Hi Guys.
Updated on Wednesday 18th June 2014:
Mallory Park 1978 V1.1 is now released and available to use online. You can therefore now obtain this track from the "Track Downloads" Database here: http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=45.0
(http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=45.0)
Thank you for all your support and comments while working on this great little track. I hope this thread will continue to be of use to those that wish to alter or create a track of their own. Thank you. ;) ;D 8)
I've been talking about track topology and why I think bad topology has a lot to do with why bikes react in a weird way sometimes, particularly in chicanes and corners when bikes seem to fall over for no good reason.
Well I thought I would test my theory and rebuild a track surface to see if this would improve the bike handling on track. So I decided to rebuild the "Mallory Park" track surface this afternoon.
Below I have posted some photo's, of before and after, to demonstrate the difference in track surface topology(Ignore the original topology of the rest of the track surroundings, it's all terrible, but I only wanted to test the track surface itself. :)
BEFORE:
(http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/836/bim0.jpg) (https://imageshack.com/i/n8bim0j)
(http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/824/ydvr.jpg) (https://imageshack.com/i/mwydvrj)
(http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/812/0alu.jpg) (https://imageshack.com/i/mk0aluj)
AFTER:
(http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/835/t8sf.jpg) (https://imageshack.com/i/n7t8sfj)
(http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/801/yke1.jpg) (https://imageshack.com/i/m9yke1j)
(http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/xq90/163/rwp8.jpg) (https://imageshack.com/i/4jrwp8j)
I've still got some cleaning up to do, and then I've got to start the GP BIkes integration process..... Would love some help to integrate this track so we can test it..... So if you can help then let me know, and then as soon as I've finished cleaning it up I'll send it to you for integration, otherwise I'm going to have to work it all out for myself and that will take longer... Much longer. Hehe ;D
Either PM me, or post here if you can help me integrate this test track into GP Bikes. Thanks. ;)
well that looks like a class a job Hawk, very clean tracksurface the way you build that up.
I'm curious how it drives compared to the old one, i feel a test coming up. ;D
Nice one.
This looks FORMIDABLE! :o
You visulazied what i feel driving through corners on some tracks.
It feels like im driving above every single line through the corners...
Interested how it feels driving the updated track....
yea definatley the right way about it... honestly you could probably get away with afew more tri's in the corners.
some thing i have found out while working out the tools, is the collision seems to be a heavily optimized version of the surface ( even the track) so that could also be apart of the problem.
for example the lighting test i posted a pic of in my question thread.. the sphere has the track id texture etc... but the collision is pretty much a box inside of it.
really need to find out exactly what the collision export is doing to work out how to build a perfect track... or find a way to import or own collision file!
Quote from: SA_22 on April 14, 2014, 11:34:05 AM
yea definatley the right way about it... honestly you could probably get away with afew more tri's in the corners.
That would be my advice too. The old topology has probably been done by a mad man with at least 5 gr/l of alcohol in the bloodstream, but in your one too few polys may lead to strange handling too.
MaX.
Quote from: SA_22 on April 14, 2014, 11:34:05 AM
yea definatley the right way about it... honestly you could probably get away with afew more tri's in the corners.
some thing i have found out while working out the tools, is the collision seems to be a heavily optimized version of the surface ( even the track) so that could also be apart of the problem.
for example the lighting test i posted a pic of in my question thread.. the sphere has the track id texture etc... but the collision is pretty much a box inside of it.
really need to find out exactly what the collision export is doing to work out how to build a perfect track... or find a way to import or own collision file!
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 14, 2014, 02:40:40 PM
Quote from: SA_22 on April 14, 2014, 11:34:05 AM
yea definatley the right way about it... honestly you could probably get away with afew more tri's in the corners.
That would be my advice too. The old topology has probably been done by a mad man with at least 5 gr/l of alcohol in the bloodstream, but in your one too few polys may lead to strange handling too.
MaX.
@Max/SA_22: Well this is what the test is all about guys..... Whatever the test reveals it will be easy to increase the polygon quad count if needed because of the possible issues you've suggested, but until we know what techniques Piboso is using for collision detection for the track surface we really don't know. :)
I can always create a high resolution quad track surface to compare if we get any problems..... Let's just test this and see what difference it will make first and take it from there. ;)
You don't need to create a very high poly track surface, it will be too heavy for the game. You only need to have enough polys in corners where you take a lot of angle. The easier way to know, is to have a "low poly" track surface, and to see where you fall after the first export.
Then, you detach the falling turn, you smooth it (here a turbosmooth should be good, with only 1 iteration to start) and you export the track again. If you still fall increase the turbosoomth iteration 1 by 1.
Don't forget that a high poly zone of a track = FPS decreasing while in the zone. Try to make the track as light as possible, so if you can save some polys, do it ;D
Quote from: PeterV on April 13, 2014, 08:28:07 PM
well that looks like a class a job Hawk, very clean tracksurface the way you build that up.
I'm curious how it drives compared to the old one, i feel a test coming up. ;D
Nice one.
Thanks Peter
Once the test track is finished and initially pre-tested for any obvious errors, I will then post a download link in this threads 1st post for anyone who wants to test it. But a track test event would be good Peter. ;) ;D
Quote from: RiccoChicco on April 14, 2014, 10:37:20 PM
You don't need to create a very high poly track surface, it will be too heavy for the game. You only need to have enough polys in corners where you take a lot of angle. The easier way to know, is to have a "low poly" track surface, and to see where you fall after the first export.
Then, you detach the falling turn, you smooth it (here a turbosmooth should be good, with only 1 iteration to start) and you export the track again. If you still fall increase the turbosoomth iteration 1 by 1.
Don't forget that a high poly zone of a track = FPS decreasing while in the zone. Try to make the track as light as possible, so if you can save some polys, do it ;D
Sorry Ricco, I have to disagree mate. :)
I've been told on good authority that, when modelling a track surface, it is a mistake to try and optimise the same as you would for normal game objects. The track should be created with uniform evenly spaced quads throughout the whole track surface; this also makes texturing easy and professional looking without any stretching and distortions. Also that the resolution of quads needed depends on the type of track you aim to create, ie: whether the track has a lot of gradient and height changes that could require a higher resolution of quads. Also that because the collision model is often derived from the track mesh model it is very important that the track surface mesh consists of uniform and evenly spaced quads throughout the whole track surface to avoid collision detection problems. :)
Well, I use my method to do some of my tracks (TT Mini, Oschersleben, Pau and others) and there isn't any difference in term of texturing.
I don't understand your point of view about "uniform evenly spaced quads throughout the whole track surface". You prefer to have a lot of useless polys? :o
both of your are right.... more in the corners is definitely better and for bumps, inclines etc.. however you can optimize it on the straight flat sections
but to be honest ( not sure about this engine) but tri's are not that expensive for games unless you take the piss.. textures, alphas, dynamic stuff like lights, objects is what hurts.
should be able to keep the texture clean on optimized track as long as you uv it correctly
but without knowing exactly what the collision export is doing its hard to say the best way to go about it... because it's not just exporting the track mesh as is, which i thought it would, atleast for the actual track. for example take that track in max and throw the pro optimizer on it and crank it up... you'll get some idea of what i believe it is doing
Quote from: RiccoChicco on April 14, 2014, 11:33:53 PM
I don't understand your point of view about "uniform evenly spaced quads throughout the whole track surface". You prefer to have a lot of useless polys? :o
Sorry Ricco, but they are not useless polys. :)
The track surface collision detection model is often, though not always, taken from the track surface mesh, and if the toplogy is terrible it can lead to problems with the collision detection model taken from that badly modelled track surface mesh; at least this is what I was taught as one of the rules of track surface modelling. I was also taught as a rule that, you don't optimise a track surface model the same as you would for other game characters and objects because it can cause problems with the way the bike or car models can perform on track.
Another good reason for these polys would be that it will allow for the modelling of track surface height differences, undulations and bumps(proper bumps, not grand canyons that we have often seen in converted tracks that cause the bike to crash. Lol) in a track surface.
Put it this way, if you had laser scanned track data for a track surface, would you then strip out all the data representing the height changes, bumps and undulations? Where do you think the modelling of all these undulations and bumps in the track surface come from? They come from ploys.
Most modern PC's with a decent graphics card can well handle the limited sized track surface data required for good detail and topology for a 2 or 3 even 4+ mile racing track..... Even now we are talking about the creation of a 36 mile laser scanned track of the IOM!! Are you still worried about what you consider "useless ploys"? And if it's slow FPS rates you have in mind, then when people rip a track or convert a track from an originally ripped track, they might care to go through all the mesh topology and check all the vertices and edges and make sure they have no "ngones" or "split polys", and also to clean up the mesh topology itself(Ripper software very rarely, if at anytime, extracts a model cleanly), all these modelling errors combined throughout a badly modelled track will greatly slow down the rendering process and definitely effect FPS rates from what could be achieved if these ripped track meshes were cleaned up properly before release. :)
Hope this helps for you to understand better of what and why I'm trying to test this track surface in the way I have modelled it. :) 8)
If you still think I'm in error, then please explain this from your knowledge, either that or, we can just agree to disagree for now and let the results of the test speak for themselves. :P ;D 8)
PS: I would be interested to see the source files of the tracks you have created. Maybe I could learn something? ;)
Quote from: SA_22 on April 15, 2014, 12:56:53 AM
both of your are right.... more in the corners is definitely better and for bumps, inclines etc.. however you can optimize it on the straight flat sections
Yes, there are straight sections of tracks, but very rarely if ever flat. :)
Quote from: SA_22 on April 15, 2014, 12:56:53 AM
should be able to keep the texture clean on optimized track as long as you uv it correctly
This is very true, but I'm sure you will agree that if the mesh is modelled well with good topology, this makes the UV mapping and texturing SO SO much easier. :)
UV mapping and texturing a badly modelled mesh can be a complete nightmare. Hehe
Well, it seems that language make me say things i don't want to ;D
For tracks (especially tracks for bike), the mesh is very VERY important. The topology needs to be very good in turns. But from what you said I understood that you want to have the same mesh "frequency" all along the track. So I was saying that even if you need to have a good topology all along the track, you don't need to have as many poly on a straight than on a very sharp turn.
Here are some screens, just to be sure that we are saying the same thing. I made just a straight and a curve as sample mesh. Things are a bit exagerated for the explaination :P
Here's what I understood from what you've said :
Picture 1
(http://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/632376topology2.jpg)
Here's what I was talking :
Picture 2
(http://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/595131topology.jpg)
Picture 1.
You can see that the "frequency" of quads is everywhere the same
Picture 2 :
Straight : I think you don't need so many quads on the left part (a straight), because the bike should'nt be on angle here. That's why I have so few quads here.
Start/End of the curve : the lean angle will not be very important. Let's say 20 degrees. Again, having a lot of quads here isn't necessary. But you need to have more than on the straight, because of course you will start to lean.
Middle of the curve : On this part of the curve, you will be on max lean angle. You need a lot of quads, especially if there is undulations or bumps. That's why there are so many quads here.
Maybe we are talking about the same thing since few days, but we don't understand each other ;D
Increasing the polys wont all ways make a track playable, In fact it can cause more problems as there a lot more hight difference in the verts over the same area
Hi Guys..... I need some help getting this into GP Bikes:
I've finished modelling the track surface and exported the Mallory Park.map/.trp files from 3ds Max.
I copied the Original "Mallory Park" track folder and deleted the original .map and .trp files and replaced them with my exported ones.
I've loaded the Mallory Park.trp file into track editor and created/merged the track surface centreline and again saved the Mallory Park.trp file.
I then ran GP Bikes and tried to load the track, but GP Bikes keeps crashing and won't load it??? Any ideas guys???
I haven't generated a bestline(Didn't think it was mandatory to do so), and I haven't generated the "race data"(start line/grid or pit exit/entrance, simply because I haven't got a clue of the procedure to know how to place them(Again I didn't think it was a requirement just to test the track out); again I need some advice(How to's) here please guys.
If there is anything else I need to know before trying test the track in GP Bikes, I would be very grateful if someone would let me know. Either PM me or post here... Thanks guys. ;) ;D
make sure the ends of the center line are definitely connected
after you create the center line click i think its merge in the drop down for it.. makes it match the height of the track
then you need to create the race data... all of it i think
that should be it?
Quote from: SA_22 on April 17, 2014, 02:08:25 PM
make sure the ends of the center line are definitely connected
after you create the center line click i think its merge in the drop down for it.. makes it match the height of the track
then you need to create the race data... all of it i think
that should be it?
Hi SA. Thanks for the quick reply mate. ;D
How do you create the race data and position it? Sorry, I'm a total Noob when it comes to track model integration. Tried following Piboso's thread about the track editor but it's very vague for someone who knows absolutely nothing about it.
yeah know the feeling!..
if you hit absolute on the top right you should be able to position the things manually
then its just playing with numbers to get it in the right spot,
just use the icons, markers etc that show up for each part to help with that.
if you get something right like the start line, save it before you move on to the next.... found the race data windows loved to freeze up on me alot!
Quote from: SA_22 on April 17, 2014, 02:18:37 PM
yeah know the feeling!..
if you hit absolute on the top right you should be able to position the things manually
then its just playing with numbers to get it in the right spot,
just use the icons, markers etc that show up for each part to help with that.
if you get something right like the start line, save it before you move on to the next.... found the race data windows loved to freeze up on me alot!
Thanks SA... Appreciate your help with this. I'll let you know how I get on. ;)
@Ricco:
Sorry I've not replied to your post yet, I will reply to you Ricco, I just want to reply in detail to your post and I'm just a little rushed off my feet at the min. ::) :)
When I load the "Mallory Park.trp" file into track editor and view the wireframe, all the original track surroundings show up in wireframe, but my track surface doesn't although my track surface must be there because the track texture shows? Anyone know what's happening because I'm having big problems trying to figure out this track integration procedure. I've looked at other track .trp files and the track surface in those does show in wireframe view; I must be doing something wrong in the procedure somewhere. GRRRrRrr!! Where's a proper manual when you need one????????
Ref: I named the track surface to: TRKASHP_01HK is this okay?
name seems fine... check you havn't got another object with the same name
have you tried putting what you have ingame, or is the fact its not showing up messing it up?
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 17, 2014, 09:41:58 PM
I named the track surface to: TRKASHP_01HK is this okay?
Nope, it's "TRKAS
PH" not "TRKAS
HP"
It can explain your problems :)
ahh lol spelling mistakes are the worst!! :o ;D
"TRacKASPHalt"
Hi Guys.....
I feel like I did when I first started learning Computer Programming way back in the early 80's... When we used to type those programmes in by hand from the magazines and then they wouldn't work and then you'd have to go back through every line of code to make sure you not only spelt every word correctly, but also that you had the programme delimiters in the correct places too. Usually it would be a misspelt code or a comma or a space that you'd not put into the code line and it was usually buried deep inside the code somewhere that was stopping it working..... It was a very frustrating time indeed. But we did learn a lot by doing it that way, especially how to type properly on a keyboard! Hehehe. ;D
You know, I'm sure I checked that spelling several times.... I must be going blind! Hehe. ;D
Thanks for the correction guys.... Appreciate your help. ;)
I'll give that a try later as soon as I get some down time...
Got the track surface to show up in TrackED now. Thanks for your help Guys! ;)
It's still crashing when I try to run it in GP Bikes. :(
I'm using the original track "config" file..... Is there anything I need to adjust in the config file?.... What about that [DATA] code? What is that from?
Can anyone help please? :)
This is a strict minimum list to have a track into GPB. It's a fast integration (it should take 5/10 minutes), but it will ask to be modified for the release :P
- Export both .map and .trp
- Put it in your track folder which already contain background/skydomes/.amb (the .amb needs to have the name of the track)
- Complete the track's name in your track.ini
- Open TrackEd
- Open the .trp
- Draw the centerline. Don't forget to close it. Merge it. Save it (the .tcl). Note : don't forget to start the centerline with a straight and to finish it with a curve.
- Open View->Race Data -> Pits -> Put 1 (or more) in Num Pits. Save the .rdf (which will have the name of the track).
Notes :
- The data/code is the code you get when you export the .trp (in the 3ds max exporter). It's good to replace it for each update of the track. The game checks this code to know if two people run the same version. If you don't update it, it's not important for Testing, the game will not crash because of that.
