2014 MotoOption Supercross Rd 14 - Houston

[checkerz]

From what i see work has been made on the scale. It looks like jumps are closer together. Problem seems to be that they are too big, it seems like they do not fit with the new spacing. I stopped between two jump in the first section. The higher part of some jumps are higher than the rider himself when he is up on the bike. Too big, IMO.

Maybe this video will help you to understand what i mean : http://instagram.com/p/mVy1kbORPu/

I don't know if it's for real or if it's just a feeling because of how the jumps are made, but i feel like JLV' jumps are a little smaller. Don't know about the rest of the track (width and length) as it is harder to compare. It is hard to explain how i feel about this but as some of the track makers said you used the 1:25 scale all year, i believe it all depends on the jumps as it is the other major variable.

Jumps are scaled to 1.2 height and distance. That means 3 foot jumps are 3.6 ft in game, 5 foot jumps are 6 foot in game, etc.

Yes, distance is strictly at 1.2 scale between jumps.

Width is at 1.2 scale based on a 22.5 track width. JLV's were based in the past off a 25 foot width, while real SX is 20 feet wide. (So we went right down the middle on that).

Previous rounds were a bit off on scale because we were scaling the maps proportionately based on width which was causing jump distances to be extremely off. This time we've scaled off the jump distances and put the widths where they needed to be. It's a bit trickier, but IMO it makes a better product.

The width matches last weeks width by the way. Jump heights are pretty close as well. Spacing is really the biggest shift.

What was the base for JLV's scale ?
Distance between jumps seems to be close from distances used on JLV's tracks, it is just jumps that look bigger. But if you say that the scale is the same for distance and height of the jumps... I don't know where does this feeling come from.

Track width is not a big deal for me. I kind of like the idea to use a 22,5 track width. Make it harder to jump big triple out of a turn and so make a track more technical.

JLV's jump spacing was at 1.25 vs. the 1.2 on this track. Probably a foot different? Not much really. The difference in look/feel is the height. I'm not sure what scale JLV used height-wise, but it wasn't proportionate to the length scale I don't think. The other thing is, if you look at JLV's jumps, the earlier tracks come to a complete razor sharp peak and the later ones slightly had that rounded, but were very sharp angles basically giving an extra couple of feet between each jump but also not giving a nice rounded top to case on without having weird things happen. I'ts a super fine balance that I know he worked with even when starting to round the tops.

[barrington314]

While Im pretty sure JLVs spacing was at 1.25, his jump heights were still at 1:1.

[jlv]

That's correct. I used to go for maximum flow back in the 125/250f days. With the big bikes I had to steepen the landings to make some of the super crazy jumps harder which left more room to round the jumps off. I probably didn't go far enough with that, but I like to keep things conservative when I change stuff.

[MX PRODIGY 17]

Watching the races and this track is on point with real life. Good job ladies.

[yzmxer608]

back in the 125/250f days.

Those were the days...

[Lo2Rider]

JLV's jump spacing was at 1.25 vs. the 1.2 on this track. Probably a foot different? Not much really. The difference in look/feel is the height. I'm not sure what scale JLV used height-wise, but it wasn't proportionate to the length scale I don't think. The other thing is, if you look at JLV's jumps, the earlier tracks come to a complete razor sharp peak and the later ones slightly had that rounded, but were very sharp angles basically giving an extra couple of feet between each jump but also not giving a nice rounded top to case on without having weird things happen. I'ts a super fine balance that I know he worked with even when starting to round the tops.

Yep, i notice the evolution of JLV's jumps too. But, as he said, there was no big changes. Never had that much weird reactions on previous years tracks. This year i have to set my suspension harder sometimes. If i don't, the bike scrubs or the rider fall off (superman mode) because of the choc of the front of the jump.

Maybe that, as it has been said, using different scale for spacing and height allow to compensate the fact that, ingame, power/scale ratio is different from real life and people ride differently.

One thing that impress me is that JLV was able to use 1:25 scale for spacing and 1:1 scale for the jumps but despite that the spacing doesn't look overscaled at all.

