz 300km/h you're rotating about 40 degrees per step. So cutting it to 1/6th that (~7 degrees per timestep) means you can track grip levels due to flatspots or whatever more accurately.

    BeamNG also needs very high physics rate on its tires to prevent them exploding but that's modeled purely from first principles, the entire tire is made of springs and weights, and it's easy for that to get unstable.
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2018
    Andrew_WOT and Cote Dazur like this.
  9. yes, it's a sign that the engine is doing "bursts" of physics updates instead of a steady flow of that.
    Working in bursts is better from a performance point of view because you can execute stuff at lower rate (ie. collisions) and in general interact better in a multi threaded environment.
    In ACC I moved from a steady update to a burst style update in order to optimize the performance with many cars and saw a pretty good gain.
    So, while in AC there is a physics update every 3 milliseconds, steady, in ACC there is a burst update every 9 milliseconds with 3 sub steps.
    So while the effective physics tick rate remains at 333Hz, collisions,AI and input/output are now running at 111Hz which is a nice gain without too many drawbacks.

    EDIT: And of course, as @Stereo pointed out, you can't go below a certain number in order to simulate stiff systems like race cars.
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2018
    deni80s, Dookie, Epistolarius and 5 others like this.
  10. liakjim

    liakjim Alien

    Someone would expect that for the new game, there would be a rise in Hz calculation for physics, but still you decided to remain in 333Hz. Is this frequency enough? Why you kept it at this level ? I imagine that the high frequency is not always the cure but I think that you said somewhere that also the reason of some engine's limitations was the fact the you had to keep the frequency "low" in order to keep up with minimum cpu requirements. Are ACC's calculations so complex that you.couldn't rise it more?

    PS I so much miss your dev streaming. I hope you will start an ACC season

    Στάλθηκε από το m2 note μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
     
  11. tbh trying to judge the quality of a sim from the physics rate is pretty dumb. The real game is to find the lowest number that can accommodate what you are trying to achieve. ACC is simulating a championship with races with 50-60 cars on the track and that's the dream target to hit, not playing the "who's got the bigger number" on the internet.

    Having higher rates can only guarantee a better result if the calculation stays the same, the number alone without analyzing what's actually going on during those calculation is totally useless.. you can probably run arcade style physics at 30000Hz, will it make it the best sim in the world?
     
  12. liakjim

    liakjim Alien

    I totally agree. This is why I always wondering why on earth people keep doing the Hz war between sims.
    What the point saying that a X sim does 1000hz while calculating a simple calculation vs an Y sim that does 100hz but calculates a vastly harder one?

    Without having the code from all softwares at hand, someone can't simply compare by Hz alone.

    That why I don't agree with the "best track" "best sim" . It's stupid.

    In the end, play the same thing and if your brain says that I like it, then it's a success. So keep playing it

    Στάλθηκε από το m2 note μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
     
  13. marmagas

    marmagas Gamer

    Great,another generic comment WITH numbers.
    S397 Sebring still is the best track around,for me.Why?Stop torturing your keyboard and try it,if you dont like it,refund,simple as that.
    Accepted opinions only from the ones who tested it,if you dont like that some guys find it 'the best',show your arguments AFTER you test it.
    The whole debate should be about the track NOT someone's opinion about the track.
    The whole evolving experience about Sebring,day-night cycle+rain+sunset,is unique.You feel the car not only of the bumps and kerbs,sth magic S397 done here!
    No numbers can capture this.Try it!
    Until now there is no instrument to measure pleasure and enjoyment!
    Why do you think the whole simracing community has been amazed by this track?Marketing?

    First try then talk.
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2018
    denis dracup, MR279321 and Rastas like this.
  14. Gevatter

    Gevatter Alien

    You're a sneaky one ;)

    Marketing has a lot to do with it. A video from Racedepartment Staff declaring it the BEST track in Simracing, one from Jimmy Broadbent calling it the same. Those are influential people in the community.
    Also, in the general discussion, I see very little discussion about the quality of the track, the consensus seems to be that S397 did a very good job. Most of the critizism is regarding the price tag.
     
    nate and liakjim like this.
  15. marmagas

    marmagas Gamer

    YOUR opinion?
     