If you something is not clear for you feel free to ask for details and if you still have problems to integrate the track, just send me a PM with your .trp and .map :)
any update? :D
Quote from: RiccoChicco on April 19, 2014, 10:45:37 AM
This is a strict minimum list to have a track into GPB. It's a fast integration (it should take 5/10 minutes), but it will ask to be modified for the release :P
- Export both .map and .trp
- Put it in your track folder which already contain background/skydomes/.amb (the .amb needs to have the name of the track)
- Complete the track's name in your track.ini
- Open TrackEd
- Open the .trp
- Draw the centerline. Don't forget to close it. Merge it. Save it (the .tcl). Note : don't forget to start the centerline with a straight and to finish it with a curve.
- Open View->Race Data -> Pits -> Put 1 (or more) in Num Pits. Save the .rdf (which will have the name of the track).
Notes :
- The data/code is the code you get when you export the .trp (in the 3ds max exporter). It's good to replace it for each update of the track. The game checks this code to know if two people run the same version. If you don't update it, it's not important for Testing, the game will not crash because of that.
If you something is not clear for you feel free to ask for details and if you still have problems to integrate the track, just send me a PM with your .trp and .map :)
Hi Ricco.
Thanks for that mate, that's brilliant! ;D
I know now what I have to do least to get the track working just for the test. I'll give it another go and if I still have problem I will send you the track folder to sort it out.
Thanks, Ricco.... Appreciate it! ;) ;D 8)
Quote from: Alby46 on April 19, 2014, 10:56:21 AM
any update? :D
Was still having probs getting the track integrated into GP Bikes.... However Ricco has given me a bare minimum "to-do" list here..... I'm going to give it another go at integrating the track, and if I still can't get it sorted Ricco has been kind enough to have a look at it for me, but I'd like to figure this out if I can.
I will post here of the progress when it happens.... should not be too long now I hope. ;) :)
Hi guys.
AT LAST!! Thanks RICCO!! Your a STAR MATE!! ;D ;D
Finally it works thanks to all you guys help.... and especially Ricco for creating a little how to for the bare essentials to get a track integrated in GP Bikes.
The problem was that until Ricco pointed out that you only need certain files in the track folder to be able to test it in GP Bikes, I was just replacing the .map/.trp and .rdf files into the original Mallory Park Track Folder; obviously having those other original files in the folder that I didn't replace was creating an issue of some kind. But all is well now. ;D 8)
Initial tests by myself are great... the track surface seems very good on the 125/500/1000cc bikes... not tested the track surface with any other bikes. Hopefully you guys will give it a good test and report back by posting here to let me know if there are still any problems that you are experiencing; hopefully if there is then we can find a cure for them if it's a problem with the track surface model. If you think it is a bike physics problem that you encounter and not a track surface issue, then please say so. ;)
But remember guys, this is just a track surface test to see how your bike handles the track surface, etc, etc.... It's just basic alpha type textures on track, so don't expect anything else. It's just a track surface rebuild test that hopefully if successful we can rebuild some of the dodgy track surfaces with the same technique.
I'm just creating a basic set of track replay cameras now, and then I'll post a Track Download link here for you guys to be able to download and test this track surface for yourselves and hopefully report back in this thread with your constructive findings. :)
Hi Guys!
Here is the download link for the "Mallory Park" Track Surface Rebuild Test Track: https://mega.co.nz/#!KR9m0KwI!Fs_RRPw7cpcJ3QAK4eHX_RBocwzM9MPugge88oI0_Gw (https://mega.co.nz/#!KR9m0KwI!Fs_RRPw7cpcJ3QAK4eHX_RBocwzM9MPugge88oI0_Gw)
Please test it and get back to me via posts in this thread for any comments or problems and constructive advice for any improvements.
Having said that, my initial tests are very pleasing and promising for the possibility of upgrading other problem track surfaces.
Remember. This is only a track surface test, so comments on the rideability of the track surface with various bikes would be helpful. Also remember that this track has some undulations on it that the beta physics of GP Bikes still has a problem handling. ie, uphill and downhill gradients, so bear this in mind when forming you opinion and comments. Thank you. ;)
Nice to see it works :D 8)
Will give it a try! :)
Nice work Hawk! I'll try this tonight or tomorrow and compare it to the older version (some 125cc laps) ;)
Seems to be core.exe on loading for me. Cant test.
Quote from: RBp on April 19, 2014, 05:50:52 PM
Seems to be core.exe on loading for me. Cant test.
I'll check this out with the file I uploaded for you guys to make sure it's the correct file I'm using now, because mine works fine. ;)
Thanks guys...... Just one question as I noticed that the track wasn't recording any fastest times during play. What do you have to do to get it to record those times? I thought it was the splits, but I'm now thinking it is the checkpoints(I have not applied those yet) that record the actual fastest lap while playing?
track loads fine for me....
the tight hairpin still has a few small bumps that upset the bike
the camber is weird on the outside of the last corner.. not sure if its like irl, but it throws the bike to the left
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 19, 2014, 06:06:50 PM
Quote from: RBp on April 19, 2014, 05:50:52 PM
Seems to be core.exe on loading for me. Cant test.
I'll check this out with the file I uploaded for you guys to make sure it's the correct file I'm using now, because mine works fine. ;)
@RBp: Just tested it with the track I uploaded to MEGA. It works fine.
Did you copy paste it without moving the original Mallory Park Track first? That would merge it with the original track folder and leave some old files in the track folder that will cause it to core.exe.
Quote from: SA_22 on April 19, 2014, 06:14:55 PM
track loads fine for me....
the tight hairpin still has a few small bumps that upset the bike
the camber is weird on the outside of the last corner.. not sure if its like irl, but it throws the bike to the left
Well this is the thing, There is no bumps in the track surface model. I have noticed a little sort of rumbling around the hairpin myself, especially if you go tight and very slow; wondering if I should try increasing the resolution of that corner for another test, but I will wait until others have had a good chance to give the track a good test first.
But yeah.... I definitely hear what your saying on that point SA. ;)
The last corner has a dipping undulation on the exit, it's same as original track surface, I'm also pretty sure it is true to real life also? Maybe others who are in the know can comment on that.
You also have to take into consideration the fact that GP Bike Physics still has a slight problem with dipping road surfaces, same with road surfaces that rise up especially on bends while your leaned over.
Work nows, thanks Hawk, I copy and pasted as im working though the BSB tracks myself.
Harpin bend as you stated,
I've posted the track download link in the 1st Post so it won't get lost in all the comments. ;)
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 19, 2014, 06:09:38 PM
Thanks guys...... Just one question as I noticed that the track wasn't recording any fastest times during play. What do you have to do to get it to record those times? I thought it was the splits, but I'm now thinking it is the checkpoints(I have not applied those yet) that record the actual fastest lap while playing?
Hi Hawk_UK, in your .rdf file you have this:
finish_line
{
long = 167.686005
left = 0.000000
right = 0.000000
}There's no finish line, essentially.
long is the position on the centerline, left and right are the meters left and right of the centerline (left must be negative, right positive).
Piboso has osted an additiona detail here: http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=991.msg10966#msg10966 (http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=991.msg10966#msg10966)
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 19, 2014, 08:34:20 PM
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 19, 2014, 06:09:38 PM
Thanks guys...... Just one question as I noticed that the track wasn't recording any fastest times during play. What do you have to do to get it to record those times? I thought it was the splits, but I'm now thinking it is the checkpoints(I have not applied those yet) that record the actual fastest lap while playing?
Hi Hawk_UK, in your .rdf file you have this:
finish_line
{
long = 167.686005
left = 0.000000
right = 0.000000
}
There's no finish line, essentially.
long is the position on the centerline, left and right are the meters left and right of the centerline (left must be negative, right positive).
Piboso has osted an additiona detail here: http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=991.msg10966#msg10966 (http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=991.msg10966#msg10966)
MaX.
Hi Max.
Brilliant. Thanks for this Max.... You answered one of the questions I was just asking SA and while awaiting a reply I saw your post here. Lol
The other question I was wondering about was the Pit-In/Pit-Out markers? Should they be placed on the actual main track surface level with the Pit-In/Pit-Out entrance/exits(like I've seen others do on other tracks I've had a look at), or, should they be placed in the actual pit lanes at the entrance/exit of the pit lanes?
PS: Oh and can you possibly explain to me what the checkpoints are for and were they need to be? Thanks :)
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 19, 2014, 08:41:48 PM
The other question I was wondering about was the Pit-In/Pit-Out markers? Should they be placed on the actual main track surface level with the Pit-In/Pit-Out entrance/exits(like I've seen others do on other tracks I've had a look at), or, should they be placed in the actual pit lanes at the entrance/exit of the pit lanes?
The best thing to do is to open up Victoria in tracked and see how it is done, given that victoria is supposed to be 100% correct.
From what I see, pit lane in/out lines are on the pitlane, not on the track. Makes sense.
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 19, 2014, 08:41:48 PM
PS: Oh and can you possibly explain to me what the checkpoints are for and were they need to be? Thanks :)
Checkpoints are lines that must be crossed in order for a lap to count (i.e. if you don't cross a checkpoint, your lap time won't be counted). In races the behavior can be modified, I think you receive a time penalty for cutting a check point. They avoid people cheating cutting the track.
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 19, 2014, 10:09:44 PM
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 19, 2014, 08:41:48 PM
The other question I was wondering about was the Pit-In/Pit-Out markers? Should they be placed on the actual main track surface level with the Pit-In/Pit-Out entrance/exits(like I've seen others do on other tracks I've had a look at), or, should they be placed in the actual pit lanes at the entrance/exit of the pit lanes?
The best thing to do is to open up Victoria in tracked and see how it is done, given that victoria is supposed to be 100% correct.
From what I see, pit lane in/out lines are on the pitlane, not on the track. Makes sense.
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 19, 2014, 08:41:48 PM
PS: Oh and can you possibly explain to me what the checkpoints are for and were they need to be? Thanks :)
Checkpoints are lines that must be crossed in order for a lap to count (i.e. if you don't cross a checkpoint, your lap time won't be counted). In races the behavior can be modified, I think you receive a time penalty for cutting a check point. They avoid people cheating cutting the track.
MaX.
Now I understand.... These checkpoints with the option to give a penalty, as an example, could have been used in the Red Bull Rookies cup Enna Pergusa race when we were trying to stop riders cutting corners.... We could have simply stretched a checkpoint across the corners being cut and if riders went through that checkpoint then we could have added say 10 seconds to their lap time?
I will take your advice and have a look at Victoria circuit also.
I understand this a lot better now. Thanks for the advice and help Max. Very much appreciated. ;)
PS: I presume that if their is no need for a checkpoint, then these checkpoints are not a mandatory must for getting a lap time recorded?
I don't think they are mandatory, but it takes like 5min to put 3 of them around just to test.
Max.
Thank you very much.
I'm getting a strange thing happening on export from the 3DSMax 2010 EDF Exporter:
I do my modelling in Maya 2011, then export via .fbx and import into 3ds Max. From there I use the Max EDF Exporter to export the .map and .trp files to open in TrackED.
Seemed I'd got the hang of using the workflow fine, but then when I updated the track surface by remodelling the hairpin section of track as a separate object(Named: TRKASPH_03HK), the exporter just seems to ignore it and doesn't export that piece of track, hence when I open the .trp file in TrackED the hairpin mesh is now missing. I'm getting very frustrated with this now, because I've gone through the procedure double checking everything again and again but it's still happening and I just don't know how to solve this now. :( :(
weld it........ probably best you just make 1 mesh for the track anyways
Quote from: SA_22 on April 20, 2014, 09:40:44 PM
weld it........ probably best you just make 1 mesh for the track anyways
I agree with the one mesh track object as a whole, but I've increased the resolution on that bend a lot and I want to test it as a separate object from the rest of the track to see if it made any difference.
Yes I could weld(We say "Merge". Hehe), them together as an option and see if it worked but I want to know why it won't work on a separate object? Other tracks I've looked at have the track separated into several separate objects, so why won't mine export? If I'm doing something wrong I just like to find out what it is. ;) ;D
The only thing I can think of is, I'm using the .rdf file from my first version and importing the saved Centerline file into the updated version and merging it and saving it. But surely the centreline we create is only a reference until it is set to merged and saved? So in theory we should be able to use a saved centreline file over and over so long as we are only updating the track mesh and so long as the centreline is still cantered on track when merged?
Same with the .rdf data file, it's only a ref file isn't it, to place items on track in correct position like the grid/Pits, etc,etc... so we should be able to use the same one again without having to create a new one for every little update of the same track? Just some thoughts running through my head. :)
Update: I'm sure that TrackED used to ask for a .map file on intitial load for a new track edit? Now it only asks for a .trp from start when I try to update the track? Am I going mad? Is this the problem? Have I got to create totally new .rdf everytime?
I'm sure the .tcl file is not mandatory (e.g. victoria does not have it).
MaX.
Quote from: janaucarre on April 20, 2014, 09:32:51 PM
Thank you very much.
Thanks janaucarre.... This is only a test for the track surface mesh to see if we can find the best way to model/remodel the track surface meshes for circuits in GP Bikes. Plus a learning curve for myself for the integration process, which for me at the momet is a right pain in the you know what. Lol ;D
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 20, 2014, 10:19:01 PM
I'm sure the .tcl file is not mandatory (e.g. victoria does not have it).
MaX.
Thanks Max. I haven't been using it so far. ;)
Just to be sure: you do have to create a centerline and then burn it (merge) into the track. But you're not obliged to distribute the .tcl file. Of course, you should keep the .tcl file in case you need to change the track a bit while keeping the centerline unchanged.
MaX.
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 20, 2014, 10:22:58 PM
Thanks janaucarre.... This is only a test for the track surface mesh to see if we can find the best way to model/remodel the track surface meshes for circuits in GP Bikes.
There is no best way it take many technics to mke a track work, Game physic suck in some areas, surface mesh shoudnt be as one the game will read the whole circuit at the same time not good for FPS. to get some corners to work they can't be 100% accurate to real life in some case's. I have 21 versions of seprang model while I was fixin the corners new model for every fix I done and exported and merge cnterline drop it in the track folder, Barcalona was a killer I wonted to give up many times.
The game finds bumps where there should be none it a nightmare
I pretty much finished Croft and Brands, was starting on thruxton (shocking bumpy) but might look into this track so I can I help you out with ideas on how to fix corners, think I know how to make that corner work but need to test it first myself.
Quote from: RBp on April 21, 2014, 06:58:27 AM
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 20, 2014, 10:22:58 PM
Thanks janaucarre.... This is only a test for the track surface mesh to see if we can find the best way to model/remodel the track surface meshes for circuits in GP Bikes.
There is no best way it take many technics to mke a track work, Game physic suck in some areas, surface mesh shoudnt be as one the game will read the whole circuit at the same time not good for FPS. to get some corners to work they can't be 100% accurate to real life in some case's. I have 21 versions of seprang model while I was fixin the corners new model for every fix I done and exported and merge cnterline drop it in the track folder, Barcalona was a killer I wonted to give up many times.
The game finds bumps where there should be none it a nightmare
@ RBp: I stand corrected..... Your right to a great degree in that there is "no one" best way to model a track surface; as you say, we all have different techniques when it comes to modelling 3d objects. ;)
However, as for your opinion that by creating/separating a track surface into several separate objects generates better FPS rates, well that is very questionable. In game terrain/object distance rendering has, as far as I understand, got nothing to do with whether in game models are separate/ed or not; however, again, as far as I understand things, the CPU/GPU task time is greatly increased if they have to render objects(ie, a track surface) if it is split up into several separate objects? This is how I've understood my studies on the subject of 3D game rendering; maybe someone who fully understands this subject can enlighten us. :)
When I look at some of the tracks models, I honestly think it is easier and best to just totally remodel the track surface instead of trying to smooth out the current bumpy surfaces as from my experience the smoothing tools often leave subtle uneven poly's that still generate slight ripples in the track surfaces(especially noticeable on very slow hairpin type bends), but if you totally remodel the track surface then the surface comes out very smooth.
