2022 GP4 Time Trial League (F1virtual and friends) - Season Finished
Posted by Prblanco
My unfinished tracks: [www.grandprixgames.org]
Send bug reports and track editing questions to f1virtualblog@gmail.com
Prblanco Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> - Enforce 60 frames per second (guaranteed equal
> physics for everyone)
I would like to know who was the brain behind this, because that phrase alone is so contradictary Frames Per Seconds DOES NOT ALTER PHYSICS OF THE GAME
Their are tools that alter the gp4 physics ...
> - Disallow loading saving games (log must report
> "Session started normally" )
I use this in order to save time because you waste more time doing the outlap than doing the hotlap!!!.
> - Time limited format (honestly I don't know how
> to implement this, open to suggestions)
Many people here are not ready for this, infact they will be frustrated because the laps that they will do during TL will be much slower and
it requires a lot more time to practice in order to do the attempt of the TL.
In my opinion this should be implemented in season 3.
2010 to 2021 Gp4 Track updates
-------------------------------------------------------
> - Enforce 60 frames per second (guaranteed equal
> physics for everyone)
I would like to know who was the brain behind this, because that phrase alone is so contradictary Frames Per Seconds DOES NOT ALTER PHYSICS OF THE GAME
Their are tools that alter the gp4 physics ...
> - Disallow loading saving games (log must report
> "Session started normally" )
I use this in order to save time because you waste more time doing the outlap than doing the hotlap!!!.
> - Time limited format (honestly I don't know how
> to implement this, open to suggestions)
Many people here are not ready for this, infact they will be frustrated because the laps that they will do during TL will be much slower and
it requires a lot more time to practice in order to do the attempt of the TL.
In my opinion this should be implemented in season 3.
2010 to 2021 Gp4 Track updates
Hey guys, just wanted to say that I'm sorry for only participating for one event this season so far. I didn't have the time and also sometimes commitment to do hotlaps on the weekend.
I hope I can get myself more commited towards the last handful of races.
Apart from that even tho I only participated once I have to say that I agree with Jorges 2nd point that loading saves is actually a very good tool to save time since otherwise you would have to completely drive an outlap.
I used it a lot at Imola.
Unless autosaves actually alter the game physics I don't see why that should be disallowed
I hope I can get myself more commited towards the last handful of races.
Apart from that even tho I only participated once I have to say that I agree with Jorges 2nd point that loading saves is actually a very good tool to save time since otherwise you would have to completely drive an outlap.
I used it a lot at Imola.
Unless autosaves actually alter the game physics I don't see why that should be disallowed
Prblanco Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just for the record @ksezen all your submitted
> laps this round had save/restore enabled, in case
> you didn't notice. I will stand by my decision
> unless a majority of drivers is against it.
> Results table coming "soon"
>
> Anyway, let's start taking note of proposed rule
> changes for the second "half" of the season,
> including some I've received in private, so
> everyone can state their opinion.
>
> - Enforce 60 frames per second (guaranteed equal
> physics for everyone)
> - Disallow loading saving games (log must report
> "Session started normally" )
> - Time limited format (honestly I don't know how
> to implement this, open to suggestions)
- I don't mind the enforcement of the 60 FPS rule, I'm already using this setting
- I don't use save state/restore state function, so I don't mind it being refused (I'm selfish here sorry, I don't mind it staying either)
- What do you mean by time limited format ?
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just for the record @ksezen all your submitted
> laps this round had save/restore enabled, in case
> you didn't notice. I will stand by my decision
> unless a majority of drivers is against it.
> Results table coming "soon"
>
> Anyway, let's start taking note of proposed rule
> changes for the second "half" of the season,
> including some I've received in private, so
> everyone can state their opinion.
>
> - Enforce 60 frames per second (guaranteed equal
> physics for everyone)
> - Disallow loading saving games (log must report
> "Session started normally" )
> - Time limited format (honestly I don't know how
> to implement this, open to suggestions)
- I don't mind the enforcement of the 60 FPS rule, I'm already using this setting
- I don't use save state/restore state function, so I don't mind it being refused (I'm selfish here sorry, I don't mind it staying either)
- What do you mean by time limited format ?
