Are the physics done with development?

Post anything about MX Simulator here. Please. I'm begging you.
Post Reply
tobz173
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:19 am

Are the physics done with development?

Post by tobz173 »

I realise development has moved on to other things, the mediocre multiplayer is great, and some of the tracks coming out now are getting slightly closer to the caliber that we used to see back in the day, but are the physics done as far as development is concerned? They're definitely a good thing, and absolutely love the hint of realistic handling, but is there a big white elephant in the room when it comes to talking about how overly sensitive the front is to being washed out? or how these things handle is the simplest of whoops sections? sure you can swap out in real life, but it's honestly luck of the Irish if you can make it through a set of whoops at anything near full speed, it's almost as though the rider doesn't have legs holding onto the bike, allowing it to swap ridiculously. Please post if you agree, but I'd love to hear why you would disagree.
Image
Dont ever question my determination and my will to win - Chad Reed
gordy
Posts: 1099
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:43 am
Team: Privateer
Location: Bathurst, Australia

Re: Are the physics done with development?

Post by gordy »

jlv wrote:There are changes I plan on making that will affect cornering. The current traction is done with Coulumb friction. That is close to correct for dry sliding surfaces like concrete, pavement or hardpacked dirt. When the tires actually dig into the dirt there is a viscous drag effect that isn't modeled with the current traction system. In future versions it will be possible to give a different coefficient of friction for each slip rate. That will allow for much closer modeling of softer soils. That should help prevent the unexpected washouts because it will slip some before it gives out entirely.
Image
instupitious.
DJ99X
Posts: 15524
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:36 am
Location: Land Down Under

Re: Are the physics done with development?

Post by DJ99X »

Was gonna quote that too.

But I'll post this image

Image
tobz173
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:19 am

Re: Are the physics done with development?

Post by tobz173 »

Not exactly white, is it?



Excellent, thanks gordy! guess i haven't quite sifted there every post yet, cheers.
Image
Dont ever question my determination and my will to win - Chad Reed
tobz173
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:19 am

Re: Are the physics done with development?

Post by tobz173 »

So that explains the qualms with the sensitive from end. No comments on the pogo-like backend?
Image
Dont ever question my determination and my will to win - Chad Reed
DJ99X
Posts: 15524
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:36 am
Location: Land Down Under

Re: Are the physics done with development?

Post by DJ99X »

Pogo-like backend? Just turn the rear rebound down
tobz173
Posts: 94
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:19 am

Re: Are the physics done with development?

Post by tobz173 »

thanks mate, helps a bit.
Image
Dont ever question my determination and my will to win - Chad Reed
Garasaki
Posts: 1959
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 4:33 pm

Re: Are the physics done with development?

Post by Garasaki »

Um it might be less confusing to say "turn the rear rebound up" (make the number higher = more damping)

Good bike setup makes this game a lot less frustrating.
Image
DR.MIZ wrote: Keeping something "secret" so you can be "cool" is not making a flourishing community.
DJ99X
Posts: 15524
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:36 am
Location: Land Down Under

Re: Are the physics done with development?

Post by DJ99X »

Oh really, I though increasing Shock Rebound reduced damping, in effect quickening the suspension's return. I just associated those sliders with how quickly it worked, so I have had it round the wrong way this whole time.
ShackAttack12
Posts: 3131
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 1:51 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Are the physics done with development?

Post by ShackAttack12 »

DJ wrote:Oh really, I though increasing Shock Rebound reduced damping, in effect quickening the suspension's return. I just associated those sliders with how quickly it worked, so I have had it round the wrong way this whole time.
The suspensions adjustments are damping adjustments, not spring adjustments.

Higher the setting = prevents "that action"

higher rebound damping = prevents rebound more.

... in simple terms.
ShackAttack12
| 2010 Supercross Champ | 2011 Supercross Champ | 2019 Supercross Champ |
DJ99X
Posts: 15524
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:36 am
Location: Land Down Under

Re: Are the physics done with development?

Post by DJ99X »

I see. Well, that would probably explain why suspension settings I think should work, don't
Garasaki
Posts: 1959
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2008 4:33 pm

Re: Are the physics done with development?

Post by Garasaki »

Having descriptions on these settings is one of those things on JLV's honey-do list.
Image
DR.MIZ wrote: Keeping something "secret" so you can be "cool" is not making a flourishing community.
jbob23
Posts: 1096
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 4:06 am
Team: Privateer
Location: Inman, Kansas

Re: Are the physics done with development?

Post by jbob23 »

welcome to like 4 weeks ago DJ!!! gah. lol we had a big discussion about it. it helps alot once u get it set up right. feels alot more realistic.
Post Reply