But yes I also agree that it doesn't help when there is also a problem with the bike physics that still need tweaking to sort the problems of uphill/downhill cambers and the effect on the handling of the bike. But then again, is it the bike physics, or is it to do with the virtual rider and how it intervenes in certain situations? At this time we just don't know for sure. It is very frustrating at times. We hope Piboso can sort this issue out for the next release. :)
Quote from: RBp on April 21, 2014, 08:02:53 AM
I pretty much finished Croft and Brands, was starting on thruxton (shocking bumpy) but might look into this track so I can I help you out with ideas on how to fix corners, think I know how to make that corner work but need to test it first myself.
Brilliant! Two more great british circuits.... Nice one(or two) mate! ;D
Would be good to bump ideas off each other.... My big problem at the moment is from my posts above about exporter problems. Thought I'd got the procedure down well, but for some reason it won't export my new hairpin section of track that I rebuilt at higher ploy density? I've read the FBX-EDF exporter has issues with certain things(waiting for Piboso's fix/update), but I will try it to see if it will solve my problem. :)
I replace the track model with bumps for a new model that the way I smoothed all the other tracks, it not needed around the whole circuit like you have done, that just a waste of time really, it's not wrong but a much more time consuming way to fix tracks. it not possible to smooth out bumps with just modifiers the track section has to be replaced. Sometimes even that not enough to make a corner smooth and you need to then use a smoothing tool,
Im not on about rendering, it the calculation on collsion surface, it take a lot longer to calculate a large model than a smaller one, I think that why evey track is made from section instead of one piece. Every track is made like this so I would say that the correct way to make a track surface but I could be wrong.
What I do know is that the physic make track making really hard.
Hi guys.
Just wondering how long the FBX Exporter takes to generate a .map file? It says the log has started twice, and I've been waiting now for must be 15 mins and still no .map file generated in the Mallory park folder?
Anyone got an idea of how long it takes, as the EDF max plugin exporter didn't take this long.... Wondering if the FBX Exporter has crashed?
UPDATE: I posted this @ 10:46am, it's now 13:00pm and I'm still waiting for the FBX Exporter to finish exporting my .map file...... Good job I was able to do this while working, and yeah... I think it must've crashed guys. Just thought I'd give it a good chance(Truth is I totally forgot it was still running). LOL ;D
UPDATE_2 @14:00hrs 21st April 2014: Ref: I'm using FBX2EDF Exporter version 1.0 - Ran it straight from file, loaded my .fbx track file, saved it to my Mallory Park track folder, pressed the okay button. The log started in the black app window, then I wait for the finished log message to appear and the "Mallory Park.map" file to appear in the Mallory Park folder, but nothing happens even after a long wait? Any ideas? Am I doing something wrong?
Quote from: RBp on April 21, 2014, 10:24:40 AM
Im not on about rendering, it the calculation on collsion surface, it take a lot longer to calculate a large model than a smaller one, I think that why every track is made from section instead of one piece. Every track is made like this so I would say that the correct way to make a track surface but I could be wrong.
Collision Detection: As far as I understand, the major work of calculating the surface collision detection is done already with the creation of the .trp collision data file, other calculations needed(as the bike moves through virtual space) to detect surface collisions from that .trp data file should be a walk in the park for modern PC's. The collision detection calculations are done per poly face the object being detected is intersecting, but only for poly faces that an object has intersected(Greatly cutting down the need to calculate for each and every poly face in the in game 3D models?) Again, I could be wrong, but this is how I basically understand the procedure? The collision detection optimisation algorithms in place these days don't require the whole scene to be calculated each time their is any movement in virtual space. This is why I wonder why you think that it is better to split a single object into many separate objects to achieve quicker collision detection calculation times and therefore you presume better FPS rates? I hope I've understood you correctly? ;D
Track Surface Modelling: Personally, and this is just my preference really, I find rebuilding the whole track surface a lot easier and quicker than messing about cutting and rebuilding parts of a track, especially if the track is ripped and the poly's are in tri's and not quads(no one works in tri's if they can help it). Also if I have built the whole track myself then I have the curves control points locked in place to be able to easily adjust the surface anywhere on track to alter or improve the run of the corners/track widths/cambers/undulations or inclines, etc, etc without any distortion in the topology of the surface poly's. I just think it's a better workflow and makes UV mapping/texturing SO much easier.
But as I say, this is just my preference, and as you rightly said RBp, we all have our own ways and techniques of doing things. This is one of the things that makes this field of work so fascinating, the fact that you can discover new techniques from others that fit into your way of doing things, and also could save a lot of time and work in the process.
My way of thinking about a project isn't to particularly find the quickest way to achieve one particular stage of development, or to save time, but to look at the project as a whole, because what may seem to save you a lot of time now, may well later on in the project cost you a lot more time to finish another stage later. Also making sure that if you had to come back and make alterations or updates, that the techniques you used in your earlier work will have made it so much easier to achieve those updates or alterations later. :)
I hope I understood you correctly with regards to your thinking on the collision model detection calculation process? :)
Im not really certain myself on collsion stuff, I did ask Whitham about joining all the grass models togeather when I started and he said that a No No as it cause FPS issue, Grass on nordschliefe had to be made into little models to give good FPS.
Track surface is a strange one due to how the game physic work, I can normally get away with replacing the affending corner and replacing with a new plain but there times this wont work,
Mallory park harpin is a good exsample. your track should work fine but as you know it still crash's the bike everytime for pretty much no reason that I can see or explain, you said yourself there no bumps on the model the topology is good, putting more poly's on the harpin don't have the desired effect in game which is annoying. In this instance I started to remove the polys and have just 2 polys for the whole corner, A 1x1 plain and rebuild the surrounding model around this new square track model.
Im sure this is not the best way to model nor is it 100% realistic to the real life track but the game engine suck's and at time's it seems the only way to make the tracks playable, Here a WIP of this fix on Mallory harpin. the bike don't crash at all now, surrounding models need a lot of work still.
I wont post the .max file as people will laugh at the fix. let me know if you wont the .max file to look at.
http://www.mediafire.com/download/77z7oxq22a9v2fz/Mallory+park.rar (http://www.mediafire.com/download/77z7oxq22a9v2fz/Mallory+park.rar)
@RBp: Thanks for that RBP. ;D 8)
The new section of hairpin you put in their certainly works, it's smooth, and no falls, but like you said, you have had to sacrifice the real layout of the hairpin to get the result, ie: the camber has gone and the track section is now flat. I guess this sort of proves that it is likely or partly a problem with bike physics and cambers, uphill and downhill gradients that needs tweaking on the physics somehow? But then again it could still be partly a collision detection problem too? I really don't know. That does your head in doesn't it thinking of all the possibilities. Lol ;D
In my opinion we shouldn't sacrifice a real life layout of a track, we should work to solve the problem, even if it means waiting till Piboso has got things sorted. Otherwise were going to have a hat-ful of tracks that need updating yet again when the time comes. :)
But all credit to you for finding a workaround but I honestly don't think it's the answer.... We need to find a solution that will enable us to keep the track layout life like and yet have that hairpin section sorted so riders feel confident to heal over their bikes there with no problems.
I have an update I think will work or work hugely better than my present test track, but I cannot get the exporter to recognise the new section of hairpin track I replaced. I'm working on it. but if I can't get it to export, will you take a look at it for me and see if you can get it to export?
How do you get the lap timings to work properly and record the times? I've got the sector times working but nothing else. Lol
What is it in TrackED that allows lap timings to work apart from the sector markers(as I've already placed those around the track). Is there supposed to be a sector marker at the start and finish line to indicate an end of lap or something?
@RBp: I also considered joining the terrain together for Mallory Park into one object for the outer terrain and one for inner terrain, but the original mesh is such a mess with split verts and double faces and edges that I decided to give it a miss as I only wanted to test a new track surface nothing else.
But what I mean, is that with the mesh in such a mess I'm sure this would hamper the FPS rates anyway. it would ideally need sorting out if this track is to be published.
I tend to look at it from a different angle, These tracks have had problem since the alpha I've been told. that coming on for 4-5 years now, I could only see 3 options,
1) make only flat tracks there are no flat tracks
2) leave all tracks until a physic fix by piboso He don't seem to know how after many updates
3) mod the track to work with what we have. not the best but makes the game/track playable
The timing lines need to be on a colliable object with all the holes on the edge this could be an issue? the startline and sectorlines need to across the track check you got - and + the right way round for the lines
I run 3dmax 09 I can't load max files from newer version, not sure if I can import a scene, a 3ds will merge all the models and that would need a whole new start.
Don't think this small model will cause to many issue for FPS, I'll find out once I start work proper on it
Saved Centerline file before merged?: With reference to my export problems since updating and rebuilding the hairpin section of Mallory Park, I'm wondering if the centreline file I built for my first track surface rebuild is somehow connected to the first rebuilt track surface poly's even though it's a saved centreline file before merged; so maybe I cannot use that file again if I alter or rebuild a section of track afterwards??
But then again, the new section of track doesn't show up when I load the .trp file into TrackED, so even if I was to build a new centreline what would be the point if there isn't the new section of track to merge it to? I'm just thinking out loud here for some answers. :)
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 21, 2014, 07:26:28 PM
Saved Centerline file before merged?: With reference to my export problems since updating and rebuilding the hairpin section of Mallory Park, I'm wondering if the centreline file I built for my first track surface rebuild is somehow connected to the first rebuilt track surface poly's even though it's a saved centreline file before merged; so maybe I cannot use that file again if I alter or rebuild a section of track afterwards??
But then again, the new section of track doesn't show up when I load the .trp file into TrackED, so even if I was to build a new centreline what would be the point if there isn't the new section of track to merge it to? I'm just thinking out loud here for some answers. :)
Could be a texture problem, some texture don't show in tracked or game, I've converted brands hatch 2005 from GTR2 and texture for the grass edge never showed in tracked or game. mugello one track piece never showed a shadow even thou it was the same texture a the rest of the track, double check the spelling TRKASPH_01 or try TRKCASPH_01
export the trp only
load centreline
merge centreline
save trp
put infolder
now see if the bike falls though the gap
.map file take time to export I don't bother with these when fixing the track surface, I just export the TRP and see ifthe 125 crash still after the fix
Quote from: RBp on April 21, 2014, 07:20:55 PM
I tend to look at it from a different angle, These tracks have had problem since the alpha I've been told. that coming on for 4-5 years now, I could only see 3 options,
1) make only flat tracks there are no flat tracks
2) leave all tracks until a physic fix by piboso He don't seem to know how after many updates
3) mod the track to work with what we have. not the best but makes the game/track playable
I understand what your saying above, and the frustrations we are up against until things are fixed, but personally, I think, if we're going to have real track layouts, then it's best to do the best we can with what we've got until the fix is implemented, rather than distort the real layouts for a temp fix. :)
The other option is as you say, which is a great idea at this time, which is to just build some flat or at least flatish type of fantasy tracks until the fix is implemented. ;D 8)
Quote from: RBp on April 21, 2014, 07:20:55 PM
I run 3dmax 09 I can't load max files from newer version, not sure if I can import a scene, a 3ds will merge all the models and that would need a whole new start.
I use Maya 2011 to model and 3ds Max 2010 to export, so I could export in .fbx then you can import if it's in ,fbx format, yes? It's the best format for exporting to other 3D applications there is. ;D
Quote from: RBp on April 21, 2014, 07:35:00 PM
Could be a texture problem, some texture don't show in tracked or game, I've converted brands hatch 2005 from GTR2 and texture for the grass edge never showed in tracked or game. mugello one track piece never showed a shadow even thou it was the same texture a the rest of the track, double check the spelling TRKASPH_01 or try TRKCASPH_01
export the trp only
load centreline
merge centreline
save trp
put infolder
now see if the bike falls though the gap
.map file take time to export I don't bother with these when fixing the track surface, I just export the TRP and see ifthe 125 crash still after the fix
I'm ahead of you there.... I already tested that and yes it does fall through the wapping great hole were the hairpin track surface should be. It was quite funny! Hehe ;D ;D
Not tried the alternative TRKCASH prefix though. I'll give that a try.
Thanks RBP. ;)
this might sound dumb but I got to ask, you have added the new harpin to the old track model and not got two trp exports?
There one good thing, at least were not MX guys trying to make burms (SP) work in game,
Quote from: RBp on April 21, 2014, 07:20:55 PM
The timing lines need to be on a colliable object with all the holes on the edge this could be an issue? the startline and sectorlines need to across the track check you got - and + the right way round for the lines
I don't think there are many places on my test version that have holes in the track side; I did go around the track sealing 99% of them up, so I don't think the timing lines over track holes would be the problem unless I've been unlucky enough to find maybe one of the few that still exist(That would just be my luck). LOL
I've got the lines the right way as far as the left/right -/+ values are concerned, so that isn't the problem. :)
I wish there was a proper tutorial.... This shouldn't be this difficult! It's a bit like someone building a plane and then telling a non pilot to just get in and fly and hope he doesn't crash! Crazy, Crazy!. Lol. Thank god for good Samaritans on the forum, like yourself, RBp. ;) ;D
Quote from: RBp on April 21, 2014, 07:55:40 PM
this might sound dumb but I got to ask, you have added the new harpin to the old track model and not got two trp exports?
There one good thing, at least were not MX guys trying to make burms (SP) work in game,
Don't worry... I understand what your saying there. Lol.
Sometimes we all do the dumbest things that we wouldn't dream of looking for when debugging things. Been there done that myself in the past. LOL
But it's a very good question to cover; however, in answer to your question, "No", I've already checked for that possibility, just in case I was having a senior moment at the time. Hehe ;D
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 21, 2014, 08:01:56 PM
I wish there was a proper tutorial.... This shouldn't be this difficult! It's a bit like someone building a plane and then telling a non pilot to just get in and fly and hope he doesn't crash! Crazy, Crazy!. Lol. Thank god for good Samaritans on the forum, like yourself, RBp. ;) ;D
problem is I don't know what the hell im doing either :P
Quote from: RBp on April 21, 2014, 08:13:21 PM
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 21, 2014, 08:01:56 PM
I wish there was a proper tutorial.... This shouldn't be this difficult! It's a bit like someone building a plane and then telling a non pilot to just get in and fly and hope he doesn't crash! Crazy, Crazy!. Lol. Thank god for good Samaritans on the forum, like yourself, RBp. ;) ;D
problem is I don't know what the hell im doing either :P
Lol... Then we make a right pair don't we. Hehe ;D
I'm sure we'll get there in the end, and be better off for it having solved some of these issues. ;)
Well I never ment to get into modding, but none of the tracks worked, Whitham started me off on a flat basic track with only afew texture's and learnt tracked, then gave me slighty harder tracks until I got to portimao which needed surface modding and multi textures, once I got that that finished I started working though the odd motogp tracks Johor Assen Brno mugello. At the same time I was collecting models and textures from these tracks,
My goal now is to run BSB series, I like to make all the tracks with a common pheme making them as playable as possible with pit awning, trucks, garages, ad boards textured abit like the currant BSB, I don't think it possible to fix every corner surtees at brands hatch I just make work and im dreading knockhill.
At the moment I can't figure out how to add bump maps to make the grass tarmac and kerbs look better or make the cameras work in correct way, once I nail those two I think I could make some decent tracks at last. Im not going to rush the release like I did with the motogp tracks, Im going to finish the track start work on the next and then come back and look at the track again for any thing I could make better then release the track.
Seems like a big task but there only two track that I don't have almost finished max files for , cadwell park and the new Assen
I've just been studying the "Victoria.trp" , and .rdf files in TrackED..... First thing I noticed is that Piboso(or whoever integrated the track in GP Bikes) has obviously only named the vital immediate track surroundings for collision detection and not the whole circuit modelled. This makes good sense. So when naming the model objects, we only have to name the immediate track and track surroundings and objects with the correct prefixes to only have those objects be detected for the collision detection model.
I also noticed just how much the Checkpoints and Sector lines extend a long ways across the track, especially with the Checkpoint lines, again this makes sense to catch a bike through checkpoints even it they crash and slide off and past the Checkpoint line they still run through it. :)
Quote from: RBp on April 21, 2014, 09:03:23 PM
Seems like a big task but there are only two tracks that I don't have almost finished max files for , cadwell park and the new Assen.