Regarding physics and frame rate: In GP4 (and the whole Geoff Crammond GP series), unlike more recent racing simulators, physics calculations are tied to the graphical frame rate (for example, iRacing's physics run at 360 Hz). In other words, in GP4, every frame on the screen also corresponds to a time step in the physics calculation. I confirmed this during my GP4.exe investigations, where for example I found a calculation where both the engine flywheel inertia and the graphical frame rate are on the same formula.
This can be especially relevant in moments like braking and cornering, since variables like weight distribution, suspension travel etc. change very quickly and a shorter or longer time step may have a noticeable effect. For example, under our current rules, for those running 60 fps have a time step of 0.0166 seconds and those running 45 fps have a time step of 0.0222 seconds. Which means, for every 3 physics calculations for the 45 fps runners, there are 4 physics calculations for the 60 fps runners.
Now, is this beneficial or harmful to the competition in any way? Is it better to have less or more physics calculations in the same amount of time? Does it make a difference in handling and how you need to drive? Does it make any difference in laptime? Is it an unfair advantage to run a specific FPS value? All these questions can be debated and I don't have the answers for any of those, but I can 100% assure that, in GP4, different graphical frame rates mean different physics calculations.
What is time limited format: in a League I participated long ago, it ran somewhere along these lines: we opened the League website and clicked a button "ready to race". The website would generate a random number, for example, 5428; and record when I clicked the button. I'd then open my GP4 and edit the driver name to, for example, enrique bernoldi5428. From the moment I clicked the website button, I'd have a limited time to submit my lap/race (60 minutes for example). The number on my driver name would be the guarantee that I did my runs under the time limit. There wasn't, of course, any restriction on how much practice I took before clicking the website button and starting my time limit.
My unfinished tracks: [www.grandprixgames.org]
Send bug reports and track editing questions to f1virtualblog@gmail.com
This can be especially relevant in moments like braking and cornering, since variables like weight distribution, suspension travel etc. change very quickly and a shorter or longer time step may have a noticeable effect. For example, under our current rules, for those running 60 fps have a time step of 0.0166 seconds and those running 45 fps have a time step of 0.0222 seconds. Which means, for every 3 physics calculations for the 45 fps runners, there are 4 physics calculations for the 60 fps runners.
Now, is this beneficial or harmful to the competition in any way? Is it better to have less or more physics calculations in the same amount of time? Does it make a difference in handling and how you need to drive? Does it make any difference in laptime? Is it an unfair advantage to run a specific FPS value? All these questions can be debated and I don't have the answers for any of those, but I can 100% assure that, in GP4, different graphical frame rates mean different physics calculations.
What is time limited format: in a League I participated long ago, it ran somewhere along these lines: we opened the League website and clicked a button "ready to race". The website would generate a random number, for example, 5428; and record when I clicked the button. I'd then open my GP4 and edit the driver name to, for example, enrique bernoldi5428. From the moment I clicked the website button, I'd have a limited time to submit my lap/race (60 minutes for example). The number on my driver name would be the guarantee that I did my runs under the time limit. There wasn't, of course, any restriction on how much practice I took before clicking the website button and starting my time limit.
My unfinished tracks: [www.grandprixgames.org]
Send bug reports and track editing questions to f1virtualblog@gmail.com
Prblanco Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Now, is this beneficial or harmful to the
> competition in any way? Is it better to have less
> or more physics calculations in the same amount of
> time? Does it make a difference in handling and
> how you need to drive? Does it make any difference
> in laptime? Is it an unfair advantage to run a
> specific FPS value? All these questions can be
> debated and I don't have the answers for any of
> those, but I can 100% assure that, in GP4,
> different graphical frame rates mean different
> physics calculations.
GP4 1.02 Hotlap for track 13: Hungaroring
Level: Ace / Frame rate: 60.0 FPS
Race type: Practise Session: Unlimited practise
Weather type: Custom Probability of rain: 0%
Car #2, driven by jorge (ferrari - ferrari)
Power: 855 BHP, weight 610 kg, fuel laps: 2.2
Lap time: 1:19.461 (split1 0:28.264, split2 0:56.217)
[www.mediafire.com]
I did a quick test and i was 1 tenth and a fraccion slower and i mainly i think because i didnt do any driving in the hungaroring since last tuesday.
