2017-07-25 snapshot (Updated 2017-07-26)

[VUSTTOS]

Time trial starting point is now one gate further back than before.

Would be a posibility for the next snapshot to be able to change the back up restart bottom? Sadly I've had the rear brake in the same bottom for ages and can't get used to anything else. I've read about more people having the same "issue".

Thanks for the updates, gonna be testing erode after a few weeks out of sim.

[barrington314]

Have you tried 2.0-2.5 yet?

I haven't. If we do a radius of 2, then we should have a displacement of 1. My fear is that the development of the rut wont be noticeable enough for the next rider to see and take the same line. (unless we run erode pretty high but then we know that it gets choppy) But it is worth trying. I'll do an update to Unadilla and try it in a couple corners to see what happens.

[ShackAttack12]

Have you tried 2.0-2.5 yet?

I haven't. If we do a radius of 2, then we should have a displacement of 1.

Does displacement have to be half of the radius? I'd think if the erode_slope was set properly, the displacement could be the same as the Erode_depth without ill effects.

It might be cool to do burnout comparisons for the various settings. Compare the "shape" of the rut side-by-side via screenshots.

[Big Smooth one3]

Have you tried 2.0-2.5 yet?

I haven't. If we do a radius of 2, then we should have a displacement of 1.

Does displacement have to be half of the radius? I'd think if the erode_slope was set properly, the displacement could be the same as the Erode_depth without ill effects.

It might be cool to do burnout comparisons for the various settings. Compare the "shape" of the rut side-by-side via screenshots.

Not sure if this will help, but here is what Charlotte's simple erode settings are:

Code: Select all

erode_depth 3
erode_displacement 1.3
erode_radius 3

When Chris, Race and I were playing earlier, it seemed to form pretty realistic/narrow ruts like I had hoped. Can't remember how many guys were playing (less than 20?), with server set at 5, but it worked out OK - could have been a bit deeper, though, which would have come with more riders in the server and/or slightly greater depth.

Whether it's really what happens or not, I just guessed at these numbers while thinking the displacement value in particular would help to keep the width between ruts smaller (if that makes sense). There are many guys on here, like the two of you, who have a better understanding of every component involved, but these settings in our race earlier seemed to deliver the most narrow/small/quasi-realistically sized ruts of the few online erode sessions I've been in.

Hope this can help.

[ShackAttack12]

Charlotte

Haven't tried Charlotte out yet, but it sounds promising. I'll check it out tonight.

[Racers52]

Charlotte

Haven't tried Charlotte out yet, but it sounds promising. I'll check it out tonight.

The diameter is good, but the ruts are really choppy

[Big Smooth one3]

Charlotte

Haven't tried Charlotte out yet, but it sounds promising. I'll check it out tonight.

The diameter is good, but the ruts are really choppy

Yea, agreed. Definitely some testing and tweaking needed in general, hopefully this can be another data point, but was at least encouraged by the rut width if nothing else.

[ShackAttack12]

JLV, not sure what to make of it, but there's a strange correlation with setting the server,erode to 2 and huge, intermittent lag spikes every 5-10 seconds. Any ideas?

[M@xTizZz]

Charlotte

Haven't tried Charlotte out yet, but it sounds promising. I'll check it out tonight.

The diameter is good, but the ruts are really choppy

because we need to set the others erode settings or is it a consequence of a smaller disp ?

[jlv]

I forgot to say when I posted the server, you should set --min-version to 26 if you're running erode. Otherwise you'll let old clients in who will have a smooth track.

Ahh cool, so you already changed the Unadilla settings. Still thinking a radius of 3.5 is too high. Thats a 7 foot wide hole dug when we do a burnout. Have you tried 2.0-2.5 yet?

I understand that a larger radius making wider ruts allows for ruts that are a lot more forgiving/easier to ride, but when in motocross are there multiple cupped out berms in each corner? :lol:

Using a tiny radius is misguided in my opinion. The radius doesn't control how wide a ditch is dug. It sets the minimum distance where the ground is completely unaffected by the force the bike puts into it. That's much farther than you might think. I used to think track wear was all from the tires directly digging and throwing roost until I saw a video where riders were hitting a berm and the whole berm was visibly moving as each rider hit it. That opened my eyes to the fact that to get it right you have to model the plastic motion of the ground due to the force the bike is exerting into it. That's what the more recent force based erode models, and running the radius too low will prevent it from doing its job.

Instead of thinking about digging holes you should be thinking about the force exerted into the ground and the area affected by that. It's definitely wider than the contact patch!

JLV, not sure what to make of it, but there's a strange correlation with setting the server,erode to 2 and huge, intermittent lag spikes every 5-10 seconds. Any ideas?

I can't see why 2 would be special. Are you sure it isn't a coincidence?

[David R21]

i cant get this snap shot to work everytime i try to open it it says "cant find game data" tell me how i can fix it or if im being stupid

[yzmxer608]

I'm also thinking the "On/Off" action of the anti-lock brakes causes some weird braking bumps.

I was wondering how this would effect it. That and people who only use front brakes and no rear brake under normal braking (like me). I'd think there's maybe a handful of people in the whole game that don't use anti-lock front brake.

[Racers52]

Erode 4 with 27 people, 10 laps.










Did some intensive testing tonight.

Found that the higher value erode, the worse the chop and lines would form. Also, if the erode value is high, if a rider crashes he can severely fuck-up

the track. IMO, the more riders you have, the lower erode value you must have. This will reduce the load on the server. Tried erode 2 with 40 people

and the server almost died. Then tried erode 1 with 40 people and it ran smooth.

[Atom6246]

Was really fun playing with erode again especially on an rF track with a decent amount of people^
Although it sucked I had to leave eventually because I started getting frame skips down to 8fps. JLV is there any hope for future optimization?

[ShackAttack12]

1. Any thoughts on preserving the erode across multiple restarts, so that the erosion could be built over a series of motos? It would be awesome for replica events to start off open practice with a perfectly smooth track and realistic erosion settings and just have the erosion build up over the course of the race event (timed practice, timed qualifiers, both classes motos. The last moto would be the roughest. Supercross we may not want that, but for outdoors it would be awesome.

2. I mentioned it a few times now, but i'll add it here for reference.To get the experience of a rough track by the end of a race, On public servers (none races) i think the "server,erode #" value should be dynamic. In other words, target a TotalErosion value or EndErosion value. An equation like this:

TotalErosion = (NumPlayers) * (NumLaps) * (Server,Erode #).

So lets say we target a Total Erosion of 500 for a 10 lap race with 5 riders. The server,erode# would be 10 dynamically.
For that same TotalErosion value of 500, a 10 lap race with 20 riders would have a server,erode# of 2.5 dynamically.

Both would have pretty close net track erosion by the end of the race. Obviously they wont be identical, but if we're going for the "Eroded"/"Roughed-in track" experience, it might be a good idea.

This would also prevent smooth tracks from being ultra boring to ride when not many people are on the track.