Realistic Bike Mass and Geometry

Post your suggestions here
ehm24
Posts: 1556
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:12 am
Team: Used to be Factory
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Realistic Bike Mass and Geometry

Post by ehm24 »

I think we should keep the scaling as it is, the 450's in game feel as fast as a 450 irl, it's just we have no consequences in game and I think that's what we need in sim. There are still people that hit big lines pretty precisely lap after lap though.

I suggested in ts that we should have some sort of device set up to your body, so if you crash hard in sim and brake you ig femur it brakes your irl femur. I think thatd be a perfect way to make every second guess going big.
Image
sethiemeboi
Crushed Dissenter
Posts: 745
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2015 5:17 pm
Team: VlastMX
Location: Right Behind You....
Contact:

Re: Realistic Bike Mass and Geometry

Post by sethiemeboi »

mxsrider96 wrote:This would be great, as long as it would really make people ride different bikes, and not just the fastest bike
the fastest bikes in the game are the lightest ones listed
Image
mxr449
Posts: 584
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:43 pm
Team: SYS / FAMmx Design
Location: Quad Cities Illinois
Contact:

Re: Realistic Bike Mass and Geometry

Post by mxr449 »

I think this is a tough issue to deal with when it comes to Mx Simulator but I agree with nerfing the 450s a bit. The 450s in game are probably the same speed as they are in real life but as said in previous post, with no risk, people are going to try and send the big lines when the penalty is only 5-10 seconds and sometimes not even a complete fall off. Imagine if any pro were to open up a 450 in real life like what's seen in Mx Simulator. They would probably be jumping just as far. But the fall off would be months, years or even a lifetime of injuries.

I remember in 2011 or maybe it was 2012 when the Arenacross series was being held. The two classes you could choose from was 125 or 250. That seemed to work out awesome. There were multiple lines being done in rhythms, sometimes even just double double double if you weren't able to get a good run out of the corner. The 250s obviously had a lot easier time doing the big lines than the 125s but it wasn't as consistent as it would of been if they were on 450s and some of them still opted to double in to be safe.

I'm not saying we should only use those two bikes, but that was one time that I remember where riders in the bigger class were doing different lines, struggling to triple into a section and they were actually having to shift to do the big lines. In sim now, almost any triple out of a corner can be done in first gear on a 450 and like Chex said, once you've successfully triple into a section, there isn't much we can do to stop the momentum.

I do see the argument behind changing the traction but I would rather this not be done. I enjoy the traction we have because we are able to push it without worrying about washing a front end as easy as it use to be with JLV's' traction. After reading this thread, I ripped around on a 2010, 2011, 2012 and a 2013 SX track and it was not nearly as enjoyable. It doesn't help that I'm used to the new traction, haven't ridden the old traction in a long time and don't have the proper setup to accommodate the old traction but I do remember having similar issues back when those were the main supercross tracks. The leaning system we have now is very difficult as it is. I don't think it should be changed at all but I would rather not see a traction that makes it harder to stay consistent.

Instead of going through the trouble of changing the Dynos for each bike, what if there was a way to use the homologate feature in servers but add in a subtraction from horsepower element.

Such as:
homologate crf450-10hp|rmz450-10hp|kxf450-10hp|350sxf-5hp|450sxf-10hp|

I'm not really sure if that is a great answer to the problem but that would at least give us an opportunity to test different horsepowers to see if we can find a solution without having JLV go through the code to release a new snapshot.

As far as changing jump faces, if we lower the faces too much, or take away from the lip - to me it doesn't seem as realistic. With lower jump faces, I think we would basically be barely skimming across the top of jumps. I like having the pop off a jump where you go up and then down having to downside the landing good to complete the rhythm rather than just flying straight forward as fast as possible. The further and lower you jump, the more speed you are going to carry and while that might make the rhythm lines more realistic as far as how many singles you are jumping, it wouldn't eliminate the power that the 450s have.

To sum all that up, I believe that we need to make it harder for 450s to do the big lines. As I said in the first paragraph, I do think the 450s are accurate to real life but there is no risk. I'm not sure how I feel about changing the way the fall offs work either. I'd like to see it where riders have to check up and double out of a corner if they slide out instead of tripling in every lap regardless of corner speed. Imagine a 450 class all on 250s. The big lines would be more difficult and I think more realistic lines throughout a rhythm would end up being the norm. I also think the racing would be better since riders won't be able to do the big lines as consistently as they are able to do now. When it comes to fall off and traction - the game is very hard as it is and I don't think we need to make it harder by having a slicker traction and harder fall offs.
Post Reply