RaceDepartment Store

Do you ever race in VR?

  • Yes

    Votes: 140 36.9%
  • No

    Votes: 239 63.1%

Upcoming Events

AC events on Simracing.GP ACC events on Simracing.GP R3E events on Simracing.GP Weekly rFactor 2 events Join TCR Virtual today!

Automobilista 2 | Physics Updates and New Content in v1.3

A significant physics update for Automobilista 2 is coming this month, along with plenty of new content.

Reiza Studios has shared the second batch of news concerning what is coming to Automobilista 2 this month via a post on their official forums. Much of the post centred around their improvements to the driving physics and force feedback. Version 1.3 will allow Reiza to create much more elaborate and authentic driveline physics for the cars in the game. There is also going to be a new default FFB profile that is selectable from the settings menu. A bug found by Reiza has delayed the release of the update, but it is still expected to be public before the end of the month.

Content was another focus of the post, and the highlight of the upcoming content is part 2 of the Racin' USA DLC. Part 1 included GTE cars plus three American tracks, and part 2 will follow a similar format. Three distinct years of Indycar/Champcar will be added to the title as part of the Formula USA car class, plus three tracks. Cleveland and Watkins Glen are the first two confirmed tracks, and there is a third that Reiza is unable to share quite yet due to licensing.

The two Volkswagen cars that are currently available as part of a demo version of AMS2 will also be added to the main game this month.

Finally, another significant bit of news is that Reiza is rolling out the first iteration of a multiplayer ranking system. Players will begin to earn ratings that will help group them more evenly for online racing.

Hit the spoiler button below to read part 2 of the Automobilista 2 November Development Update (source).

Part 2 of our November Development Update has finally arrived with some fresh good news for Automobilista 2 in our final development sprint of 2021!

And what a run of weeks it has been so far - not only have we managed to hit some of the important developments we had planned for the month, we also managed to find and are in process of resolving some other significant issues along the way - in fact our plan had been to publish this article already with our first big game update of November, however spotting a rather sizeable physics issue just a few hours before the update was meant to be deployed has forced us back to the drawing board for a few more days - the new Automobilista V1.3 update is expected to arrive towards the end of this week.

On the plus side, V1.3 will now pack even further value to what is already a landmark update for AMS2 - so let´s get into some of what we have been working on these past few weeks!

AMS2 Demo With VW TSI Cup by Acelerados Now Available

Our collaboration with Volkswagen Brasil and the Acelerados Channel has come to fruition this past week with the release of the AMS2 Demo featuring the new VW TSI Cup, bringing the VW Polo & Virtus production cars to AMS2 - more details on this release here.

The delay on our new game update unfortunately has meant the addition of these cars to the main game have also been slightly held back - do look forward to their arrival later this week however with the release of V1.3!

The Big Physics Overhaul of AMS2 V1.3

As touched upon in Pt1 of the November Dev Update, physics & FFB are receiving a pretty substantial overhaul this month similarly to what happened earlier in the year in the V1.2 dev cycle, maximizing further knowledge of the Madness tire & driveline models we have gathered in recent months.

Beginning with the latest finding - the issue spotted just this weekend forcing the delay of the update is nothing more than a simple syntax error that resulted in some of the tire models in AMS2 using components that didn´t belong to them. This error - the type you hope not to spot years into the development of the sim - is nevertheless the type of thing that can happen when you are working on someone else´s technology, and part of a learning curve that sometimes can stretch longer than one would have preferred. The silver lining here of course is that spotting and correcting this error will lead to even further progress to what was already proving a very extensive revision of all tire models in AMS2, which combined with the driveline developments have already led to all cars driving substantially better than the current release to one degree or another.

On to the driveline developments: as with tires, we have been constantly learning more details about the complex driveline system in the Madness Engine - a physical model based on masses, friction coefficients, stiffnesses and pairings, which if not configured correctly for each car can easily result in various handling issues.

The first major development here is fine tuning clutch LSD disc friction coefficients to eliminate the infamous "sticky" behavior of the differential on some cars, which could lead to the car balance suddenly changing mid-corner; the differential operation is much smoother now, remaining closed when it should, and opening immediately and yet gradually based on your effective locking amount from preload, ramp angles and amount of clutches.