Well I passed on the job of creating a new scratch build Cadwell Park track to SA_2 at his request. Probably best to PM SA_2 about that. I don't think anyone is creating a new up to date Assen Circuit, but both would be BRILLIANT additions to the track database when finished. Assen is my favourite track! ;D ;D 8)
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 21, 2014, 10:20:44 PM
I also noticed just how much the Checkpoints and Sector lines extend a long ways across the track, especially with the Checkpoint lines, again this makes sense to catch a bike through checkpoints even it they crash and slide off and past the Checkpoint line they still run through it. :)
Not crossing a checkpoint while crashed is not an issue, as (currently) GPB makes you respawn where the crash started, so you get a chance to cross the checkpoint.
This is exactly the reason that made Piboso change the respawn behavior to "where the crash started" (before beta 3 it was "where the crash ended").
The general rule about checkpoints extent should be: wide enough to allow unintentional "out of track" situations not to be considered as "missed checkpoints", but tight enough to avoid people cutting the track or running intentionally out of it where it gives an advantage.
MaX.
BSB!!!? :) oulton park would be mega! I imagine graham hill bend would be a task to get through though lol
Since cutting and rebuilding the hairpin section the mesh for that section isn't being exported(the grey area in the pic below).
I even tried, as a last resort, to combine/merge them together so that the whole track surface would be one object, but it still exports the .map/.trp files without the new hairpin section..... How can this be if it's now one object??? This is really beginning to piss me off now! >:(
Track surface name: TRKASPH_01HK
TrackED Picture: Mallory Park.trp (Wireframe view)
(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2937/13965347091_d8bea34094.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/nh549p)
Have you reapply a texture to this hairpin?
I have problem like this with my janjgp2: All is good in 3ds and after export the texture is 90 degrees inclined, all the asphalt texture are across the track in 3ds max to be good ingame, some trees dont have any texture ingame but made like other in 3ds.
I have tested all what i know and nothing changes. I have same problem with border, some are good but some are at 90 degrees. From many months, in my head, there is that: why? why? WTF?
I really don't have solutions. I have tried other textures, other positions, rebuild parts non good, export with or without shadows, new textures size.
What the hell can i do?
Another problem: i builded bleachers for the public and all the seated place are in wood, a good texture of wood, the problem was that: i apply the texture on each wood board, i make that all look good in dimensions, after export it looks like an enormous texture, 10 time or 40 time bigger as in 3ds max, to solve this problem i resize the texture many times to obtain the right size in game. Note that i used the same tricks as for all other textures of my track wich are good in 3ds and ingame, but for that, its not good. Not that some of the wood board are ever non well textured after all corrections.
I cant help you, i think piboso is the only man can help us.
PS: send to another modder your 3dsmax files, and he will try to export and see what happens.
PS2: I use 3dsmax 2010 32 bit, the export plugin is the penultimate version( i use it because noss69 said me that ghe last version create bug)
@janaucarre : My problem is that the new section of track at the hairpin is not being exported in the .trp file with the rest of the collision model wireframe, as you can see from the picture above; it's not just greyed out, the wireframe collision model is just not there, it's empty space. I've tested this by putting this file into GP Bikes and running my bike around the track, and when I come to were the new section of track should be at the hairpin it's just empty space and my bike just falls into the void. Lol.
Can I send you a link for my .fbx(version 2010) source file for you to have a look at and see if you can figure out what I'm doing wrong? It's got to be something to do with creating a new section of track at that hairpin, because if I go back to my original new surfaced track source file it exports okay; so it's got to be something to do with this new section of track I rebuilt?? I think. Lol.
It's SO frustrating isn't it, when before the export was working fine, and now all I've done is rebuilt and replaced the hairpin section of track and all hell breaks loose on the export. :(
This is the new section of track at the hairpin I want to export for the update. As you can see I've gone a little bit overboard on the ploy resolution, overkill as you may call it, but I tested this section of track previously with a higher than original, but less than the picture below and it was almost silky smooth to ride around, so I thought I'd do this test(overkill) to see if it finally got rid of every subtle ripple so riders can heel their bike into this hairpin with confidence that their bike will not fall over or slide away from them.
Picture from "Maya 2011"
(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2938/13966675741_0759eb7541.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/nhbS7a)
Is there a track surface quad maximum limit for the "EdfExp2010p.dle" exporter plugin for 3ds Max 2010?? This would explain this problem. Anyone know? Piboso?
are the faces flipped?
try exporting and reimporting just that section
try remaking it?
3d print it and beat piboso over the head with it? ;D :o
Yes you can send me your project:)
the limit of the poly of the entire track depend in first of your pc, the second the game. By mine pc problems of export begin with more than250 000 polys.
If you mean about a section poly limit, you can have as many polys as the section appears white of vertex, the only problem will be a fall of the FPS ingame.
Do you have any error message in the little window at the export? Error missing texture or texture has not the right size?
Quote from: janaucarre on April 22, 2014, 03:34:28 PM
Yes you can send me your project:)
Do you have any error message in the little window at the export? Error missing texture or texture has not the right size?
Yes there has always been error messages about missing textures in that little export window during the process(Don't think all the texture files were there from the original .3ds max file), but that has not affected the actual export before or working of it when it worked before.
Besides, I think this is a collision model(.trp) export problem rather than a .map file problem?
Thanks for taking a look at this for me Janu..... Hopefully you'll PM me back and tell me I'm a daft prat for something silly I've overlooked in doing. It wouldn't surprise me because this has been giving me absolute brain ache over the last few days. Hehe ;D
I've sent you a PM with the download link. Appreciated mate. ;) ;D
Quote from: SA_22 on April 22, 2014, 03:33:30 PM
are the faces flipped?
try exporting and reimporting just that section
try remaking it?
3d print it and beat piboso over the head with it? ;D :o
No the faces are not flipped in the mesh, and they are not even there in the export at all, it's just a void. It's as though the new section has just been ignored for some reason.
Tried exporting and reimporting that section alone.... no joy.
I've tried rebuilding it three times.
"3d print it and beat piboso over the head with it?" - Haha.... Well it would be nice if Piboso would take a few mins out to help us with problems like this. Even if he just says it's broke so we'll have to wait for an update. At least we'd now where we stood instead of wasting SO much time trying to figure out if it's something we are doing wrong or whether it's a bug in the exporter plugin? Or maybe he could suggest a workaround? Just some help and advice from the creator would be good for us to get things sorted quickly. ;)
5 seconds to find what was wrong:
the polys of this curve are flipped:)
Looking forward to trying this out guys. Been going to Mallory since i was a kid and it really is one of the most historic tracks in the UK
Quote from: janaucarre on April 22, 2014, 04:13:11 PM
5 seconds to find what was wrong:
the polys of this curve are flipped:)
Yeah... I feel a right bananna now. Hehe. :-[
Thought Maya would pick them up as I usually have the two sided lighting checked "off", but it was checked to "on". That will teach me to take things for granted. LOL
Thank you Janu ... Appreciate it. ;D
I'll just go and jump off a roof now guys(Just joking!). Hehe ;D
Might have found a reason for the core.exe's in GP Bikes guys??:
While updating to the next version, I'd put the track surface into an earlier version of the track terrain which was still full of gaps and split verts, etc, etc..... Still I tested the new version of the track surface with this, but I noticed that each time I ran off track over particularly a small gap were the bike doesn't fall through, I got a core exe crash.
Now this was not normal on the track terrain I'd pretty much fixed a lot of the split verts and gaps before. So what do you guys think? Could this be the reason we get core.exe crashes in GP bikes? Because of all the split verts and edges not matched up properly to the separate objects composing the track as a whole? Might be worth looking into more I think. :)
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 22, 2014, 07:27:28 PM
Might have found a reason for the core.exe's in GP Bikes guys??:
While updating to the next version, I'd put the track surface into an earlier version of the track terrain which was still full of gaps and split verts, etc, etc..... Still I tested the new version of the track surface with this, but I noticed that each time I ran off track over particularly a small gap were the bike doesn't fall through, I got a core exe crash.
Now this was not normal on the track terrain I'd pretty much fixed a lot of the split verts and gaps before. So what do you guys think? Could this be the reason we get core.exe crashes in GP bikes? Because of all the split verts and edges not matched up properly to the separate objects composing the track as a whole? Might be worth looking into more I think. :)
We had a problem with that with for example in Aragon in the past. All open verts along the track (black surface between track and grass/curbs), which gave by touching or crossing them a core.exe.
We have mentioned that to Piboso at the time, and he made an alteration to GPbikes (track stuff thingy detection?, I dont know what im on a bout ;D). But i can remember that.
If you wanna know exactly you might wanna ask Piboso or maybe Gazillion man.
Btw, how high was the roof you jumped off? i bet it was from a kiddie house on the playground cause you posted again already ;D
Quote from: PeterV on April 22, 2014, 08:00:22 PM
Btw, how high was the roof you jumped off? i bet it was from a kiddie house on the playground cause you posted again already ;D
hahaahhah ! ;D
Holes, space between vertex, are really bad for gpbikes, you can test(lol) to fall of the track, ulster is great for that, after seconds you falling you gotta have a core.exe crash, the time depends of your pc and the track.
Gazillion man, to the rescue !
Well, not much to add actually. Holes are well known to cause crashes (not systematically, but often enough).
However, we've seen crashes even when well in the middle of the track, even in the pits.
Max.
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 22, 2014, 10:24:53 PM
Gazillion man, to the rescue !
Well, not much to add actually. Holes are well known to cause crashes (not systematically, but often enough).
However, we've seen crashes even when well in the middle of the track, even in the pits.
Max.
This is what I've been saying in earlier posts about the current tracks source files I've had a look at, a lot if not all I've seen have their tracks surfaces and everything else split up into separate pieces. Now if the separate sections of the track surface have not been absolutely lined up perfect which a lot of them are not, they even overlap slightly in some cases, then surely this could be the cause of the core.exe's we've been experiencing while riding on the track surface? It's just a thought. :)
Oh... and btw guys.... Thanks to Janu's help in sorting out my export problem, I've successfully and finally exported the new version of Mallory Park and tested it. I must say that I think it is a success! ;D ;D
The hairpin is now smooth and gives you confidence to ride round their without walking on eggshells anymore for fear of the bike sliding away from you or falling over. But I have just got the track lap timer to sort out before I upload for you guys to give it a good testing, if I knew how. Lol
The only thing I haven't put on track are the checkpoints; I've got a feeling they have something to do with the actual lap time recordings, as I already have the sector timing markers installed and they record the sector times but don't seem to record the actual lap time as a whole? I guess I'll find out tomorrow.
Quote from: PeterV on April 22, 2014, 08:00:22 PM
Btw, how high was the roof you jumped off? i bet it was from a kiddie house on the playground cause you posted again already ;D
Hahaha!! ;D ;D
Well.... We live on the top floor 17 floors up in the penthouse suite(Well that's what I like to call it. Hehe). I took one look out the window and thought I'd go for a beer instead. ;D
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 23, 2014, 12:49:34 AM
But I have just got the track lap timer to sort out before I upload for you guys to give it a good testing, if I knew how. Lol
Didn't we discuss this already ? http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=958.msg10984#msg10984 (http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=958.msg10984#msg10984)
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 23, 2014, 12:49:34 AM
The only thing I haven't put on track are the checkpoints; I've got a feeling they have something to do with the actual lap time recordings, as I already have the sector timing markers installed and they record the sector times but don't seem to record the actual lap time as a whole? I guess I'll find out tomorrow.
Didn't we discuss this already ? http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=958.msg10991#msg10991 (http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=958.msg10991#msg10991)
Deja vu powa !! :) :)
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 23, 2014, 12:01:20 PM
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 23, 2014, 12:49:34 AM
But I have just got the track lap timer to sort out before I upload for you guys to give it a good testing, if I knew how. Lol
Didn't we discuss this already ? http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=958.msg10984#msg10984 (http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=958.msg10984#msg10984)
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 23, 2014, 12:49:34 AM
The only thing I haven't put on track are the checkpoints; I've got a feeling they have something to do with the actual lap time recordings, as I already have the sector timing markers installed and they record the sector times but don't seem to record the actual lap time as a whole? I guess I'll find out tomorrow.
Didn't we discuss this already ? http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=958.msg10991#msg10991 (http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=958.msg10991#msg10991)
Deja vu powa !! :) :)
MaX.
Hi Max.
Indeed we have mate. ;D
The problem still is that I've had a look at Victoria(Hmm... Should be named: Phillip Island Circuit, shouldn't it? :) ), and I still cannot get the lap times to work even though I've now put in the checkpoints too. Again frustrating... again probably a silly mistake on my part that I'm overlooking. Lol. I've just been going through so much information overload trying to absorb everything at once for this track integration process that my mind is going here there and everywhere except were it should be at the moment, if you know what I mean. Hehe.
Although I'm stubborn and want to figure out and learn to do things for myself, I also realise that there comes a point were a person just needs a helping hand to be able to progress further. So anyway, Ricco very kindly offered to take a look at it for me, so I've sent him the required files and a copy of the current version of the track, so I'm hoping he can sort out my lap timing problem and tell me where I was going wrong. ;D
Just to be sure, did you fix the finish line issue (1st link in my post above) ?
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 23, 2014, 01:11:43 PM
Just to be sure, did you fix the finish line issue (1st link in my post above) ?
MaX.
The Start/Finish line problem was sorted thanks to your timely help there Max. I've made sure that the left is a negative number and the right a positive number so the line stretches as far as is needed on collision surfaces. ;)
UPDATE: This is why I've been cleaning up all the gaps and rubbish in the terrain and objects because I was wondering if that was affecting it's operation somehow with a gap not registering as a collision surface or something in that line of thought.
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 23, 2014, 01:17:07 PM
The Start/Finish line problem was sorted thanks to your timely help there Max. I've made sure that the left is a negative number and the right a positive number so the line stretches as far as is needed on collision surfaces. ;)
Hmmm ... can you show here you .rdf file ?
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 23, 2014, 01:37:45 PM
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 23, 2014, 01:17:07 PM
The Start/Finish line problem was sorted thanks to your timely help there Max. I've made sure that the left is a negative number and the right a positive number so the line stretches as far as is needed on collision surfaces. ;)
Hmmm ... can you show here you .rdf file ?
MaX.
I'll send you a PM with the download link for my latest work that I haven't released yet, you can take the .rdf file from there and have a look at it. ;)
Now Hawk_UK, I think I'm officially entitled to insult you in the worst way (at any rate, my reputation is already solid in that area). ;D
These are the first 6 lines in the .rdf of your track (just downloaded from the link you PMed me):
finish_line
{
long = 167.686005
left = 0.000000
right = 0.000000
}
So, who can spot the problem ? ;D
MaX.
If i understand the problem, the finish/start line is nothing with no value of right and left. You must input a negative value for the left and a positive for the right, until the sides of the road, and if the start/finish line is along the pits you can lengthen the right or left until the border of the pits(across to the next surface).
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 23, 2014, 02:06:18 PM
Now Hawk_UK, I think I'm officially entitled to insult you in the worst way (at any rate, my reputation is already solid in that area). ;D
These are the first 6 lines in the .rdf of your track (just downloaded from the link you PMed me):
finish_line
{
long = 167.686005
left = 0.000000
right = 0.000000
}
So, who can spot the problem ? ;D
MaX.
Hi Max.... Well I wouldn't have believed it until I saw it! :o :o
I swear I put those figures into the start line boxes... I've even got them written down here. Lol
Well no excuses for me max..... So go ahead and put your biggest boots on and give my a good kick up the ass!! Hehe ;D ;D
As I say, I'm on information overload here trying to do several things at once... and you know(unlike the girls) us men aren't designed to do that sort of thing..... Well I have to come up with some kind of excuse. Hehe ;D ;D
Thanks for keeping me on my toes Max.... Appreciate your help as always. ;) ;D
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 23, 2014, 02:52:20 PM
Hi Max.... Well I wouldn't have believed it until I saw it! :o :o
I swear I put those figures into the start line boxes... I've even got them written down here. Lol
Debugging, an art of its own :)
The reasoning went: how likely is that Hawk has somehow forgotten to fix the finish line (or lost the fix) ? Very unlikely. How long does it take to double check ? 5 seconds. Hence risk to be a jerk and ask Hawk to confirm.