Infact i was faster in S2 than my fastests lap i uploaded for the event.
So i continue to say this FPS thing is nonsense.
2010 to 2021 Gp4 Track updates
-------------------------------------------------------
> Now, is this beneficial or harmful to the
> competition in any way? Is it better to have less
> or more physics calculations in the same amount of
> time? Does it make a difference in handling and
> how you need to drive? Does it make any difference
> in laptime? Is it an unfair advantage to run a
> specific FPS value? All these questions can be
> debated and I don't have the answers for any of
> those, but I can 100% assure that, in GP4,
> different graphical frame rates mean different
> physics calculations.
GP4 1.02 Hotlap for track 13: Hungaroring
Level: Ace / Frame rate: 60.0 FPS
Race type: Practise Session: Unlimited practise
Weather type: Custom Probability of rain: 0%
Car #2, driven by jorge (ferrari - ferrari)
Power: 855 BHP, weight 610 kg, fuel laps: 2.2
Lap time: 1:19.461 (split1 0:28.264, split2 0:56.217)
[www.mediafire.com]
I did a quick test and i was 1 tenth and a fraccion slower and i mainly i think because i didnt do any driving in the hungaroring since last tuesday.
Infact i was faster in S2 than my fastests lap i uploaded for the event.
So i continue to say this FPS thing is nonsense.
2010 to 2021 Gp4 Track updates
I'm the one who suggested a mandatory 60FPS.
For the benefit of fairness, and most of all for the bouncing back of the fun which motivated this TTL creation. From my side I have not reached Paulo's level of detail on debugging the gp4.exe, which in his report clearly shows a disbalance on cars behaviour under different FPS.
Though, doing myself hotlaps under 60 and 45 FPS for Hungaroring it was fairly noticeable the difference. For two days last week I was not able to run below a 1:20.300 without infringing track limits. Today morning, out of curiosity, I switched the graphics from 60 to 45 FPS and after one single attempt, not saving laps let alone restoring it I managed a 1:20.100.
Thus, for me and my not so brillant brain Yes, frames per second affect car response under braking and reacceleration, and this disbalance the praise of competition, and take the whole fun out of the thing. I don't need to be the fastest guy, all I want is to know everyone is running under same conditions.
For the benefit of fairness, and most of all for the bouncing back of the fun which motivated this TTL creation. From my side I have not reached Paulo's level of detail on debugging the gp4.exe, which in his report clearly shows a disbalance on cars behaviour under different FPS.
Though, doing myself hotlaps under 60 and 45 FPS for Hungaroring it was fairly noticeable the difference. For two days last week I was not able to run below a 1:20.300 without infringing track limits. Today morning, out of curiosity, I switched the graphics from 60 to 45 FPS and after one single attempt, not saving laps let alone restoring it I managed a 1:20.100.
Thus, for me and my not so brillant brain Yes, frames per second affect car response under braking and reacceleration, and this disbalance the praise of competition, and take the whole fun out of the thing. I don't need to be the fastest guy, all I want is to know everyone is running under same conditions.
gildoorf Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm the one who suggested a mandatory 60FPS.
>
> For the benefit of fairness, and most of all for
> the bouncing back of the fun which motivated this
> TTL creation. From my side I have not reached
> Paulo's level of detail on debugging the gp4.exe,
> which in his report clearly shows a disbalance on
> cars behaviour under different FPS.
It may show in his debugging but in reality in driving i didnt notice anything.
gildoorf Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Though, doing myself hotlaps under 60 and 45 FPS
> for Hungaroring it was fairly noticeable the
> difference. For two days last week I was not able
> to run below a 1:20.300 without infringing track
> limits. Today morning, out of curiosity, I
> switched the graphics from 60 to 45 FPS and after
> one single attempt, not saving laps let alone
> restoring it I managed a 1:20.100.
So because you got lucky or because your practiced a lot and managed a great time you
you think it was for the FPS...