The second important improvement was made to the clutch engagement formula itself - thus far, preload setting in LSD diffs had far too much importance and ramp angles relatively very little. Reason for this laid in a bug in the underlying mathematical formula combining forces from these two setup factors. With that legacy bug corrected, it´s been possible and in fact necessary to update all default differential setups to more sensible ones.

One neat example is the Caterham clutch LSD that could now get inspiration from a real-life Titan LSD designed for Caterhams: a 30/90 ramp configuration with preload adjusted for each driver's needs. This maintains the Caterham's trademark throttle steer character, while users will remain able to fine tune preload to suit their lift-off behavior tastes.

Furthermore on the driveline topic, we have been literally "flexing the muscles" of the engine by introducing driveline elasticity - with multiple moving parts between the engine and driven wheels (each with its own finite stiffness) the forces applied on these parts can be immense, as gearboxes multiply engine torque - one can often hear these dynamics at play on real onboard videos as engine noise and transmission whine oscillating as the whole driveline acts like a giant spring under changing loads.

We have revised stiffnesses and driveshaft weights in multiple classes, and in multiple points in their drivelines. This creates an immersive and organic effect that fully depends on what is going on in the physical simulation. If you stomp on the throttle in 1st gear, you will hear revs jump up as the driveline tenses up. Lift suddenly, and the driveline releases its tension audibly. Driving over bumps the engine and transmission noises will oscillate smoother than before as the connection between tires, gearbox and engine isn’t as direct.

This isn’t purely for immersion purposes either, as a slight delay in response between driven wheels and engine can have subtle effects on handling - it means for example that tire slip and engine RPM aren’t the only buffers for sudden forces, which can also dampen some sharp jolts in bumpy braking zones.

In the video below comparing a lap with the Mercedes AMG GT3 around Nürburgring in V1.2.5.1 (left) vs the current AMS2 Beta (right) overlayed with wheel speed telemetry, you can see and hear the subtle but noticeable results of the developments described above:


All of these substantial physics developments along with some adjustments in setup options have also led to a big revision of default setups on all cars - so further good news is default setups being as reasonably well adjusted as they can possibly be as universal baselines for all tracks and controller types.

It does also mean however it will be critical to reset all your setups one more time upon deployment of the next update - failure to do could result in some very odd setups that will most definitely spoil the cars´ handling.

A small price to pay hopefully for what is all around a really big step in the AMS2 driving experience - while physics development remains always an ongoing process for anyone serious about simulation, in V1.3 the physics will have reached a level of maturity that we are confident represents our very best work in this area to date.

Force Feedback Developments in AMS2 V1.3

AMS2 V1.3 will also introduce developments in the game Force Feedback, with the addition of a new "Default+" profile, parallel to the existing "Default".

FFB can be a somewhat subjective matter - while generally steering FFB in-game should resemble certain traits from real world vehicles - self-centering steering wheel, resistance buildup with more steering angle & ramp up of forces with tire load - in race sims that is somewhat restrictive and often leaves us missing the actual feedback we get in our bodies on a real car through its lateral and longitudinal acceleration. Through FFB one hopes to convey some of that mixed in with the usual steering forces, and the way to do that is where things get subjective.

With the new "Default+" profile we have what we believe to be a good compromise, adding further useful information to what you get on the Default profile.

Aside from additional info provided in Default+ , we also did a lot of work on damping, which is inherent to any steering system and something we strongly advise to be used to some degree as it now doesn´t take anything away from the feedback, instead works in sync with the vehicle you drive - it depends not just on steering velocity, but vehicle velocity, lateral acceleration, tires slip, oversteer. All of that is taken into account on damping, so it is usable and helpful instead of simply providing viscous-like resistance to wheel turning.

While the Default+ is, given FFB´s subjectvity to taste the usage of custom FFB profiles will remain an option, with some interesting and popular work being developed by Karsten Hvidberg and company you may also want to check out.