You are more or less my age (IIRC), so I know that our memory ... well ... ;D
Now kick that Mallory park out so that we can test: I have zero experience in 3d stuff (well, close to zero let's say) but I've always thought that it is easier and better to redo the track surface than to try to smooth out the existing one.
If your test is conclusive, then you have a long list of tracks top fix before you. Welcome to the club of the ones spending more time working for/on GPB than playing with it :P
MaX.
im comverting fo0r posting a video on how to do rdf files:)
This is like a soap opera what will be the next twist in the plot.
Well done Hawk_Uk for sticking with it your almost there.
You have put me off ever attempting to do a track ;D
Quote from: Ian on April 23, 2014, 05:01:45 PM
This is like a soap opera what will be the next twist in the plot.
Well done Hawk_Uk for sticking with it your almost there.
You have put me off ever attempting to do a track ;D
Hehehe!! ;D ;D
Oh it's not that bad really... It's like anything we know nothing about, at first it's frustrating because you just want to be able to do it and finish your track so you guys can give it a good test, but once you've learned what you need to do(and a few kicks up the arse for doing some silly things you should've known better for. Hehe), then it all starts falling into place and seems easy. Put it this way, with my learning curve I have plenty of fresh tips and advice to give anyone who's new to trying out track model integration; and Janu is doing a .rdf file tutorial now, so now is one of the best times to give it a go. We're all here to help. ;) ;D
Okay guys.... Thanks to Max for helping me sort out the Lap Timing system. It is now working properly. Thanks mate! ;)
I've now exported my latest track update, this time I exported with super-sampling and shadows included; it went through no problem(Thank God!. Lol). I'm really getting the hang of this now. ;D 8)
Anyway, just wanted to let you guys know that the download link for the latest update will be posted here within 30mins. Just look out for my post here to say it ready. ;)
Feedback would be appreciated.... Again, it's the track surface in particular I want you guys to test out and tell me if it gives you the confidence to ride hard without feeling you have to walk on eggshells for fear of the bike falling over while cornering, etc.
Just to let you guys know that the download link for the latest track update will be posted within the next 30mins. Just look out for my next post here. ;)
Great Hawk ! If you have any corner in particular you want us to focus on (on top of the hairpin, I guess) ...
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 23, 2014, 05:41:51 PM
Great Hawk ! If you have any corner in particular you want us to focus on (on top of the hairpin, I guess) ...
MaX.
Your absolutely right, Max..... The hairpin in particular is the corner to concentrate your testing with, but the track surface as a whole has been rebuilt/remodelled, so also comments on how well the bikes rides the dips and undulations that are part of this circuits character too would be appreciated. ;)
check the pit boards, number 24 nearly in the middle of straight.
Quote from: RBp on April 23, 2014, 06:09:28 PM
check the pit boards, number 24 nearly in the middle of straight.
Will do, RBp. I'll sort that out for the next release(shortly), but I'm already in process of uploading this version now, so you'll all have to put up with that for a short time. Thanks for pointing that out, RBp ;)
Sorry for the delay guys.... I'd just been tweaking it some more before I uploaded the track.... Should be about 10 mins now. :)
Latest update for "Mallory Park 1978" Download link: https://mega.co.nz/#!fA8WkCCY!QmN66-IFI5k3rEgZwMQJz6Ln3ZZBh6HookgMaeR8NXE (https://mega.co.nz/#!fA8WkCCY!QmN66-IFI5k3rEgZwMQJz6Ln3ZZBh6HookgMaeR8NXE)
1st Post link also updated.
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 23, 2014, 06:35:21 PM
Quote from: RBp on April 23, 2014, 06:09:28 PM
check the pit boards, number 24 nearly in the middle of straight.
Will do, RBp. I'll sort that out for the next release(shortly), but I'm already in process of uploading this version now, so you'll all have to put up with that for a short time. Thanks for pointing that out, RBp ;)
we cant get 24 people online so I wouldn't worry to much.
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 23, 2014, 06:41:10 PM
Latest update for "Mallory Park 1978" Download link: https://mega.co.nz/#!fA8WkCCY!QmN66-IFI5k3rEgZwMQJz6Ln3ZZBh6HookgMaeR8NXE (https://mega.co.nz/#!fA8WkCCY!QmN66-IFI5k3rEgZwMQJz6Ln3ZZBh6HookgMaeR8NXE)
1st Post link also updated.
Did you tell / ask Dibu? ;)
Just to let you guys know that Dibu has updated the online server to this latest version. ;) 8)
Quote from: PeterV on April 23, 2014, 07:04:03 PM
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 23, 2014, 06:41:10 PM
Latest update for "Mallory Park 1978" Download link: https://mega.co.nz/#!fA8WkCCY!QmN66-IFI5k3rEgZwMQJz6Ln3ZZBh6HookgMaeR8NXE (https://mega.co.nz/#!fA8WkCCY!QmN66-IFI5k3rEgZwMQJz6Ln3ZZBh6HookgMaeR8NXE)
1st Post link also updated.
Did you tell / ask Dibu? ;)
Lol I think we posted at the same time. Hehe
Yes, Dibu has been informed and servers are already updated. Thanks peter. ;)
Hmmm ... are you sure about these ? :)
[weather]
cloudy_prob = 0.28
rainy_prob = 0.12
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 23, 2014, 07:46:28 PM
Hmmm ... are you sure about these ? :)
[weather]
cloudy_prob = 0.28
rainy_prob = 0.12
MaX.
To be honest. No. :)
They are the default settings from the original track.... Not sure of the strength of the values? Is 1.0 max, like certain to rain? and 0.01 certain not to rain and vice versa for cloud probability?
Anyone know how to alter the grip levels on track surfaces?
Maybe for the possibility of different grip levels for different sections of the track? I'm not talking about big differences just subtle. ;)
Would also help to get the lap time somewhat correct too.
Is there any published grip levels for race circuits? That would be handy. ;D
Not sure you can. I think each material (asphalt 1/2, white lines, grass, sand etc) has his own grip level "hardcoded" in GPB.
MaX.
Track Creation rules (http://tools.piboso.com/index.php?topic=4.0)
asphalt -> ASPH (Use this for main track surface)
asphalt 2 -> BASPH (Same as ASPH, but slightly less grip)
asphalt 3 -> CASPH (Slightly less grip than BASPH)
Quote from: PeterV on April 23, 2014, 08:18:07 PM
Track Creation rules (http://tools.piboso.com/index.php?topic=4.0)
asphalt -> ASPH (Use this for main track surface)
asphalt 2 -> BASPH (Same as ASPH, but slightly less grip)
asphalt 3 -> CASPH (Slightly less grip than BASPH)
Interesting...... Could be worth experimenting with to see just how big a difference each grip level is?
Thanks, Peter. ;)
Got a data mismatch joining your server....tried murusama, MSM125, NSR500. :-\
Quote from: C21 on April 24, 2014, 06:34:35 PM
Got a data mismatch joining your server....tried murusama, MSM125, NSR500. :-\
Hi C21.
Just tried it myself and connects fine. :)
Are you selecting "Mallory Park 1978",
NOT, "Mallory Park" from your track selection menue? Either that or you have not downloaded the latest version from the link in the 1st post?
I gave a quick try to Mallory 1978 compared to the previous Mallory, only a few laps with the 600 and the 125. The hairpin is definitely way better in your version and, especially with the 125, I had less random crashes due to the front washing out all of a sudden without any real reason. Some strange things are still there (the 125 sometimes loses the front when closing the throttle, OK it can happen, but not that much), but it's probably not a track problem. Well done Hawk_UK !
I'm not sure how easy it is, but it would be good if our little community of track modders was able to exchange best practices using 3ds/Maya, tricks and useful tools, ways to redo the track surface of a given track in a clever manner and so on.
MaX.
P.S.
Only tested locally, not online.
offline driving is fine. Can´t connect online because of DATA Mismatch ;)
Used the latest version (Folder date 23.03.2014 19:13).
Quote from: C21 on April 24, 2014, 07:11:58 PM
offline driving is fine. Can´t connect online because of DATA Mismatch ;)
Used the latest version (Folder date 23.03.2014 19:13).
If the folder is named Mallory Park 1978, then you have the correct version. :)
Is your bike mod up to date?
PS: Saw you connect and then disconnect almost straight away?
It'll be the bikes, best to re-download anything in your bikes folder older than March :) Or to be safe just do them all again
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 24, 2014, 07:00:10 PM
I gave a quick try to Mallory 1978 compared to the previous Mallory, only a few laps with the 600 and the 125. The hairpin is definitely way better in your version and, especially with the 125, I had less random crashes due to the front washing out all of a sudden without any real reason. Some strange things are still there (the 125 sometimes loses the front when closing the throttle, OK it can happen, but not that much), but it's probably not a track problem. Well done Hawk_UK !
I'm not sure how easy it is, but it would be good if our little community of track modders was able to exchange best practices using 3ds/Maya, tricks and useful tools, ways to redo the track surface of a given track in a clever manner and so on.
MaX.
P.S.
Only tested locally, not online.
Hi Max.
Thanks for the feedback. ;)
I agree the track is a whole lot better than it was and the hairpin is very good now.
Overall I think it gives a lot more confidence to ride the track and particularly that hairpin without feeling you have to ride on egg-shells, which was my aim.... So I guess this could be marked as a success.
Would love to hear some feedback from a manual rider operated bike to see how they feel about it?
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 24, 2014, 07:00:10 PM
I'm not sure how easy it is, but it would be good if our little community of track modders was able to exchange best practices using 3ds/Maya, tricks and useful tools, ways to redo the track surface of a given track in a clever manner and so on.
MaX.
I think I'm the only guy using Maya? But if anyone is interested in how I did what I did using Maya, then let me know and I'll post a step by step little tutorial in it's own thread. ;) :)
Quote from: C21 on April 24, 2014, 07:11:58 PM
offline driving is fine. Can´t connect online because of DATA Mismatch ;)
Used the latest version (Folder date 23.03.2014 19:13).
It connected instantly for me.
Quote from: Hawk_UK on April 24, 2014, 08:11:55 PM
I think I'm the only guy using Maya? But if anyone is interested in how I did what I did using Maya, then let me know and I'll post a step by step little tutorial in it's own thread. ;) :)
oDi uses Maya too (but he's not into track modding, he has plenty to do with bikes already).
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 24, 2014, 08:13:03 PM
oDi uses Maya too (but he's not into track modding, he has plenty to do with bikes already).
MaX.
Is there only oDi and me that realise just how good Maya is over 3ds Max? Hehe ;D
PS: No seriously... they are both good in there own ways.... just depends what you started with I guess? ;)
This track is very good for the 125 the hairpin is a dream great job Hawk_UK it will still tuck but you have to be heavy handed.
I did have a core exe when I hit the barrier on the outside of the first corner were there are people standing may be a hole there.
Have to try another track and work your magic, Brno would be a good test my favorite track. ;D
Quote from: Ian on April 24, 2014, 08:19:53 PM
Have to try another track and work your magic, Brno would be a good test my favorite track. ;D
Brno gp is already pretty good, we just raced it with the 600 (italian championship) and it went pretty OK. Aragon on the other hand was a total catastrophe.
MaX.
You mean Aragon had more core exe problems ?
I was thinking about that uphill chicane at Brno its so tricky.
Quote from: Ian on April 24, 2014, 08:19:53 PM
This track is very good for the 125 the hairpin is a dream great job Hawk_UK it will still tuck but you have to be heavy handed.
I did have a core exe when I hit the barrier on the outside of the first corner were there are people standing may be a hole there.
Have to try another track and work your magic, Brno would be a good test my favorite track. ;D
Hi Ian.
I bet you hit that tiny slit of a gap that Peter found yesterday on the outside of the first corner at the sandpit? Seems that if you happen to hit one of those gaps even if it's tiny you'll get a core.exe. I sealed 99% of them on Mallory.... I'll seal that one on the next update.
Another fan of Brno for track resurfacing. I've had a few requests for wanting me to resurface the Brno circuit. I'll think about it... I've got my 1982 Yamaha YZR 500GP Bike to finish first now, but maybe a poll would be a good idea for which track people want resurfacing next? Hehe ;D ;D
Thanks for the feedback Ian... Much appreciated. ;)
fricken maya users! :o
;D
fix laguna!!! :D
I have never connected to a track with my ping at 190 before normally if its over 100 I can't connect just a coincident ?
Just sort that bloody chicane out at Brno ;D ;D np mate
It would be interesting to see if your method will fix the gradient problems
Hello,
Very good work:)
I m really interested by how do you smooth with maya, i will see if i can use your method in 3ds max.
Quote from: Ian on April 24, 2014, 08:30:12 PM
You mean Aragon had more core exe problems ?
Yes. Tons of core.exe crashes, including fo rme (I normally have very very few, like 1 every 5 or more hours of play).
Quote from: Ian on April 24, 2014, 08:30:12 PM
I was thinking about that uphill chicane at Brno its so tricky.
It is, but it's not sure it's a surface problem. The current brno
gp is otherwise pretty good. For sure there are other tracks that do need a "resurf" more than brno gp.
MaX.
I have to wait until saturday to try this out! Pc should be up and running by then.. Cant wait mallory is a great little circuit!
Looks like your theory hawk was correct! Great work!!!
Quote from: janaucarre on April 24, 2014, 09:24:50 PM
Hello,
Very good work:)
I m really interested by how do you smooth with maya, i will see if i can use your method in 3ds max.
Hi Janu... Thanks mate! ;D
I don't smooth at all.
I have observed that when you smooth a section of track surface it will do the job up to a point, but it still leaves very tiny ridges in the surface(Probably won't notice unless you look in perspective view when modelling).
I use curves with the "make object live" feature of Maya to rebuild the track surface or just a section of track.
Anyway, thought I'd do a quick tutorial for you and others who may want to use the same techniques.
1: First you make the original track object live(best to isolate the track surface from the rest of the circuit using layers), then use an EP curve(Set to 3 cubic and uniform. Don't use it set to linear), to trace the outline of the original track, the live track object will snap the curve to the edge of the original track.
2: Then use the "Rebuild Curve" feature to rebuild that curve with uniformly spaced number of edit points(Enough edit points so as not to distort the curve upon rebuild).
3: Check every edit point to make sure that it is snapped cleanly onto the edge of the live original track surface.
4: Once your happy with your work. Then offset that curve by a minus track width factor, or a plus track width factor depending on if you are offsetting to outer track edge or inner track edge.
5: Now this is were you've got to be careful. Each edit point in the offset curve is laterally aligned to an edit point of the original curve. Now what you need to do now is snap each edit point of the offset curve onto the other edge of the live original track surface object, but you must make sure not to move any edit point off it's y axis line from the original curve or you'll get distorted quads in the end result.
6: Once your happy with your work, it's time to create the track surface using the "Loft" function set to uniform and quad output. Using curves with plenty of edit points ensures you will get a sliky smooth track surface that follows the line of the curves, even on tight bends, but the tighter the bend the more quads you build into the lofted quad surface(Test for best results).
7: Delete the old track surface. The track surface or section of track surface is now finished. If you wish to alter the track surface for camber or undulations at this time, then the curves are still connected to the newly created track surface, so you can adjust the curves for height, camber using the control points of the curves to do so.
8: Then you have to go around every vert of the surrounding terrain trackside edging, and again using the make live feature, make the new track surface is set to "live" and then snap every terrain surface trackside vert onto the edge of the new track surface to seal the trackside edges to the track.
You can use the same technique to seal any holes accurately, especially between objects you wish to keep separate but which must be aligned properly.
9: If your just creating a new section of track, say a new rebuild for a hairpin, then make sure you marry up the join of the new section of track to the old one by using the "live object" feature to make the original track live and snapping the verts to alignment at the fresh joint. The join probably won't be noticeably out of line by your eye, but they will be very slightly out of line and you need to do this or you'll have a slight ripple in the track surface were they join. Either that or you can try merging, but usually there is a greater number of quads in the hairpin section than on the straight section of track your planning on merging to, so my advice in this circumstance is to keep any tight hi quad corner sections as a separate object from the rest of the track surface unless it's a gentler corner with the same quad topology as the straights, in that case it's better to keep the track as much in one object as possible. In the Mallory track surface rebuild there is only the hairpin section that is a separate object, all the other corners are part of the same track surface object.