Trully amazing how some people are more sensitive than others ... because i didnt notice any difference
and i even uploaded a lap to prove it, not just putting some words in writting here.
gildoorf Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thus, for me and my not so brillant brain Yes,
> frames per second affect car response under
> braking and reacceleration, and this disbalance
> the praise of competition, and take the whole fun
> out of the thing. I don't need to be the fastest
> guy, all I want is to know everyone is running
> under same conditions.
Custom track 13: 'Hungaroring'
checksum 0b1a96e0
init, car, damage, cc checksum: fc7160b0, 00000000, 6015de08, 928cee6c
Thats the fairness.
And i see where this is going. Its not the first time people try to alter the rules to try to slow me down or change conditions of the events.
What i think is some people here are desperate for a win and i think: "if i cant beat them on the track i might as well change the rules" ...
Truthfully, nothing surprises me anymore.
2010 to 2021 Gp4 Track updates
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm the one who suggested a mandatory 60FPS.
>
> For the benefit of fairness, and most of all for
> the bouncing back of the fun which motivated this
> TTL creation. From my side I have not reached
> Paulo's level of detail on debugging the gp4.exe,
> which in his report clearly shows a disbalance on
> cars behaviour under different FPS.
It may show in his debugging but in reality in driving i didnt notice anything.
gildoorf Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Though, doing myself hotlaps under 60 and 45 FPS
> for Hungaroring it was fairly noticeable the
> difference. For two days last week I was not able
> to run below a 1:20.300 without infringing track
> limits. Today morning, out of curiosity, I
> switched the graphics from 60 to 45 FPS and after
> one single attempt, not saving laps let alone
> restoring it I managed a 1:20.100.
So because you got lucky or because your practiced a lot and managed a great time you
you think it was for the FPS...
Trully amazing how some people are more sensitive than others ... because i didnt notice any difference
and i even uploaded a lap to prove it, not just putting some words in writting here.
gildoorf Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thus, for me and my not so brillant brain Yes,
> frames per second affect car response under
> braking and reacceleration, and this disbalance
> the praise of competition, and take the whole fun
> out of the thing. I don't need to be the fastest
> guy, all I want is to know everyone is running
> under same conditions.
Custom track 13: 'Hungaroring'
checksum 0b1a96e0
init, car, damage, cc checksum: fc7160b0, 00000000, 6015de08, 928cee6c
Thats the fairness.
And i see where this is going. Its not the first time people try to alter the rules to try to slow me down or change conditions of the events.
What i think is some people here are desperate for a win and i think: "if i cant beat them on the track i might as well change the rules" ...
Truthfully, nothing surprises me anymore.
2010 to 2021 Gp4 Track updates
I also did some back and forth testing back in Imola for about half an hour, and whilst I'm no Top Gear Stig in consistency, I was able to set much better times and have a better feel with a lower fps than a higher one, even though there was more time to think with 60fps.
Paul's inspection into the code only confirms my 'feel' and lap time tests I did earlier in the season.
I've been running at the minimum allowable ever since. For total parity and a true competition, I think it's best to standardise the fps.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/02/2022 09:37AM by fongu.
Paul's inspection into the code only confirms my 'feel' and lap time tests I did earlier in the season.
I've been running at the minimum allowable ever since. For total parity and a true competition, I think it's best to standardise the fps.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/02/2022 09:37AM by fongu.
I am having a lot of fun driving in Spa after so much time.
I hope everyone is having fun too.
Over here i am in the 1m46s, I think its ok, i dont know what to expect because of the
limits to alter the setup.
Anyway i hope everyone is doing great.
2010 to 2021 Gp4 Track updates
I hope everyone is having fun too.
Over here i am in the 1m46s, I think its ok, i dont know what to expect because of the
limits to alter the setup.
Anyway i hope everyone is doing great.
2010 to 2021 Gp4 Track updates
Summary of received laps, checks still pending:
1 JCaranti 1:46.144
2 gildoorf 1:46.960 +0.816
3 ksezen 1:47.602 +1.458
4 Hinyaldee 1:48.544 +2.400
It seems not everyone returned from the season break
Zandvoort for this week's round is available at the F1virtual website.