We had in fact planned to add one of these profiles as a third default option in the game, however we found out that the memory load from FFB system is raised considerably by its presence if there is another profile present in the "custom" slot, leading to glitches.

We do encourage our users who may still be looking for something beyond what our default profiles are offering to give these a try checking out the Automobilista 2 Custom Force Feedback - Overview & Recommendations thread.

AI Development in AMS2 V1.3

AMS2 V1.3 will bring yet another big step for the AI, with an extensive calibration pass to not only match recent player physics development, but also solving several track and car specific performance discrepancies from the current release.

Driver personalities have been extended with some initial parameters defining an AI driver´s ability in managing tire wear, racing in wet weather & cooperating with blue flags.

Furthermore, V1.3 will introduce the option to mod AI driver names, livery assignments & personalities - you can read more about this new feature on this topic moved from the beta subforum for those looking to get an early understanding of how to go about it.

Multiplayer Rating System Hitting Public Beta in V1.3

Last but not least in our big list of V1.3 features is the introduction of the driver profile page alongside the long-awaited Multiplayer Rating System - albeit in Beta stage in this initial release.

The system is heavily based on the legacy system featured in Project Cars 2 with several adjustments - more details about it to be shared in a dedicated thread shortly before release.

We are also working with third party Multiplayer services to best integrate our system with theirs, which should hopefully see the arrival or organized scheduled races in AMS2 in the not-so distant future.

Furthermore, we have also been collecting some valuable feedback from the community for further Multiplayer development, some of which we are pushing to deliver as we progress through the public beta of the MRS - not everything will arrive in a matter of weeks, but we do hope to be fulfilling at least some common requests in the near future.

Racin´ USA Pt2 Arriving Soon!

As previously announced, the second part of the Racin´ USA Expansion Pack is due to be released shortly after V1.3 and before the end of this month.

This time, we will explore what many consider to be the golden years of American single seater racing, as Racin´ USA Pt2 will feature a number of Reynards, Swifts and Lola Indycars & Champ Cars from the 1990s, along with three iconic road courses.

The cars will make up what we will call the "Formula USA" class in the game, in three generations - Gen1 will feature models from the 1995 Indycar season (the last before the series infamously split), Gen2 will have models from the 1998 season when Alex Zanardi reigned supreme, with Gen3 featuring models from 2000 - the performance peak of the Champcar era, enabling historical feats such as Gil de Ferran´s closed course record average speed.

The 3 tracks to feature in the pack will be Watkins Glen (which even though was not raced by these cars during the 1990s, is still one the greatest road courses in the USA fully warranting its place on the pack); the unique Cleveland temporary road course, set on the Burke Lake Front Airport with a fast, flowing and very bumpy layout serving as stage for some memorable wheel-to-wheel battles; and the third one remaining under wraps for a few more days as we finalize some licensing requirements.

Racin´ USA Pt2 itself will be a slightly staggered release - the Gen2 cars along with Cleveland & Watkins Glen will be released at the end of this month, with the remaining models and the third track arriving just before our Christmas wrap-up; there will be further additions to this pack later on in 2022, as the arrival of Racin´ USA Pt3 will introduce oval tracks to Automobilista 2, which will see all Formula USA models in Pt2 receiving their oval spec variants.

While Pt3 of Racin´ USA will take a bit longer than originally planned into 2022, the delay will see more tracks being added to the package than originally planned - at no extra expense for those who already bought the full Racin´ USA Expansion Pack!

Price for Racin´ USA Pt2 will be the same as Pt1 in your local currency.

New Manufacturers Joining the Party!

We are happy to confirm we´re in the final stages of licensing arrangements with Nissan, which should see several models from the brand coming to Automobilista 2 if not already on v1.3, very soon after.

There are at least two more major manufacturer deals we are looking to wrap before the end of the year, all of which leading to various existing classes in the game being expanded with new competitors over the course of 2022 - watch this space!

This covers the main topics we had to bring you on this Dev Update, even if not quite all we have in store for the remainder of the year - we will cover these remaining goodies in our final Dev Update of the year early on December, by which time you will all hopefully already be enjoying AMS2 V1.3 & Racin´ USA Pt2!

Are you excited for this update? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.