10: Then it's just a case of creating your track texture/s, uv mapping to make sure your texture/s fit nicely onto the track surface without any blurring or distortions.
11: Now comes the real hard part..... Track integration with GP Bikes!! Just joking! Hehe... It's not so hard once you know how. ;D
I hope this quick guide helps.
If you need any further help or explanation then just let me know, I'll help all I can. ;)
Thanks, i will try it in maya:)
Quote from: BOBR6 84 on April 24, 2014, 10:07:49 PM
I have to wait until saturday to try this out! Pc should be up and running by then.. Cant wait mallory is a great little circuit!
Looks like your theory hawk was correct! Great work!!!
Thanks Bob!..... Your compliments are very much appreciated mate. ;)
Quote from: janaucarre on April 25, 2014, 12:37:20 AM
Thanks, i will try it in maya:)
I'm shocked! Have I converted a 3ds Max user to working with Maya? Hehe ;D
Your welcome janu. ;)
if it can be easier to make or to smooth track for gpbikes, why not?
:)
@hawk
QuoteIf the folder is named Mallory Park 1978, then you have the correct version. :)
Is your bike mod up to date?
PS: Saw you connect and then disconnect almost straight away?
Yes i use the correct version, the latest you´ve uploaded. Did not have the old Mallory installed.
Bike mod is up to date but as IAN posted it must be an issue with the bikes.
Still confused why i can´t connect with the 125cc.
Have to sort out an issue with the GP1000 class (can´t connect to the HL server so there must be something wrong with some of the bikes...)
Rode the track offline and it´s very rideable with the 125cc. Don´t have an issue with the hairpin. Had a core.exe when returning to main menu but no core.exe on the track.
Really good work!!
[BrnoGP]
I eat my keyboard several times while crashing on the uphill chicane destroying many many good laps with the 125cc. This particular area of the track is so far away from the real track (ridden on it 2002-2004) that i please you to smooth and / or rebuild this part of the track. The track is totally different in this section to the real one. For sure you have to be carefull on the right hander acceleration but i´ve never seen bikes loosing his front or rear (especially 125cc bikes!) at this one!
Brno is my favorite track in GPB and in real life and i´m really annoyed of this issue!!!
Thank you C21.... Appreciated mate. ;) ;D
Many are asking for the Brno track surface to be rebuilt, if only at that uphill chicane section. I'd have a look at Brno if I had access to the source files, but don't know who to get permission from or where to obtain the Brno source files. But if anyone can help on that issue, then I'll have a look and see what I can do. ;)
Ask RBP , he smoothed BrnoGp and maybe have the files available.
Quote from: C21 on April 25, 2014, 08:39:53 AM
Ask RBP , he smoothed BrnoGp and maybe have the files available.
Thanks mate.... Have done so. Awaiting reply. ;)
There's a chance the uphill chicane problem is not a track surface problem (more of a GPB problem), but if you can improve it then go for it.
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 25, 2014, 11:28:54 AM
There's a chance the uphill chicane problem is not a track surface problem (more of a GPB problem), but if you can improve it then go for it.
MaX.
I've had a look at Brno(not the source file, but on GP Bikes while riding), and there is still places on the track that don't feel right, especially that exit corner of the chicane that starts uphill. definitely something not right there, but I agree with you that GP bikes needs tweaking to sort out part of the problem, the track I'm sure will be playing a part in the problem too. But I'll have a look at it when I can get hold of the source file and see what's happening there mesh-wise. ;)
Not sure if I have just clicked with this track but I am stringing laps together like I have never before with the 125.
For me the stability on the brakes is a lot better normally I get out of shape and down I go, but now the bike gets out of shape
but comes back in control, less surface irregularities to over work the suspension .
I tried the old version and several times on the brakes I hit a bump on the entry to the hairpin and the bike was down instantly.
Quote from: Ian on April 26, 2014, 02:36:32 PM
Not sure if I have just clicked with this track but I am stringing laps together like I have never before with the 125.
For me the stability on the brakes is a lot better normally I get out of shape and down I go, but now the bike gets out of shape
but comes back in control, less surface irregularities to over work the suspension .
I tried the old version and several times on the brakes I hit a bump on the entry to the hairpin and the bike was down instantly.
Hi Ian.
Thanks for the feedback... Much appreciated mate. ;)
I did a few more laps. The hairpin is definitely no longer an issue, great work !
Only issue I feel is after the hairpin, the left turn : there's a slope and a subsequent compression when the slope ends, if you're leaning the bike seems to spin left (like losing the rear). But I thing this is the well known issue of GPB on banked/sloped turns.
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 27, 2014, 01:12:21 PM
I did a few more laps. The hairpin is definitely no longer an issue, great work !
Only issue I feel is after the hairpin, the left turn : there's a slope and a subsequent compression when the slope ends, if you're leaning the bike seems to spin left (like losing the rear). But I thing this is the well known issue of GPB on banked/sloped turns.
MaX.
I know exactly were your talking about Max... I call it "Peters Dip" as it seemed to catch him out there nearly every lap when he first gave the track try. Lol
We're sure that compression dip is real to life, but just not sure if it's just a little too much depression than real life?
Actually once you've practiced on the track for a while, you realise that by taking the correct line through that bend you can easily get through it fine without any probs as even though you still ride into the depression your bike isn't as healed over as when you take the wrong line, so as I say, it becomes no problem at all. ;)
I have no problem with the dip, if it is there in real life then it should be there.
The thing that is strange is how the bike seems to spin around a vertical axis when you hit it (especially on throttle). You have the same weird behavior in many other sloped/banked corers on other tracks: you're leaning left and all of a sudden the bike seems to spin left, the rear going right and the front left, as if the bike was turning around a vertical axis. Given how much the bike spins, it's also surprising that many times you can save the situation (i.e. avoid crashing). Again, it's likely to be more a physics issue than a track one.
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on April 27, 2014, 01:30:34 PM
I have no problem with the dip, if it is there in real life then it should be there.
The thing that is strange is how the bike seems to spin around a vertical axis when you hit it (especially on throttle). You have the same weird behavior in many other sloped/banked corers on other tracks: you're leaning left and all of a sudden the bike seems to spin left, the rear going right and the front left, as if the bike was turning around a vertical axis. Given how much the bike spins, it's also surprising that many times you can save the situation (i.e. avoid crashing). Again, it's likely to be more a physics issue than a track one.
MaX.
Oh yes... I've experienced that too. It's like the back end is spinning up and the rear feels like it's coming round on you only it feels like a controlled spin. I quite like it. Though like you say, if it is a physics problem with the physics not being able to handle certain track surface drop offs or vice versa then I guess it will or should be on Piboso's "To-Do" list.
I think he's already aware. Good luck to him though, that would be a nasty one to crack.
MaX.
Hawk.. Can you work your magic around brands hatch gp?
It looks great.. Even rides ok but I love the circuit and I want to push the bike hard around it!
At the moment theres too much weird stuff happening..
Is this just me or do others have problems at brands too?
Quote from: BOBR6 84 on May 04, 2014, 01:33:39 AM
Hawk.. Can you work your magic around brands hatch gp?
It looks great.. Even rides ok but I love the circuit and I want to push the bike hard around it!
At the moment theres too much weird stuff happening..
Is this just me or do others have problems at brands too?
I agree. Brands Hatch is a great little circuit. ;D
I haven't the source file for it and not sure who would have them, but I'll ask around.
I've been doing some personal testing with track surfaces that have major height changes in the track surface and surprisingly to me all looks well, so Brands Hatch would probably be a good candidate.
I'm working on another project right now, but I will certainly put Brands on the list of tracks to-do. ;)
QuoteHawk.. Can you work your magic around brands hatch gp?
It looks great.. Even rides ok but I love the circuit and I want to push the bike hard around it!
At the moment theres too much weird stuff happening..
Is this just me or do others have problems at brands too?
+1
Did a short test at the GP and Indy version (for the BSB mod) and the circuit needs definitive rework!
Weird things happen on the right after the start/finish line. Have it on replay.....
QuoteI haven't the source file for it and not sure who would have them, but I'll ask around.
As it is a "NC" track ask the creator of magnycours,....-> noss69 ;)
Having initially started this project just as a track surface rebuild test, I've had so many ask if I would complete
"Mallory Park 1978" and release it, so this is what I have decided to do.
Work completed so far for this latest version of
Mallory Park 1978:
- Cleaned up most of the terrain mesh were it matters(hopefully this will eliminate most core.exe crashes)
- Rebuilt and remodelled the hairpin inner concrete barrier and terrain leading up to and into the hairpin and also the terrain around the outside of "Devils Elbow".
- Added new track surface texture
- Rescaled the track surface to the correct width
I'd have had the latest version released by now except that I've come up against a problem using "TrackED".... Hoping some of you guys can help me out here and others can learn from my mistakes. :P
The problem I'm having is that although everything is exporting correctly(the .map/.trp files), the hairpin barrier is not showing it's texture, and when I test it in GP Bikes the hairpin barrier on the inside of the hairpin is invisible although the collision detection is there for the barrier.
This is a similar problem to what I had before with flipped normals facing inwards instead of outwards, but no it's not that same problem again; Photo's below to demonstrate this current problem:
Mallory Park 1978 - Rebuilt hairpin and terrain, as it looks in Maya:(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2934/14191012160_35f40e6d85_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/nC1Dvs)
This pic is to show/demonstrate that the normals are not flipped and are facing the correct direction: :)
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5527/14191012170_c8bf002472_h.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/nC1DvC)
This pic is to show the .trp file in "TrackED", showing that the EDF exporter via 3ds max 2010 did not export the texture for the hairpin barrier on the inside of the track:(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2926/14191011780_e547e5d53a_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/nC1DoU)
This pic is to show that the exporter did export the mesh for the hairpin barrier, so the exporter must know and recognise the barrier is there:(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2909/14191012010_72f3f88b11_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/nC1DsS)
This pic is to show what I believe is the collision detection surfaces, the different colours to representing the different surface characteristics for the collisions. As you can see, the collision detection for the barrier is there in dark red, hence I can bump into it during my tests without falling through the track into the void:(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3845/14191012180_1619194d6f_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/nC1DvN)
I wanted the barrier to be named as "WLLCONC"(As it is a concrete barrier), but since it didn't work I've tried renaming it to "TRKASPH" and also to what it is now named as "TRKGRAS", but none of them seem to solve the problem of the texture not showing on the hairpin inner concrete barrier. Very strange as the texture shows fine in 3ds max and Maya, so I'm left not knowing if this is a bug or something I'm overlooking in the track creation rules?
Any ideas for a solutions guys would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. ;)
Hawk.
PS: I've also looked at the hypershade editor to make sure that there is nothing wrong with the shader/material or texture.
was it oke in the previous version? if so what was it called there?
Quote from: PeterV on June 09, 2014, 11:48:39 AM
was it oke in the previous version? if so what was it called there?
Hi Peter. :)
I've had a look in the original version, and he'd just put Armco barriers at the hairpin and named them TRKGRAS; this is why I also tried renaming my rebuilt concrete barrier, "WLLCONC"/"TRKASPH" and also tried "TRKGRAS"(as it is named currently), but none solve this problem of the texture not showing on the hairpin barrier.
I've also remapped and retextured the barrier numerous times thinking it must be just something to do with the texture application, or file, but I have had a look at it with Hypershade and made sure that everything is as it should be and it is..... I'm really foxed by this problem now.
The only thing I can now think of what could be the problem, is if there is a track creation rule I'm breaking that I just haven't understood correctly in my learning process?
Hawk.
i did notice some graphical glitches (texturing) around the track. some peeps are white, and in some places textures are missingor orientated/scaled wrong (mostly grass).
About youre problem, you would think it would belong too the grass, i have had a look underneath and it just looks like completly empty.
Im a noob so im lost for words. Like the tarmac texture, looking good m8.
is your armco crossing the ground?
Try to rename well the armco, WLLCONC_armco_001, and separate each part wich don't have the same id of texture, for example: they can have the same texture but not the same id, you only need to select the armco and right clic/convert in poly (if it has not been done), after you only need to clic on the poly you want to detach and clic detach in the right panel.
Quote from: PeterV on June 09, 2014, 12:19:54 PM
i did notice some graphical glitches (texturing) around the track. some peeps are white, and in some places textures are missingor orientated/scaled wrong (mostly grass).
About youre problem, you would think it would belong too the grass, i have had a look underneath and it just looks like completly empty.
Im a noob so im lost for words. Like the tarmac texture, looking good m8.
Thanks Peter. ;)
Yeah.... Still got to finish up remapping and retexturing terrain parts and other parts that are not UV mapped properly, thanks for noticing and letting me know you saw them. ;)
Yes, it's like the barrier is there because you can bump into it without falling through the track into the twilight zone. Lol. But it is just the texture that is totally invisible, and I have checked it for transparency setting and it's set to well opaque. You see why I'm totally puzzled? Hehe.
Hawk.
Hi Guys.
Just for a test and a bit of fun, I remember a discussion on a post about not being able to spin up the rear wheel on the corners in GPBikes...... Well I thought I'd just create a test track surface with less grip so you can test this out.
This track file is different from the test track above, so keep them separate if you want to use both.
Also please NOTE: Make sure you have "Traction Help" flagged as off in the GP BIke settings(Not Garage settings) for best results
Only tested it on the 500cc 2 stroke, so let me know how you get on with the other bikes.
Download Link for "Mallory Park 1978" - Less Grip: https://mega.co.nz/#!Gd9ySASY!FYRgJ_U-7sVX-WJWzJhpdDwhx76Q-yAhgVMYs9qz8oc
(https://mega.co.nz/#!Gd9ySASY!FYRgJ_U-7sVX-WJWzJhpdDwhx76Q-yAhgVMYs9qz8oc)
Have fun!! ;D 8)
Hawk.
had a core.exe on the curbs, in the left hander leading up to the chicane, drove over it slowly again to check and there are one or two holes where bike sinks in. (you see a black line between curb and tracksurface).
this was on Mallory park 1978 les grip but those lines are also there in normal version. And yes the grip is somewhat less but not alarming
Looking at youre wireframe picture from youre problem in topview, i see a Track texture in that spot, should that be there?
Quote from: PeterV on June 09, 2014, 01:11:17 PM
had a core.exe on the curbs, in the left hander leading up to the chicane, drove over it slowly again to check and there are one or two holes where bike sinks in. (you see a black line between curb and tracksurface).
this was on Mallory park 1978 les grip but those lines are also there in normal version. And yes the grip is somewhat less but not alarming
Thanks for that Peter, I'll look into it mate. ;)
So you want to be alarmed with even less grip? Okay, you got it.... I've got to go out in a moment, but just for fun I'll sort out an even less grip track later. ;D
Hawk.
Quote from: janaucarre on June 09, 2014, 12:34:30 PM
is your armco crossing the ground?
Try to rename well the armco, WLLCONC_armco_001, and separate each part wich don't have the same id of texture, for example: they can have the same texture but not the same id, you only need to select the armco and right clic/convert in poly (if it has not been done), after you only need to clic on the poly you want to detach and clic detach in the right panel.
Hi Janau. :)
Thanks for that..... I'll have another look at the texture ID's.
I extruded the barrier from the track, so does that count as crossing the ground if it's extracts so it's a separate object but still lined up exactly from it's base extrusion?
Hawk.
If you extrude you have not a separated object, if i remember, you'll have to separate manually.
Quote from: janaucarre on June 09, 2014, 03:34:30 PM
If you extrude you have not a separated object, if i remember, you'll have to separate manually.
Yes, I realise that when you initially extrude that the extruded part is part of the same object you extruded from, and that you must extract the extrude for it to become a separate object.
I appreciate you covering all bases of possibilities. Thank you mate. ;) :)
The Hairpin Barrier is a totally separate object.
Hawk.
Quote from: PeterV on June 09, 2014, 01:11:17 PM
Looking at youre wireframe picture from youre problem in topview, i see a Track texture in that spot, should that be there?
It's not the track texture, it's the default shade(grey) implemented when nothing is there; if there was a texture there it would be shaded as the represented texture, but you are well excused from thinking it was the track texture as they practically look the very same colour in TrackED. ;)
Hawk.