My unfinished tracks: [www.grandprixgames.org]
Send bug reports and track editing questions to f1virtualblog@gmail.com
1 JCaranti 1:46.144
2 gildoorf 1:46.960 +0.816
3 ksezen 1:47.602 +1.458
4 Hinyaldee 1:48.544 +2.400
It seems not everyone returned from the season break
Zandvoort for this week's round is available at the F1virtual website.
My unfinished tracks: [www.grandprixgames.org]
Send bug reports and track editing questions to f1virtualblog@gmail.com
Prblanco Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Summary of received laps, checks still pending:
>
> 1 JCaranti 1:46.144
> 2 gildoorf 1:46.960 +0.816
> 3 ksezen 1:47.602 +1.458
> 4 Hinyaldee 1:48.544 +2.400
>
> It seems not everyone returned from the season
> break
>
> Zandvoort for this week's round is available at
> the F1virtual website.
Guess who's last, last again :D
-------------------------------------------------------
> Summary of received laps, checks still pending:
>
> 1 JCaranti 1:46.144
> 2 gildoorf 1:46.960 +0.816
> 3 ksezen 1:47.602 +1.458
> 4 Hinyaldee 1:48.544 +2.400
>
> It seems not everyone returned from the season
> break
>
> Zandvoort for this week's round is available at
> the F1virtual website.
Guess who's last, last again :D
It was a very marginal call on whether ksezen's best lap (1:47.602) was on or off track at turn 9, it was ultimately deemed off track, but I'm open to reviewing it again if there is interest. It won't change the final result though.
I'll do my best to find some time to submit a lap this week, hopefully more people return as well
My unfinished tracks: [www.grandprixgames.org]
Send bug reports and track editing questions to f1virtualblog@gmail.com
Prblanco Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It was a very marginal call on whether ksezen's
> best lap (1:47.602) was on or off track at turn 9,
> it was ultimately deemed off track, but I'm open
> to reviewing it again if there is interest. It
> won't change the final result though.
>
No thanks Blanco, it is ok. I hope we can see more driver next track. i miss the races when drivers are sperated with 0.010 secs. than i can ask review for that kind of lap
-------------------------------------------------------
> It was a very marginal call on whether ksezen's
> best lap (1:47.602) was on or off track at turn 9,
> it was ultimately deemed off track, but I'm open
> to reviewing it again if there is interest. It
> won't change the final result though.
>
No thanks Blanco, it is ok. I hope we can see more driver next track. i miss the races when drivers are sperated with 0.010 secs. than i can ask review for that kind of lap
ksezen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Prblanco Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > It was a very marginal call on whether ksezen's
> > best lap (1:47.602) was on or off track at turn
> 9,
> > it was ultimately deemed off track, but I'm
> open
> > to reviewing it again if there is interest. It
> > won't change the final result though.
> >
>
> No thanks Blanco, it is ok. I hope we can see more
> driver next track. i miss the races when drivers
> are sperated with 0.010 secs. than i can ask
> review for that kind of lap
Weeeeeeelll, for that I'd need to get drastically better or cheat ha ha ha
-------------------------------------------------------
> Prblanco Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > It was a very marginal call on whether ksezen's
> > best lap (1:47.602) was on or off track at turn
> 9,
> > it was ultimately deemed off track, but I'm
> open
> > to reviewing it again if there is interest. It
> > won't change the final result though.
> >
>
> No thanks Blanco, it is ok. I hope we can see more
> driver next track. i miss the races when drivers
> are sperated with 0.010 secs. than i can ask
> review for that kind of lap
Weeeeeeelll, for that I'd need to get drastically better or cheat ha ha ha
Did someone set a time already and tell me his laptime? That would be nice, so that I can know how my pace is
Thanks
Thanks
deokastyler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Did someone set a time already and tell me his
> laptime? That would be nice, so that I can know
> how my pace is
> Thanks
Not as of yet, sorry
-------------------------------------------------------
> Did someone set a time already and tell me his
> laptime? That would be nice, so that I can know
> how my pace is
> Thanks
Not as of yet, sorry
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.