Automobilista 2 001.jpg Automobilista 2 002.jpg Automobilista 2 003.jpg Automobilista 2 005.jpg
About author
Mike Smith
I have been obsessed with sim racing and racing games since the 1980's. My first taste of live auto racing was in 1988, and I couldn't get enough ever since. Lead writer for RaceDepartment, and owner of SimRacing604 and its YouTube channel. Favourite sims include Assetto Corsa Competizione, Assetto Corsa, rFactor 2, Automobilista 2, DiRT Rally 2 - On Twitter as @simracing604

Comments

Without mod support and mod tracks, all those cars are nice, but driving them on three realistic circuits each gets old rather quickly. And I am not even talking about the lack of compete grids to race against.
so you say Raceroom, ACC and iRacing will never get big, because they'll never get mod cars and tracks. Well, lets think about it........... :roflmao:
 
You're being real confusing right now. One one hand you're saying some true things and talking about things which are not commonly known, but on the other hand half of what you say is just nonsense and doesn't make sense. Are you a physics modder, engineering student, or what?

Like why is it useless to know your overall SAT if the other tire deflections are *isolated* from the SAT and are already expressed relatively accurately? Of course it's useful to know your overall SAT. You need it to be able to represent it. In the same way you need your cornering stiffness or longitudinal peak to be known so you can represent them.

In addition I just told you earlier that a model with *every* unique independent deflection modeled accurately barely at all differs from a more simplified one in terms of accuracy.

I'm gonna ignore all that stuff about tactile feel and whatever. I don't know about you, but I care a whole lot more about the tire correlating accurately than it meeting some kind of arbitrary "feels good to me" criteria.
I actually have an engineering degree in automotive engineering for one.
Secondly, there is a lot that happens between the wheel hub and the contact patch that influences the contact patch forces through the properties (stiffness and damping) of each element of rubber, since rubber is highly influenced by the speed at which forces/deformations are applied (actually if we are talking AC/ACC we should discuss also about how seriously approximated is what happens above the wheel hub too as that also has a role tbh).
Loads, deformations that happen on the tire can be very different even in a condition in which the global amount of lateral and vertical forces are the same, that is why global values are of limited use for a simulator. So even if one had accurate recordings of the two forces from instrumenting the hub, they would not be able to easily determine which state of deformation caused it unless they have a proper physical model of the tire, because really all you have is measures of lateral accelerations vs steering angles and potentially forces on the hub (I doubt about the latter). In reality not even the basic true data is made available by tire manufacturers so anything that wants to be predictive without having physical model is pure speculation or artistic license most likely (which I understand you really like) or if you are Ferrari or Red Bull you have a bunch of data that are good for finding a good car setup based on data recorded previously in similar conditions but no use for a real predictive FFB model to go in a simulator
Those forces on the tires and how they develop in the time domain are what constitute the basis of FFB in principle: so if you really don't know what happens between the hub and the contact patch your FFB is just a far cousin of the real forces.
Add to this that you are anyway representing the tire as a single point of contact, and obviously your tire model can practically be designed like a canvas to depict anything you want, so quite the opposite of real steering wheel feeling.
 
Last edited:
Is there target date for this update drop yet?
ACC with physics/tires overhaul is tomorrow.
 