Here you go Peter... Try this for size! ;D
This track surface is created from "TRKCASHP" so should be even more slippery than the previous version made from "TRKBASPH"
Same notes apply below:
This track file is different from the test tracks in above posts, so keep them separate if you want to use the others too.
Also please NOTE: Make sure you have "Traction Help" flagged as off in the GP BIke settings(and Garage settings) for best results
Only tested it on the 500cc 2 stroke, so let me know how you get on with the other bikes.
Download Link for "Mallory Park 1978" - Less, Less Grip: https://mega.co.nz/#!SJVwUAwA!wFBWSKV5wqFPgSoEyf5yFVOTidiiDxz0hlZ9Tf3IeUU
Have fun and see if you can get your rear wheel spun up!! ;D 8)
Hawk.
well thank you :P
As you already know i did some laps on this slippery version and i found the grip for the 500c very suitable to that class.
Its not that youre riding on egg shells, but watch with the power delivery, some corners even feel better (lefthander towards s/f).
Me like very much :p
Quote from: PeterV on June 09, 2014, 06:52:45 PM
well thank you :P
As you already know i did some laps on this slippery version and i found the grip for the 500c very suitable to that class.
Its not that youre riding on egg shells, but watch with the power delivery, some corners even feel better (lefthander towards s/f).
Me like very much :p
I absolutely agree with you Peter. Though I also have not tested this more slippery track surface version with any of the 4 stroke bikes, I have to say that this surface presents a more realistic feel for this 500cc 2 stroke class. Excellent! ;D 8)
Thanks for the feedback Peter.... very much appreciated. I have noted and will sort out those defects you spotted earlier. ;)
Hawk.
PS: I wonder when Piboso has tweaked the physics exactly how he wants it, whether this will still be the case? :)
So we have at the same time people asking for better tires for the 500cc and people asking for tracks with less grip for the 500cc.
Should we average everything and leave things as they are ? :)
More seriously, I'm not sure I'll be in favour of more slippery tracks for the 990 ...
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on June 09, 2014, 07:33:08 PM
Should we average everything and leave things as they are ? :)
MaX.
I have no trouble with the tires as they are now. the 500 rides fine for me.
Quote from: HornetMaX on June 09, 2014, 07:33:08 PM
So we have at the same time people asking for better tires for the 500cc and people asking for tracks with less grip for the 500cc.
Should we average everything and leave things as they are ? :)
More seriously, I'm not sure I'll be in favour of more slippery tracks for the 990 ...
MaX.
This was just a fun test(started by myself) to see the results of creating the track surface in all the different grip levels available to see what the results would be. Results were very surprising and showed that for the 500cc 2 stroke bike class, the "TRKCASHP" grip level performs at a level that is, in my opinion, a much more realistic experience than the currently used and highest track surface grip level of "TRKASPH".
Did you test it Max? What did you think?
Hawk. :)
@Piboso: I applied a spherical UV Map onto the Hairpin Barrier... Does GP BIkes support Spherical UV Maps? I can't see why it wouldn't, but I'm just running out of reasons why it won't show. :(
I've tried everything to solve this problem, but nothing seems to be working.
As a last resort I may resort to a texture template created via a planar UV map and then texture the barrier in Photoshop to see if that works.
Hawk.
@Max/Peter: Fixed the bugs/problems you both kindly pointed out for me.
Also bump mapped the sand pits, Sorted out more problems with the terrain mesh and also remapped the terrain mesh(Texture scale not final yet though).... I may bump map the Kerbs also, but I've been painfully trying to solve this hairpin barrier problem to no avail as yet.
Hawk.
Hi Hawk,
I gave a quick try at the slippery one (500cc only): the difference is definitely there. Not sure it goes in the direction of more controllable slides though. If anything, it seemed harder on corner exit and braking (as it should be if the track is indeed more slippery). Didn't try it with other bikes.
MaX
Thanks for the feedback Max... Appreciated mate. ;)
On the hairpin corner barrier issue.... I'VE FIXED IT!!! YAHHHOOOO!!! ;D ;D 8)
I just got so frustrated with it that I just deleted all the shaders, material and textures that were applied to the barrier surface and started again from scratch, and it worked! Problem is that I still don't know what caused this issue as I just went through the same procedure as I did before. Anyway, it's sorted now so good news! ;D
I've just been going through everything tweaking, softing edges and remapping certain sections of the terrain, so I should have a pre-release test version out before midnight GMT. After that I will need to create a marshal file, maybe redo the camera file, probably put a start finish paint line on the track surface and then I'll have to export it with super sampling and shadows(takes a long time to process). Hopefully, bar any more bugs or problems reported in the meantime, I will then register it under the name of "Classic Mallory Park 1978", a fitting name for it's era I think guys. ;)
Hawk.
I am reading through your track threads Hawk and I have downloaded and tried out the 1978 Mallory Park Track. I know it's a work in progress and you are experimenting with the track surface but just wanted to say..I love your work!
To have the classic 1970's pre-chicane(s) track lay-out in gpbikes is a wonderful thing I think. I like the track surface also..
Thank you, grT :)
Quote from: girlracerTracey on June 10, 2014, 10:14:05 PM
I am reading through your track threads Hawk and I have downloaded and tried out the 1978 Mallory Park Track. I know it's a work in progress and you are experimenting with the track surface but just wanted to say..I love your work!
To have the classic 1970's pre-chicane(s) track lay-out in gpbikes is a wonderful thing I think. I like the track surface also..
Thank you, grT :)
Hi Tracey.
Thank you!. Hope you find my thread interesting reading.... I'm just about to post a link for the pre-release version of this
great little track. Full release version will come in a few days after all the little finishing touches have been completed.
Thanks for the compliments.... Hope you enjoy! ;D 8)
Hawk.
Hi Guys.
Here is the link to the pre release version of the track: https://mega.co.nz/#!zE0x2bRa!-OTOHNU_s_Xw1TM4CzHqBkUvfQd0bkZVcDqSRW6puxA (https://mega.co.nz/#!zE0x2bRa!-OTOHNU_s_Xw1TM4CzHqBkUvfQd0bkZVcDqSRW6puxA)
There is still some finishing touches to apply, and I do know about the little island in the lake not having a texture yet, as well as the centre grass terrain leading up to the hairpin still needs the hard edges softening up more.
Okay.... Enjoy! ;)
Hawk.
PS: 1st post download link has been updated.
I love it Hawk. Just downloaded it and gave it a "spin" on Barry Sheene's 500cc Suzuki..varese physics.
Well I span the back up more easily that's for sure. It came round on me and I lost control and went down though..seems to be my problem on the 500s at the moment. But I will keep trying!
I absolutely love the track though. You deserve all the accolades you get imo.
grT :)
Beautiful little track ! And I have no sentimental value attached to it, unlike our british gang :)
Does it have the standard asphalt or the slippery one ? I'd say the standard one (taking my chances here: only tried that version with the 600 WSS and not A/B testing with the old one or the slippery one).
I'd lower the fog for the sunny condition: don't know why but everybody seems to be using density = 0.0015 (victoria has 0.0007); with 0.0015 objects far away tends to become grey/white.
Had the same on Noss' Mugello: too much fog IMHO.
Didn't test the cloudy/rainy conditions.
MaX.
@Max: Thanks Max! Your correct again mate! It is the highest level of grip (TRKASPH) on this version.... I thought, at least until Piboso has released version 1.0 of GP Bikes and we see what the finished physics are like and how the bikes perform on track that I would keep the grip levels to what has become the standard for track surfaces, unless of course there is a big call for the more slippery track surface version?
@Tracey: Thank you Tracey! Glad you liked it. ;D
It is a really fun little circuit, isn't it.... Just something about it that keeps bringing you back for more.
There are places on this track were you can usually spin up the rear wheel, particularly coming out of the "Lake Esses" before going up to the hairpin, and also on the exits of "Devils Elbow" and "Spectator Bank" but you do have to push hard to do it with this level of track surface grip.
I personally prefer the more slippery version, so much fun on the 500cc 2 strokes! So if any of you guys would prefer the slippery track version then post here, and depending on the call for it I may change it over ;)
Thanks again guys. ;) 8)
PS: Max, I will try a lower fog level and we'll see what it's like. ;)
Quote from: HornetMaX on June 11, 2014, 12:30:39 AM
Beautiful little track ! And I have no sentimental value attached to it, unlike our british gang :)
Does it have the standard asphalt or the slippery one ? I'd say the standard one (taking my chances here: only tried that version with the 600 WSS and not A/B testing with the old one or the slippery one).
I'd lower the fog for the sunny condition: don't know why but everybody seems to be using density = 0.0015 (victoria has 0.0007); with 0.0015 objects far away tends to become grey/white.
Had the same on Noss' Mugello: too much fog IMHO.
Didn't test the cloudy/rainy conditions.
MaX.
Yep.. Great little track! Been some brilliant racing there over the years! Recently went into administration and we nearly lost it forever all because of some grumpy old neighbours.. That would have been a great shame!
Luckily somebody bought the place! Still hampered with low noise limits.. But the track lives on :)
Mallory when I get home then... Cheers Hawk 8)
Good Job Hawk! Only thing I did was lower the fog, and brighten the sun. To many tracks make the sun light feels like a 40 watt bulb. :/ The sun is bright in real life but in a lot of tracks.
Next build add a spec to the track to get a little shine?
Quote from: Hawk_UK on June 11, 2014, 02:17:46 AM
I personally prefer the more slippery version, so much fun on the 500cc 2 strokes! So if any of you guys would prefer the slippery track version then post here, and depending on the call for it I may change it over ;)
Hiya. Is there an easy way I can change the downloaded track to the slippery version? I would really like to try it out..
Or is there an alternative download link Hawk?
grT
A video I made earlier tonight when practicing DST, but this one is in helmet view. The way I play GP Bikes. :) As always manual everything n assists. Manual rider.
Good work on the track Hawk!
DST Helmet View Malloy Park 1978:
http://www.youtube.com/v/507Y1y4n4co
Quote from: Klax75 on June 11, 2014, 04:48:46 AM
Good Job Hawk! Only thing I did was lower the fog, and brighten the sun. To many tracks make the sun light feels like a 40 watt bulb. :/ The sun is bright in real life but in a lot of tracks.
Next build add a spec to the track to get a little shine?
Hi Klax.... Thank you mate! ;)
Can you PM me a link for the altered .amb file and I'll give it a try out. ;D
Hawk.
Quote from: girlracerTracey on June 11, 2014, 08:19:01 AM
Quote from: Hawk_UK on June 11, 2014, 02:17:46 AM
I personally prefer the more slippery version, so much fun on the 500cc 2 strokes! So if any of you guys would prefer the slippery track version then post here, and depending on the call for it I may change it over ;)
Hiya. Is there an easy way I can change the downloaded track to the slippery version? I would really like to try it out..
Or is there an alternative download link Hawk?
grT
Hi Tracey.
It's relatively easy to alter the grip levels of a track surface by renaming the track surface mesh file: There are 3 levels of grip defined by names of, TRKASPH, TRKBASPH, and TRKCASPH.
There will only be one online version due to the process of registering a track, but while in pre release I will create the different grip level versions for the community to test and vote on for which version of grip they would like the online version to be. I cannot be fairer than that. ;)
I will post links for the different version of track surface grip later today.
Hawk.
Hi Klax.
Great video above mate! You really get that sense of speed in "Helmet View" that you don't get so much in 3rd person view... Looks good mate! ;D 8)
I was noticing little bits that need sorting out as you were riding around, I couldn't help it. Hehe
Hawk.
Quote from: Hawk_UK on June 11, 2014, 08:44:07 AM
Hi Tracey.
It's relatively easy to alter the grip levels of a track surface by renaming the track surface mesh file: There are 3 levels of grip defined by names of, TRKASPH, TRKBASPH, and TRKCASPH.
There will only be one online version due to the process of registering a track, but while in pre release I will create the different grip level versions for the community to test and vote on for which version of grip they would like the online version to be. I cannot be fairer than that. ;)
I will post links for the different version of track surface grip later today.
Hawk.
That's really kind of you. Thank you!
grT
Quote from: Klax75 on June 11, 2014, 08:30:56 AM
A video I made earlier tonight when practicing DST, but this one is in helmet view. The way I play GP Bikes. :) As always manual everything n assists. Manual rider.
Good work on the track Hawk!
DST Helmet View Malloy Park 1978:
http://www.youtube.com/v/507Y1y4n4co
That's a great video Klax. To say the least I am very impressed by what you can achieve with all those manual settings on. Seriously impressed in fact.
You are an inspiration to all of us who have to use some auto settings.. I would love to be able to emulate what you can do myself!
Good on you Klax! ;)
grT
Thanks. This is the only way I am using GP Bikes now DST only. Minus the last Red Bulls Rookies race I'll go back to default. Everyone doesn't get to see the hundreds, thousands of falls and days, weeks of practice before I could start doing this. :)
Thanks for the support though. It's appreciated.
That was after about a hour, my first 11 laps were a slightly better. The helmet view laps, by then my right hand started to go numb. :/ lol
Quote from: Hawk_UK on June 11, 2014, 08:44:07 AM
Quote from: girlracerTracey on June 11, 2014, 08:19:01 AM
Hiya. Is there an easy way I can change the downloaded track to the slippery version? I would really like to try it out..
Hi Tracey.
It's relatively easy to alter the grip levels of a track surface by renaming the track surface mesh file: There are 3 levels of grip defined by names of, TRKASPH, TRKBASPH, and TRKCASPH.
There will only be one online version due to the process of registering a track, but while in pre release I will create the different grip level versions for the community to test and vote on for which version of grip they would like the online version to be. I cannot be fairer than that. ;)
I will post links for the different version of track surface grip later today.
You don' t need to do that Hawk. The properties of the 3 asphalt "materials" are in the bike's tire files.
For the 500cc rear soft tire (for example) you have the file
m_rr500_94_r_soft.tyre:
type = bike
id = M RR 500 94 R Soft
R0 = 0.300000
Fz0 = 1000.000000
p_Cx1 = 1.600000
p_Dx1 = 1.650000
p_Dx2 = -0.100000
p_Ex1 = 0.000000
p_Ex2 = 0.000000
p_Ex3 = 0.000000
p_Ex4 = 0.000000
p_Kx1 = 30.000000
p_Kx2 = 0.000000
p_Kx3 = 0.000000
r_Bx1 = 12.000000
r_Bx2 = -10.000000
r_Bx3 = 0.000000
r_Cx1 = 1.200000
p_Cy1 = 1.200000
p_Cy2 = 0.600000
p_Dy1 = 1.650000
p_Dy2 = -0.100000
p_Dy3 = 0.000000
p_Ey1 = 0.000000
p_Ey2 = 0.000000
p_Ey3 = 0.000000
p_Ey4 = 0.000000
p_Ey5 = 0.000000
p_Ky1 = 20.000000
p_Ky2 = 1.000000
p_Ky3 = 0.010000
p_Ky4 = 0.000000
p_Ky5 = 0.000000
p_Ky6 = 3.000000
p_Ky7 = 0.000000
r_By1 = 7.000000
r_By2 = 4.000000
r_By3 = 0.000000
r_Cy1 = 1.050000
r_Hy1 = 0.000000
q_Bz1 = 9.000000
q_Cz1 = 1.100000
q_Dz1 = 0.100000
q_Dz8 = 0.100000
q_Ez1 = -10.000000
s_Sz1 = 0.000000
q_sy1 = 0.013000
compound0
{
name = Soft
OptTemperature = 70.000000
BelowTempFactor = 1.000000
AboveTempFactor = 1.000000
HeatingFactorLong = 0.000400
HeatingFactorLat = 0.000400
HeatingFactorRoll = 0.004000
WearRate = 0.000250
NumKeys = 2
Key0 = 0.900000, 0.980000
Key1 = 1.000000, 0.800000
asphalt1
{
dry_grip = 0.980000
wet_grip = 0.700000
max_wet = 0.500000
curve_type = 1
resistance_dry = 1.000000
resistance_wet = 3.000000
}
asphalt2
{
dry_grip = 0.970000
wet_grip = 0.700000
max_wet = 0.500000
curve_type = 1
resistance_dry = 1.000000
resistance_wet = 3.000000
}
asphalt3
{
dry_grip = 0.960000
wet_grip = 0.700000
max_wet = 0.500000
curve_type = 1
resistance_dry = 1.000000
resistance_wet = 3.000000
}
concrete
{
dry_grip = 0.990000
wet_grip = 0.700000
max_wet = 0.500000
curve_type = 1
resistance_dry = 1.000000
resistance_wet = 3.000000
}
grass
{
dry_grip = 0.500000
wet_grip = 0.300000
max_wet = 1.000000
curve_type = 0
resistance_dry = 0.500000
resistance_wet = 0.300000
}
sand
{
dry_grip = 0.300000
wet_grip = 0.200000
max_wet = 1.000000
curve_type = 0
resistance_dry = 20.000000
resistance_wet = 30.000000
}
kerb
{
dry_grip = 0.960000
wet_grip = 0.700000
max_wet = 0.500000
curve_type = 1
resistance_dry = 1.000000
resistance_wet = 3.000000
}
soil
{
dry_grip = 0.550000
wet_grip = 0.250000
max_wet = 1.000000
curve_type = 0
resistance_dry = 3.000000
resistance_wet = 5.000000
}
paint
{
dry_grip = 0.960000
wet_grip = 0.700000
max_wet = 0.500000
curve_type = 1
resistance_dry = 1.000000
resistance_wet = 3.000000
}
}
Name = Soft
Compound0 = Soft
Compound1 = Soft
Compound2 = Soft
OptimalPressure = 180.000000
SpringBase = 62000
SpringFactor = 350
Damper = 1410
Mass = 15
Inertia = 0.55, 0.3, 0.3
Radius = 0.305
TorusRadius = 0.11
Width = 60
RadiusRPS = 0.0001
If you look in the compound section (only one compound for this specific tire, some tires can have two), you have sub-sec tions for
asphalt1,
asphalt2 and
asphalt3, they correspond to your surface names TRKASPH, TRKBASPH, and TRKCASPH. The relevant parameter is
dry_grip and it is set to 0.98, 0.97 and 0.96 respectively.