[barrington314]

I agree that the spacing didnt look over scaled, but i felt like the width was. But then if you "fixed" that it might then make the spacing seem over scaled. Its my idea that if we are building replicas, they should be built to a specific scale. Meaning everything 1:1 or everything 1.25:1 or whatever the number might be. There shouldnt be any question about it. Follow the blue prints, 3 footers, 5 footers, 25 foot gaps... and so on. Its really simple actually. Then the only thing left to complain about would be track layout and thats nothing any of us can control. The smaller the scale the slower we would be going which should allow us to control ourselves better. But the problem here (IMO) is 1. everyone still thinks you have to go WFO because thats what they are use to. 2. bike collisions and lag dont really allow for close racing. What I dont get is why the tracks ever needed to be scaled up or mix scaled in the first place if bikes are built 1:1 and the engine dynos are all based off real life stuff. It feels like its a weightless or not enough gravity type of thing going on. Just last night I was in a sand section going pretty slow and hit a bump weird and did a barrel roll 360. Everyone has experienced these type of anomalies Im sure. How often do you see bikes tumbling for 20 30 yards before they stop IRL supercross? I never get the feeling of being "planted" or like Im riding through dirt instead of on top of a solid surface.

[Lo2Rider]

The smaller the scale the slower we would be going

There is the problem. In fact this is not true at all... That's why tracks scale have to compensate this, IMO.

1. everyone still thinks you have to go WFO because thats what they are use to.

Agreed, lot of people are doing it, and not only noobs. Fast guys do it too (there is just a higher success rate), because there is no risks. But you can't fight this. Unless making a machine that break people arms or legs when they fall hard ingame.

2. bike collisions and lag dont really allow for close racing. What I dont get is why the tracks ever needed to be scaled up or mix scaled in the first place if bikes are built 1:1 and the engine dynos are all based off real life stuff.

JLV's post in the past that he has an idea to improve collinsions, but i believe it must be something really hard to code...

It feels like its a weightless or not enough gravity type of thing going on. Just last night I was in a sand section going pretty slow and hit a bump weird and did a barrel roll 360. Everyone has experienced these type of anomalies Im sure. How often do you see bikes tumbling for 20 30 yards before they stop IRL supercross? I never get the feeling of being "planted" or like Im riding through dirt instead of on top of a solid surface.

Just don't get me started about this. It just makes me crazy everytime .

[yzmxer608]

Everyone has experienced these type of anomalies Im sure. How often do you see bikes tumbling for 20 30 yards before they stop IRL supercross? I never get the feeling of being "planted" or like Im riding through dirt instead of on top of a solid surface.

I'm not actually sure if the traction affects anything other than tires, never thought about it before. But in real life the bike (bars, fenders whatever) dig into the ground absorbing force, for us we have nothing so the thing keeps going .

[Cody Darr]

Did I hear rF is going to use the knockout system? They should it would solve a few of these problems. There is no consequence for 4-5 through a rhythm if we had knockout's I know I would be more cautious!

[Cody Darr]

Plus JLV made it so you can set the time on the knockout's! I just dont see why we are not using this plus it would be more REALISTIC.

[AWood]

Plus JLV made it so you can set the time on the knockout's! I just dont see why we are not using this plus it would be more REALISTIC.

yeah. maybe adding a second to every fall you have in the race? it gets a little ridiculous with really long times, but something minimal would still effect peoples riding i think

[barrington314]

The smaller the scale the slower we would be going

There is the problem. In fact this is not true at all... That's why tracks scale have to compensate this, IMO.

Well then I guess we have to agree to disagreeing. If you build a track 1:1 and then scale it up proportionately to lets just say 2:1, you still achieve the same jump combinations on each track. The difference though, on the 2:1 track, you are going twice as fast because there is twice the ground to build up speed. So a minor mistake at those speeds turns into a big mistake because its harder to control and the forces are greater if you do land flat or case something. But obviously on the smaller track you are losing width which means you dont have as much room for error. But what I have found when testing this is that my mistakes are much more manageable on the smaller tracks. Keep in mind that I am talking about building the tracks to spec via blueprints with real measurements and then rescaling them to the desired size, both width, length and height proportionately. I can provide examples of this after the SX season is over.

[AWood]

I hated this track at first but i came to love it, and it raced amazingly

[Naax]

I have one problem.... When i go on server it says client track modified- does not match server's track. what is that ?
Someone help me!