Last edited:
I actually have an engineering degree in automotive engineering for one.
Secondly, there is a lot that happens between the wheel hub and the contact patch that influences the contact patch forces through the properties (stiffness and damping) of each element of rubber, since rubber is highly influenced by the speed at which forces/deformations are applied (actually if we are talking AC/ACC we should discuss also about how seriously approximated is what happens above the wheel hub too as that also has a role tbh).
Loads, deformations that happen on the tire can be very different even in a condition in which the global amount of lateral and vertical forces are the same, that is why global values are of limited use for a simulator. So even if one had accurate recordings of the two forces from instrumenting the hub, they would not be able to easily determine which state of deformation caused it unless they have a proper physical model of the tire, because really all you have is measures of lateral accelerations vs steering angles and potentially forces on the hub (I doubt about the latter). In reality not even the basic true data is made available by tire manufacturers so anything that wants to be predictive without having physical model is pure speculation or artistic license most likely (which I understand you really like) or if you are Ferrari or Red Bull you have a bunch of data that are good for finding a good car setup based on data recorded previously in similar conditions but no use for a real predictive FFB model to go in a simulator
Those forces on the tires and how they develop in the time domain are what constitute the basis of FFB in principle: so if you really don't know what happens between the hub and the contact patch your FFB is just a far cousin of the real forces.
Add to this that you are anyway representing the tire as a single point of contact, and obviously your tire model can practically be designed like a canvas to depict anything you want, so quite the opposite of real steering wheel feeling.
If you're talking *purely* about FFB then I can see where you're coming from. For one we do not even have an elastokinematic element in the steering so it's a bit of a stretch to pretend that sim FFB is "realistic" when the roadwheel and hand-wheel cannot even be decoupled. For one most cars have powersteering, which most sims do not support.

I wasn't talking about FFB at all though, I think it should be treated as a completely separate field. If you would have specified what exactly you are referring to then the prior texts would have made more sense.

You are over-complicating things when it comes to a vehicle dynamics perspective of the whole car model IMO. Simulation engineering and automotive engineering are not one and the same and the goals are a little different. Hence to you a mild approximation can appear as completely inaccurate and unacceptable when it is in reality what almost every simulation model is. A tiny problem with the tire forces due to an approximate tire and upright modeling won't completely destroy the car nor would a driver notice it in how the car *drives*.

It does beg the question that how good our models really are if they produce acceptable results "externally" but "internally" when it is communicated to the driver via the steering wheel there is quite a difference. I believe the models are still accurate, but there is a lacking UX element. Maybe in your perspective the entire model is inaccurate due to that lacking UX element causing adverse control inputs from the driver and the car practically ends up not driving the same.
 
Charging money for a super inaccurate track from a 6 year old game that is leagues worse than the free laser-scanned AC mod would be pretty bad, yeah

You're wrong on multiple levels here. SMS redid WG for PC2 and it was much more accurate than the PC1 version. Second is that Reiza doesn't copy and paste PC2 tracks into AMS2. They have used trackside objects and other assets from PC2, but the tracks themselves have all been redone using lidar data.

The only exception to this was Azure, which Reiza is completely overhauling with lidar data and they have subsequently removed it from beta until it is rebuilt and ready for driving again.
 
Disclosure - I don't have AMS 2 yet, but the recent updates have got me interested and watching Reiza's developments.

I suspect the 3rd track is probably Road America, and I love RA - but it's yet another track that was also in PCars 2. I accept that Reiza remakes the tracks and they're not "ports", but it does feel like you can mostly predict what's coming (what was in PC2 that isn't in AMS2 yet?) Cleveland of course is an unexpected and new one, and I applaud that. As much as I like Road America, I'd like to see Mid-Ohio. Does any sim in the last 20 years besides iRacing have Mid-Ohio (mods excluded)? It's appropriate for everything from entry level all the way up to Indy Cars, including prototypes and GT classes (admittedly so is Road America).

I won't complain if it's Road America, it's a great track. But, it would be cool if there are more tracks added that we don't see over and over again in other sims. OTOH I understand they need to attract buyers with popular content, so I get it. And props for VIR already being in-game, that one is an awesome drive.

I feel the same exact way as you do. RA is likely the track. More US tracks is never a bad thing, but I'd rather have Mid Ohio or PIR. Tracks that are rarely seen in other sims. Only sims I know that have Mid Ohio is iRacing and R3E. It's easily one of the most versatile tracks and while RA is pretty versatile too, its length isn't as fun with slower class cars.

The more US tracks the better IMO, but it is a little disappointing that the majority or US tracks we are getting are ones that are pretty universal across all of sim racing. I'm def most excited for Cleveland just cause it's something new.
 
You're wrong on multiple levels here. SMS redid WG for PC2 and it was much more accurate than the PC1 version. Second is that Reiza doesn't copy and paste PC2 tracks into AMS2. They have used trackside objects and other assets from PC2, but the tracks themselves have all been redone using lidar data.