  16. Gevatter

    Gevatter Alien

    Are you asking me if that above is my opinion, or are you asking me my opinion about Sebring?

    First case, yes it is. I wrote some pages back that sebring is very pricy, but whenever I see a video about the GTE pack or the track praising it, I begin to think about buying both. I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks about getting the DLCs when they are praised in a video. Then I remember that both would cost me 24 Euro and that Sebring - while a great track in itself - is not something I have ever waited for, especially not in rFactor 2, and that two of five cars in the GTE pack are already in AC, and that two more don't really peak my interest, which would leave one car, and that's just nor worth it.

    Second case, I haven't bought it, and I haven't tried it. I will probably buy both the GTEs and Sebring come the next Steam sale, because I'm interested, but not interested enough to spend 24 Euro. I know I can refund, but I don't think I can appreciate the track or cars in the first two hours of playtime. You may notice however, that I have not ever talked about the quality of the track, I only stated my interest and lamented the price. That there is not a lot of talk about a perceived lack of quality of the DLC but rather the price is simple observation. Some "discussed" the overall quality of rFactor 2 itself, but that again is THEIR opinion.

    Edited for wording :)
     
  17. liakjim

    liakjim Alien

    Ok i can see a progress in the conversation.
    We pass from the "objectively" best track in the best sim, to the meaningless , take it or leave it, subjective, without any scientific or mathematical proof, "ΙΜΟ the best track in the best sim".
    Move on.
     
  18. liakjim

    liakjim Alien

    @Gevatter and everyone, you should definitely consider baying the GTE pack. All these cars also the GT3 cars (especially the RSR, the Bentley and the Norma MP30 LMP3), give me on my G27, IMO the best feeling from all sims out there.
    What thing i personally disprove , are the generic claims that this THE best. I mean, if you claim it, at least try to prove it (ex prove that this track has 20% denser cloud point from laser scan than the other track). Add an IMO and problem solve.

    ex IMO the Norma MP30 LMP3, is the best virtual car i have ever in all sims (with the AC's Cobra a close 2nd).
     
  19. David Wright

    David Wright Hardcore Simmer

    I am curious about comparison with the iRacing version of the track. Consensus seems to be the rF2 version is bumpier and this makes it "better". But why is it bumpier? Is the rF2 scanning better? Has the track become bumpier since iRacing scanned it? Are the differences in how each sim handles surfaces a factor (in rF2 you drive on the polygons modified by a material property file and in iR you drive on a bump map)? Does the physics of the cars in the two sims affect how they are affected by the bumps (i.e does the track just seem bumpier because rF2 cars are more affected by the bumps)?
     
    Nahkamarakatti likes this.
  20. Ciccina2016

    Ciccina2016 Simracer

    Just tried Sebring with Endurance Pack, really great fun with my G29.
    I am just shocked online is so dead.
    Why don't we organise an event?
    1 h at sebring??
     
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
ACC PS4/PS5/XB1/XBX/S General Discussions Crossplay Discussion Dec 14, 2023
ACC General Discussions Discussing Driving Position and Ergonomics Feb 20, 2022
ACC PS4/PS5/XB1/XBX/S General Discussions ACC PS4 - XB1 General Discussions Dec 29, 2021
ACC General Discussions Ferrari Driver Expert - Open Discussion Oct 15, 2021
ACC General Discussions Discussing AI (no reports) Mar 20, 2021
ACC Gameplay [1.7] Ai Discussion Feb 10, 2021
ACC General Discussions Assetto Corsa Competizione - 2021-2022-2023 Generic discussion Jan 1, 2021
ACC Physics Discussion about car damage Dec 22, 2020
ACC Physics Tyre behaviour discussion. Aug 31, 2020
ACC General Discussions Discussing AC vs. ACC Aug 24, 2020
ACC PS4/PS5/XB1/XBX/S General Discussions ACC physics and depth of simulation discussion Aug 2, 2020
ACC Physics Discussing the BMW M6 GT3 Jul 28, 2020
ACC General Discussions Discussing GT4 in ACC Jul 21, 2020
ACC General Discussions Discussing MP Mixed-Class Racing - GT3/GT4 Jul 9, 2020
ACC PS4/PS5/XB1/XBX/S General Discussions ACC on consoles - Discussion Jun 12, 2020

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice