First I have to say sorry for the lenght, my english, and my tone. I have to learn to resume!
so I had to model some of the famous Group A cars with mechanical diffs, which is "realistic", but not like it was in real life.
If it's not like real life it's fantasy, not realistic. It can be close though and that's "good".
Nothing wrong about that.
You may use any setting you want.
The steering wheel lock (think about keyboard or gamepad) in your controller has absolutely nothing to do with the steering angle of the front wheels. This is a matter of the steering and suspension geometry. And that we have done correctly, based on vehicle data.
The first part you said it's quite obvious I don't know why you came up with that. The problem is (and what I meant) that if you use an unrealistic 900º turn in your steering wheel, you'll have a distorted sense of how the car behaves if the geometry of the car is realistic, of course if we're talking about WRC, RRC, S2000, R5 cars and maybe others too that have 540º, all of them. So if you're telling us that you know it is right and it feels right, well, based on that we can't believe it. Assuming of course the wheels of the car turn just like the real thing or rather having the same effect as in real life (540º steering wheel) which is the second part you talk about. So you say that 540º in the "max steering lock" correspond to the real "vehicle data"? And which vehicle you're talking about?
Now you said before that 540º in the steering lock ratio is counting just one side, so it's 1080º actually! So for 540º it's 270º...but where did you get that it's like this? The only thing I know in the game is like this is the wheel animation.
Also you said 792º for example unreal because it makes the car make a 10 meter circle.
So when you said
And don't forget, it is 540° in either direction, so from lock to lock, it is 1080°
are you talking about the steering wheel and the car wheels? The car wheels alone? Or what?
So, which is the realistic seeting for a WRC car? 270 in game and 540º in your wheel?. I can't test right now but I think that will be very slow (I have G25 and use 540º wheel 540º game and it looks right). And if this is like this why you set 540º as the default? If it's not like this then what that comment means? Do you use 450º in game? So it's 450x2 900º like your wheel?
Well, as later we had roundabout +120 cars in NGP, I have decided some time ago that it is better to weaken the handbrake in said cars.
...?... That's what is called "uncorrelation".
Almost all Group B cars had a very weak handbrake, so one can keep the car standing still at a slope, but are quite not able to do proper hb turns. Exactly like in real life.
What...? What is exactly like in real life??! This sounds like: "In real life is A, here is Z, exactly like in real life"...
What...?!
If the 4wd GrB cars can make a handbrake turn then is not realistic. And what I don't get is that when every developer alive seem to be willing to compromise realism in games for balance, then why not here when actually realism is in favor of balance?! This is: the RWD GrB cars have at least the handbrake advantage...! (the same for RSRBR but I know those guys just don't listen, so, good for you).
This comment was related to these cars having technical issues all the time, back in the 80s.
In no way this was related to the cars behaviour, so this is clearly a misunderstanding.
I understood that you were saying that the player is so useless that if you did the cars as fragile as in the 80' he wouldn't reach the end...so ok...
But you are saying that as the cars in the game don't break that much as in real life then is justified to do this and that unrealistic change in those...see what I said about what we could think of the logic you seem to apply?
So I may ask you what seems wrong.
Which cars have you tested ?
Ok, well first of all I have to tell you that I used the version in RSRBR 2016 for the moment (I tested it some years ago too when they first implemented to it), I will install another RBR soon with RBRTM with up to date versions of the plugin (is that right?) or just your NGP first to test (don't know yet). I used the Impreza WRC 2000 in tarmac, Hyundai i20 WRC, Corsa S1600 and BMW M3 E30 gravel and tarmac, Audi Quattro Sport S1 (this one for few meters in tarmac). Maybe more but I don't remember. It feels like I'm playing rFactor or Race07 the cars understeering unrealistically but then always loosing their rear too easily as if they were not rally cars but ordinary road cars, there's an excessive side rolling in each turn in tarmac especially: if there's a quick left to right turn, you turn left, then right, then left again just because the car lost all lateral balance, I never ever saw a rally car do this and I'm watching onboards right now to be sure it's like I'm saying. There's hardly any weight transfer back to front, you can't force yourself to loose the rear by breaking in gravel like you can easily do in RBR (maybe too easily?). Some are too slow...And much more. The thing is, it doesn't feel right, the result is not right either, watching it doesn't look like when you watch a real rally car (the car doesn't react nor respond like the real thing). In RBR physics they did. Now don't come to me with that "in RSRBR there are cars that go form 0 to 100 in 2 seconds" because that doesn't justify anything nor I agree with those things. There are so many things in RSRBR that piss me off... If I remember correctly the last good RSRBR, for me, was the first 2012 version when they added some 2011 cars but with apparent realistic performance which soon later they increased insanely and also started to change other cars with absurd justifications like changing a car that seemed right because they didn't had the exact data but adding lots of other cars with unrealistic performance and no data for them, behaviour and capabilities because of balance or championship, and things like that.
There seem to be no developer of anything that doesn't come with "because of: balance, fun, because I don't like it so no one like it, I don't do it so no one do it, who would do it so no one do it, I don't have it, few have, I don't use it, you wouldn't want it, it's better for you, they couldn't, I can't imagine, it's not usual, it's realistically unreal, because something uncorrelated, A for this B for that, the public, the ethics, the past, the future, the target we imagine, it's impossible yeah it's been done before but it's impossible, etc, etc, etc, and bla bla" and so many more crap like this (not the money and time, that's real). There was a rFactor rally championship from spain that had all the cars exactly the same, everything, they only differed in the 3D exterior, when confronted with this they just said: "that's realistic". The cognitive dissonance in this area is...depressing. So maybe I'm expecting this, and being wrong, but judging the results, doesn't seem to be the case.