The only exception to this was Azure, which Reiza is completely overhauling with lidar data and they have subsequently removed it from beta until it is rebuilt and ready for driving again.
I've given up on these individuals. They're talking nonsense again and again everytime they can.
»Facts? Nah, just ignore those, I know better.«

EtJ_Vm-VcAAZlN4.jpg
 
I feel the same exact way as you do. RA is likely the track. More US tracks is never a bad thing, but I'd rather have Mid Ohio or PIR. Tracks that are rarely seen in other sims. Only sims I know that have Mid Ohio is iRacing and R3E. It's easily one of the most versatile tracks and while RA is pretty versatile too, its length isn't as fun with slower class cars.

The more US tracks the better IMO, but it is a little disappointing that the majority or US tracks we are getting are ones that are pretty universal across all of sim racing. I'm def most excited for Cleveland just cause it's something new.
For Reiza, PIR's track reconfigurations (off the top of my head: 1980, 1991, 2007) mean extra work. Road America's track has remained essentially the same except for bridges & bldgs in the same timeframe. Mid-Ohio would definitely be a nice addition and apart from licensing, I don't think there are many modeling hurdles between, say, 1980 and the present.
 
Is there target date for this update drop yet?
ACC with physics/tires overhaul is tomorrow.
By the way the ACC new update with their new roadmap cup cars, US tracks, etc takes no prisoner. I think AMS2 update should be postponed until the ACC update hype fades out.
 
Last edited:
By the way the ACC new update with their new roadmap cup cars, US tracks, etc takes no prisoner. I think AMS2 update should be postponed until the ACC update hype fades out.
It was meant to be out last week, So most likely this weekend .
Can't see why they would want to add further delays unless they got some last-minute fixes.

Logically one would say this Friday evening, but due to the time difference and for whatever reason, their update releases don't fall in line with the norm.
 
so you say Raceroom, ACC and iRacing will never get big, because they'll never get mod cars and tracks. Well, lets think about it........... :roflmao:
iracing is special, but I hand you that point.
However, Raceroom cannot be seriously considered a success by anybody outside the most serious sim racing bubble! As for ACC, time will tell. I consider it the best sim available but doubt its long-term success.
 
Imagine if FM8 turns out as hardcore as they claim, will it be the end of all small Indy studios?
. . .
Or the end of Forza? :unsure:
 
Last edited:
iracing is special, but I hand you that point.
However, Raceroom cannot be seriously considered a success by anybody outside the most serious sim racing bubble! As for ACC, time will tell. I consider it the best sim available but doubt its long-term success.
Care to elaborate why Raceroom isn't a success?
 
Disclosure - I don't have AMS 2 yet, but the recent updates have got me interested and watching Reiza's developments.

I suspect the 3rd track is probably Road America, and I love RA - but it's yet another track that was also in PCars 2. I accept that Reiza remakes the tracks and they're not "ports", but it does feel like you can mostly predict what's coming (what was in PC2 that isn't in AMS2 yet?) Cleveland of course is an unexpected and new one, and I applaud that. As much as I like Road America, I'd like to see Mid-Ohio. Does any sim in the last 20 years besides iRacing have Mid-Ohio (mods excluded)? It's appropriate for everything from entry level all the way up to Indy Cars, including prototypes and GT classes (admittedly so is Road America).

I won't complain if it's Road America, it's a great track. But, it would be cool if there are more tracks added that we don't see over and over again in other sims. OTOH I understand they need to attract buyers with popular content, so I get it. And props for VIR already being in-game, that one is an awesome drive.
Race room has mid-ohio. I hope it isn't RA I agree there are better tracks out there MO is a good example.
 
It's player numbers have only recently started to pick up slightly. Still, it is far from one of the most popular titles in a niche genre. Especially when compared with the Race series or GTR2.
I have had a really hard time playing it with my Fanatec CSL elite wheelbase. No matter what I do, it’s still impossible to set up the pedals and the wheel. I have tried all kinds of tutorials, setup guides, etc. Nothing works.
 

Article information

Author
Mike Smith
Views
22,627
Comments
169
Last update

Share this article

Top