So, bottom line: if you want to try a more slippery track (any track you want), just edit the tire file and replace 0.98 in
asphalt1 with 0.97 or 0.96 (or whatever you want).
WARNINGs:
- if you modify the file then you won't be able to join online servers using that bike (as you tampered with the physics). Just restore the original content. Personally I do this:from bikes.pkz I only extract the file I'm interested into, I put it in the right folder and play with it. Once I want to revert, I just delete the file. Even better solution: modify the bike .cfg and add a new tire file.
- Be careful to modify the right file (front/rear, quali/soft/hard/wet) and the right compound and asphalt.
As a side note, the hard tire of the 500 has 0.97 as grip so it behaves more or less (there are other differences) as the soft tire on the slippery asphalt.
MaX.
@Max: That is interesting reading and very useful information, thanks for that Max, It will be great to give this a test and see just how slippery it can go. Lol!
The only downside with doing it that way is, as you say, we wouldn't be able to go online unless the server had the altered physics bikes installed? Hmm, maybe one server could be used for this? Maybe we could call it the, "Classic Bike Server"? ;D
There must be some data somewhere on the grip levels and characteristics of the old tyres that were used, "back in the good old days", when two strokes ruled the world. :P ;D
Hawk.
@Max: What are these settings for in the tyre model file:
- curve_type = 1
resistance_dry = 1.000000
resistance_wet = 3.000000
Quote from: Hawk_UK on June 11, 2014, 04:45:55 PM
@Max: That is interesting reading and very useful information, thanks for that Max, It will be great to give this a test and see just how slippery it can go. Lol!
The only downside with doing it that way is, as you say, we wouldn't be able to go online unless the server had the altered physics bikes installed? Hmm, maybe one server could be used for this? Maybe we could call it the, "Classic Bike Server"? ;D
You will be able to go online if the server uses exactly the same files (probably the times won't count in the GPB stats page though).
The proper solution is to create a "copy" of the Varese bike, rename it to "varese_v594_slippery" and make it available for download.
You'll need to:
- extract the varese_v594 and rename it to "varese_v594_slippery"
- inside the folder, rename the .ini and the .cfg file to "varese_v594_slippery" .ini and .cfg
- in the .ini, change the bike name and short name
- in the .cfg, change the bike ID.
If you want to provide additional tire types you would have to take one file (e.g. front soft,
m_rr500_94_f_soft.tyre), make a copy of it, rename it to something and change it as you want (most likely, the only thing you wan to play with is the
dry_grip in the
compound0 / asphalt1 section).
The you will need to add a
tyreN section (e.g.
tyre4, as 0-3 are already there) in the .cfg file, referencing your .tyre file.
Not sure how clear all this sounds but I'm sure you can sort it out.
Quote from: Hawk_UK on June 11, 2014, 05:15:54 PM
@Max: What are these settings for in the tyre model file:
- curve_type = 1
resistance_dry = 1.000000
resistance_wet = 3.000000
These are the scaling factors (for dry and wet, respectively) of the Pacejka model for the rolling resistance momentum. W00T !!11 8)
Said in comprehensible words, they influence how much resistance to rolling the tire has (actually they scale a more complex curve that depends on other parameters like the normal load on the tire and the longitudinal force currently developed by the tire, even if this last one is not used by GPB). Anyway, bottom line is: the higher the coefficient, the more power will be eaten up to make the tire roll instead of to make the bike accelerate. Don't play with them, no real interest.
MaX.
Hi Max.
Thanks for the explanations. I've already tested the tyre model grip and found a pretty good setting.... It really does make for an interesting ride on the 500cc bike with good throttle control needed, as it should be for those classic 500cc bikes I reckon. Now you've got to really control the bike as it wants to buck and kick you down the road. Hehe ;D
I've only altered the rear soft dry tyre at the moment, but I'm experimenting, and your suggestion for having a specific "Slippery" version for download is a great idea! I'll see if I can sort something out with the use of your info here. ;D
The surprising thing is that the lap times don't seem to suffer at all, in fact I posted my fastest lap around "Mallory Park 1978".
Hopefully we'll be able to get a "Classic Racing" server up and running for some online practice and eventual classic events if someone is willing to host? Anyone? ;D 8)
Thanks for your help Max... Appreciated as always mate. ;)
Quote from: Hawk_UK on June 11, 2014, 07:53:10 PM
The surprising thing is that the lap times don't seem to suffer at all, in fact I posted my fastest lap around "Mallory Park 1978".
That's very surprising ... it probably means you weren't using all the available grip before (not that it's easy, especially on the 500). I see no other explanation.
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on June 11, 2014, 08:04:16 PM
Quote from: Hawk_UK on June 11, 2014, 07:53:10 PM
The surprising thing is that the lap times don't seem to suffer at all, in fact I posted my fastest lap around "Mallory Park 1978".
That's very surprising ... it probably means you weren't using all the available grip before (not that it's easy, especially on the 500). I see no other explanation.
MaX.
No other explanation except the fact that you have to ride smoother and have better throttle control which would surely lead to better lap times? That's my deduction anyway. :P ;D
Hawk.
Quote from: Hawk_UK on June 11, 2014, 08:10:16 PM
No other explanation except the fact that you have to ride smoother and have better throttle control which would surely lead to better lap times? That's my deduction anyway. :P ;D
But then you should be able to do the same lap time with the more grippy tires too.
How much did you lower the grip ?
Max.
Quote from: HornetMaX on June 11, 2014, 08:18:01 PM
Quote from: Hawk_UK on June 11, 2014, 08:10:16 PM
No other explanation except the fact that you have to ride smoother and have better throttle control which would surely lead to better lap times? That's my deduction anyway. :P ;D
But then you should be able to do the same lap time with the more grippy tires too.
How much did you lower the grip ?
Max.
I'm not sure about that? I personally think the slippery tyre settings suit the power characteristics of the 2 stroke engine as you can rear wheel steer coming out of corners which allow you to get the power on earlier, whereas if your tyres are stuck to the ground your often forever waiting for the bike to come around before you can start to accelerate on the exits. Does that make sense? Probably not.... but that's the way I see it. LOL :)
Anyway, you'll probably be gobsmacked when I tell you that I set the rear soft at 0.70 before I started to get the characteristics of what I'd think are getting there, after all, on a GP 500cc 2 stroke, I'm sure you shouldn't be able to whack your throttle open in a corner without the back end spinning out, which at this moment in time you certainly can do in GP Bikes. It should be a balancing act with the throttle in a corner between just right and too much that you spin out that rear tyre. No?
Anyway, I'm going to experiment more to get it just right, or what I consider just right... but I'll probably do the experimenting tomorrow as I'm working on Mallory right now. ;)
BTW.... You were right when you told me that I'd be spending more time working on modding GP Bikes than playing it. What did you say to me at the time? "Welcome to the club" I think it was.... Cheers! Lol
Wow !! 0.70 is the grip of a slick tire (e.g. quali) on the wet ... hmm ... can't be right, it'd mean you're faster with a slick quali tire on the wet than with a quali tire on the dry ?! :o
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on June 11, 2014, 10:43:38 PM
Wow !! 0.70 is the grip of a slick tire (e.g. quali) on the wet ... hmm ... can't be right, it'd mean you're faster with a slick quali tire on the wet than with a quali tire on the dry ?! :o
MaX.
Yeah, sorry!!... My mistake Max.... It's 0.87. Hehe!! ;D ;D
Hawk.
OK, it's a bit less scary, but still scary :)
MaX.
@Max: I'm getting a little off topic here, but anyway.... Just wanted to ask you if it is possible to add more gear ratio for the 500 cc 2 stroke bikes, as I've noticed that on tracks with slow hairpin type corners the bike could do with being able to lower(is it lower ratio or higher needed for tight corners to keep the revs up?) the 1st gear ratio more than it is allowed at this time? If it's possible and you can show me how to do it I would like to do a test to see how well it will work out. ;)
Hawk.
Quote from: Hawk_UK on June 12, 2014, 12:30:33 PM
@Max: I'm getting a little off topic here, but anyway.... Just wanted to ask you if it is possible to add more gear ratio for the 500 cc 2 stroke bikes, as I've noticed that on tracks with slow hairpin type corners the bike could do with being able to lower(is it lower ratio or higher needed for tight corners to keep the revs up?) the 1st gear ratio more than it is allowed at this time? If it's possible and you can show me how to do it I would like to do a test to see how well it will work out. ;)
In GPB it is possible, in the bike's .cfg file:
gearbox
{
gearing
{
ratio0 = 20, 39
ratio1 = 21, 38
ratio2 = 22, 37
ratio3 = 23, 36
ratio4 = 24, 35
ratio5 = 25, 34
ratio6 = 26, 33
ratio7 = 27, 32
ratio8 = 28, 31
ratio9 = 29, 30
ratio10 = 30, 29
ratio11 = 31, 28
ratio12 = 32, 27
}
NumGears = 6
Gear0 = 0
Gear1 = 2
Gear2 = 4
Gear3 = 6
Gear4 = 8
Gear5 = 10Add a ratio before ratio0 (you'll have to name-shift all the others).
I don't know if in reality it is possible to get a shorter one not if it makes practical sense: if there's too much difference betwen 1st and 2nd that's not good on the track.
Did you change the final ratio first ?
MaX.
@Max: I just want a 1st gear ratio with a wider range of ratio options so that when on a track with really slow hairpin type bends I can lower the first gear so that I can keep it within reasonable rev range to the power band. I know I can use the clutch to power out of those type of bends, but the lowest 1st gear ratio just seems too high/low(I get confused with gears and ratios. LOL) for the slow corners.
I heard Wayne Gardner say that he has an option of 96 gear ratio cogs to choose from for his Honda NSR 500 to get the gearing correct for each corner. Obviously there has to be trade offs when selecting gear ratios because as you said, you have to keep the ratios within a certain range for each gear or you can end up with certain gears bogged down. But I just wanted to have a test with them if it was possible, and by what you've posted above it is possible to add gears ratios, I think?
Is it possible, and I think it is by the look of it here, to just alter the ratio values, ie: ratio0 = 10, 39 instead of the default, ratio0 = 20, 39 ? Would that give me the option of keeping the revs more towards the power band in slow corners?
I suppose the best thing, now you have pointed me in the right direction is just to have a mess about with these settings and see what happens.
Thanks for that Max... Appreciated mate. ;)
Hawk.
PS: I tend to alter the final ratio to get the top speed on the longest straight when the final gear hits near max revs just before my breaking point
you need a higher ratio to be shorter.
e.g. 2,1 as 1st gear up to 0,89 in 6th gear
or for your example:
39/10 -> 3,9
39/20 -> 1,95
39/10 will be way to short.
if 39/20=1,95 is the shortest on the Varese i would go down to 2,00 or 2,10.
Quote from: C21 on June 12, 2014, 01:53:43 PM
you need a higher ratio to be shorter.
e.g. 2,1 as 1st gear up to 0,89 in 6th gear
Thanks for that C21..... I've always had trouble with which is higher and lower with the gear ratios. Lol
Hawk.
In the data above, ratio0 is 20/39 (near 0.5, a short 1st gear) while ratio12 is 32/27 (1.18, a long 6th gear).
You can edit the ratio0, ratio1 etc as you want, they have just to stay in increasing order.
I even think you can have more that 12 ratios (TBC) so you should be able to keep the existing one and add some more (before, after or in the middle of existing ones).
MaX.
Quote from: HornetMaX on June 12, 2014, 02:01:00 PM
In the data above, ratio0 is 20/39 (near 0.5, a short 1st gear) while ratio12 is 32/27 (1.18, a long 6th gear).
You can edit the ratio0, ratio1 etc as you want, they have just to stay in increasing order.
I even think you can have more that 12 ratios (TBC) so you should be able to keep the existing one and add some more (before, after or in the middle of existing ones).
MaX.
Thanks for that Max..... Your info is noted and I'll see if I can sort something out with it. ;)
Hawk.
just as an example:
NSR500V , 2 cylinder.
Shortest 1st gear ratio was 15/32->2,133.
i personally would not go beyond 2,15 or 2,2 for the 1st gear at race bikes to be on the realistic side. Sometimes you have to use the clutch in really tight 1st corners (IOM, NW200,... e.g.) with that sort of bikes.......hey it´s real ;-)
street bikes have shorter 1st gears of course... ;)
QuoteI even think you can have more that 12 ratios (TBC) so you should be able to keep the existing one and add some more (before, after or in the middle of existing ones).
i did not found a limit yet ;-)
BUT
regarding to different tyres there is a restriction of 6 different rear tyres , you can write more in the cfg but you cant get them ingame!
Quote from: C21 on June 12, 2014, 02:06:19 PM
just as an example:
NSR500V , 2 cylinder.
Shortest 1st gear ratio was 15/32->2,133.
i personally would not go beyond 2,15 or 2,2 for the 1st gear at race bikes to be on the realistic side. Sometimes you have to use the clutch in really tight 1st corners (IOM, NW200,... e.g.) with that sort of bikes.......hey it´s real ;-)
street bikes have shorter 1st gears of course... ;)
QuoteI even think you can have more that 12 ratios (TBC) so you should be able to keep the existing one and add some more (before, after or in the middle of existing ones).
i did not found a limit yet ;-)
BUT
regarding to different tyres there is a restriction of 6 different rear tyres , you can write more in the cfg but you cant get them ingame!
Taking all this good advice in from yourself and Max..... This will be an interesting test for me. ;D 8)
Thanks C. ;)
Hi Guys.
Okay. Just got to create a track marshals file and I'll then register and release Mallory Park 1978 for use on the online servers.
I could also do with a good track camera file creating..... Anyone want to chip in the work and create both the track camera and track marshals files? Let me know here and I'll send you a copy of the track to do the work on. Thanks. ;) :)
Hawk.
Hi Guys.
Updated on Wednesday 18th June 2014:
Mallory Park 1978 V1.0 is now released and available to use online. You can therefore now obtain this track from the "Track Downloads" Database here: http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=45.0
(http://forum.piboso.com/index.php?topic=45.0)
Thank you for all your support and comments while working on this great little track. I hope this thread will continue to be of use to those that wish to alter or create a track of their own. Thank you. ;) ;D 8)
Enjoy! ;D 8)
Hawk.