Public Release Build 1414

[Maurice82]

printscreen:

it now says i have 2 engines installed?? Maybe that's the problem.

[Jakgoe]

No, I think one of the "engines" is the name, and one is the actual engine.

[Maurice82]

Don't know, as the 1.5ltr didn't fit. When you add the 1.1 v8 engine and check the engine bay, you can fit a 6ltr v8 behind it, that much space is left.

[Jakgoe]

You need to re-save old engines to make them fit. Also, the top engine is the name, the bottom "engine" is the description.

[Killrob]

We've just released the latest open beta iteration with lots of fixes. Check out the OP for a change log etc.
Cheers!

[shawa666]

I can hear them idle.

High cam profile engines gurgle at idle.

[n9mfk]

the letter k in the white text were it read stroke the k looks strange

[Reaper392]

Unless I'm missing something then that is just how the k should look with that font. Its more like a cursive k than a printed k

[Lanarius]

I just downloaded the newest version and I must say, I'm quite impressed with the new UI. Finally I can design the biggest engine that fits a body and can go back and forth to make a compromise that is coolable without crashing my game just to get back to the engine designer from the car designer Can't wait until that cheeky Factory button becomes an actual thing.
Very nice improvement. Maybe not too intuitive at first, but you get the hang of it quickly and it is a joy to play around with this installment!

Haven't had really weird things happen which haven't already been mentioned.
The new bodies just have clipping issues with very big "decals". The mid-engine ones have an odd idea of where the cooling should happen and if you've played around with the damping animations of a car on the initial screen (e.g. with the done ladder) it can happen that the breaking discs somehow disconnect from the rest.

[Hermann95]

Hey, downloaded the latest build and i have to say: congratulations!
I really like the new UI because you have so much new possibilities, once you are used to it.

However, i have one big question: Is there an easy way to update all the tracks(because the cars are no where near the track at all) or have they all to be redone?

[Killrob]

Is there an easy way to update all the tracks(because the cars are no where near the track at all) or have they all to be redone?

They all suffer from the very same offset it seems (?), so the method to fixing them all would to modify the starting position of the car for all tracks by the same number, not changing anything else - a matter of seconds for each track.

[Hermann95]

Is there an easy way to update all the tracks(because the cars are no where near the track at all) or have they all to be redone?

They all suffer from the very same offset it seems (?), so the method to fixing them all would to modify the starting position of the car for all tracks by the same number, not changing anything else - a matter of seconds for each track.

Would be great if it works! I'll give it a try later today!
This means also that the editor would need a small change because the starting position is displayed correctly in the Editor.

[Hermann95]

I gave it a shot now and i detected that the y-value has to be about 20-22 higher. Just edit the .lua file and the custom tracks should work properly again.

[Reaper392]

I've just seen the performance index video you made Killrob. How exactly does it calculate the performance index, and what RPM range is it using?

Am I right in thinking that it takes an RPM range, slides that across the power band, and returns the highest minimum or highest average power that it can find? As in, if it used a 1000RPM range for its tests, first it will check 0-1000RPM and gives the minimum power in that range, then it checks 100-1100, then 200-1200, all the way up to the redline, and finally it returns the highest minimum from all those checks

[Killrob]

Simpler than that. It's calculated in the following way:

• 1) Check if it is a 2 point or 3 point problem: i.e. check if the 90%DropOffPowerPoint exists or if the curve is cut off before.
• 2) Calculate integration starting point: If (90% point exists) then 0.7 * 90%DropOffPowerPointRPM, else 0.7 * RPM_Limit
• 3) Calculate integration end point: If (90% point exists) then 90%DropOffPowerPointRPM, else RPM_Limit
• 4) Sum all power values in the range [StartingPoint, EndPoint], count the number of data points added up.
• 5) Divide total sum of power values with number of data points added up.

So basically it is the power average in the RPM range [0.7*RPMLimit, RPMLimit] or [0.7*RPM90%DropOff, RPM90%DropOff], whatever is applicable.
Cheers!