Tracks New Jersey Motorsports Park: Lightning 1.1

[formulaHEINE]

There is also a typo in the groove.ini, as there a two headers with 'GROOVE_2' .

from erros.txt :
INIReader: content/tracks/njmp_lightning/data/groove.ini > KEY_NOT_FOUND: [GROOVE_3] MIN
INIReader: content/tracks/njmp_lightning/data/groove.ini > KEY_NOT_FOUND: [GROOVE_3] MAX
INIReader: content/tracks/njmp_lightning/data/groove.ini > KEY_NOT_FOUND: [GROOVE_3] MULT
INIReader: content/tracks/njmp_lightning/data/groove.ini > KEY_NOT_FOUND: [GROOVE_3] NAME

 

[LilSki]

There is also a typo in the groove.ini, as there a two headers with 'GROOVE_2' .

Indeed the last one should be GROOVE_3

 

[RayDarcy]

I'm excited to finish the Bridge update so I can start on Watkins Glen.

Will you be creating an historical Watkins Glen?

 

[LilSki]

Will you be creating an historical Watkins Glen?

My plan is to use the 2014 LiDAR data to build a modern version to 2016/17 spec with the repave. I do plan to have 4 layouts in total. There will be two main layouts with and without the boot and then each of those will be able to run with and without the inner loop chicane.

A true historical version like what was in GPL would depend on data for the sections that was ultimately changed to what it is now. The 1956-1970 layout is very different from the back straight until the esses and there obviously wasn't any boot then. Finding a quality on-board between 1956 and 1970 might be a very tough task. There was someone who started an historical glen years ago with the intent someone else would finish it. I'll have to see if I can find it again and if the layout is accurate.

 

[RayDarcy]

But why? Watkins Glen is a terrible circuit now. I understand you may not want to work from dodgy video clips, but don't do Watkins Glen, please please please.

The only interesting thing about Watkins Glen is the 1967 circuit. It's modern version is horrible.

At very least do an intersting circuit like Sonoma?

 

[LilSki]

But why? Watkins Glen is a terrible circuit now. I understand you may not want to work from dodgy video clips, but don't do Watkins Glen, please please please.

The only interesting thing about Watkins Glen is the 1967 circuit. It's modern version is horrible.

At very least do an intersting circuit like Sonoma?

That is your opinion. In my opinion modern Watkins is my absolute favorite modern track. It is one of the fastest tracks around and still has a great flow. And it isn't that much different than the old version.

In either case there is a possible joint project in the making between Fat-Alfie and I to do build the old and new semi together. Nothing is final yet of course but we have started discussing it.

 

[ShredatorFIN]

Awesome track. Do you have plans to create the Thunderbolt layout too?

 

[LilSki]

Awesome track. Do you have plans to create the Thunderbolt layout too?

With the data I have sadly Thunderbolt was not paved yet. It is still more or less a big pile of dirt so initially I wrote it off as useless. However I have thought about trying to lay a basic layout on the data and see if the grade was pretty close to final right before they paved it. It is my understanding with talking to some NJMP staff that the window between Lightning and Thunderbolt being paved was only a few weeks. In the end I don't have any immediate plans but yes I would like to be able to have them be together at some point. Maybe between the Bridgehampton update and the Glen I'll experiment with the Thunderbolt data to see if it is usable. If it is then maybe after the Glen I'll put Thunderbolt together.

 

[DutchDevil79]

Ahh was wondering why it was only the Lightning track. Would be cool to have Thunderbolt to and I bet you even have it faster ready then waiting on Iracing to finish there track. I have the tech track but that's been there for over a year. Not sure when they finish if ever. Would be cool to have there laserscan data do. haha

 

[LilSki]

Well I had time today to revisit the guard rail flicker. In the end a 2D rail is the way to go. I simply cannot live with the 2D/3D LOD pop in. I'll have a few people test this to get more opinions but in the end I'll likely stick with this. There is still a very slight flicker but overall it is much much less.

EDIT: I even tried a normal map for the 2D rail but that brought back the flicker just as bad if not worse than the 3D rail.

EDIT 2: This shot shows the pretty drastic difference. The pit lane rail is still 3D in this shot.

 

[pafe]

I think its a good decision indeed. Most of the time (driving/racing) you won't notice the better quality of 3d guardrails much. Normally you try to stay away from them The 2d rails seem to give a much better appearance overall. Good job!

What are you planning to update on Bridgehampton?

 

[LilSki]

I think its a good decision indeed. Most of the time (driving/racing) you won't notice the better quality of 3d guardrails much. Normally you try to stay away from them The 2d rails seem to give a much better appearance overall. Good job!

What are you planning to update on Bridgehampton?

I have been working quite a bit on the Bridgehampton update. It has unfortunately turned into a much larger can of worms than I originally expected. I keep having to remind myself that it was my first track as some stupid decisions were made. Some of it is because I found a much higher resolution aerial image a year after I released the track. As it turns out the topo map I used had some serious mistakes in the drawing of the layout. So what I did was I lined up the lidar section I used for T1 to the aerial and it fit perfectly where the topo didn't. After I saw that I scaled and rotated the aerial to fit as best as possible to what I had and essentially built a whole new road from scratch. I am going through and fine tuning all the slight elevation changes now and hopefully by the end of today I can be done with the new road and start the process of tying the existing land into it.

In the end we will have a MUCH more accurate Bridgehampton but it is just more involved than I had originally planned. The good thing is the stuff that takes the most time is already done so it really shouldn't take too long to finish.

Here is a image of the first 6 turns to show the differences. The orange is the new layout based on the aerial. It seems to be faster overall so lap times will likely come down.

 

[DutchDevil79]

Damn, you realy do your research. Gonna be fun feeling the chances once its released.

Realy having fun on your tracks do. Here a race with friends online on New Jersey.

 

[JCarmo]

I just can't get enough of it.

 

[ALB123]

Ain't nothin' wrong with being a perfectionist.

 

[LilSki]

LilSki updated New Jersey Motorsports Park: Lightning with a new update entry:

NJMP

Minor bug fix update to 1.1

• Changed 3D armco to 2D to stop the moire effect.
  
• Moved the pit lane limit a little further forward after the hill on pit exit. This should prevent AI from ramming you on pit exit.
• Fixed yellow flag and invalid lap on pit lane.
• Fixed UV error on paddock fence.
  
• Fixed bug where you could get impaled on pit lane armco at pit entrance.

Read the rest of this update entry...

 

[Michael Hornbuckle]

Thank you!!! Armco looks so much better now.

 

[Leonardo Ratafiá]

Armco schwarzenegger

 

[Leonardo Ratafiá]

Nice onboard video for comparison purposes, now that this combo is available
it's a Porsche 911 GT3 (991)

 

[gallonoffuel]

I drove this track last week at NJMP Track Day and this mod is SO GOOD. Very well done. I got to come back and practice some things in sim that I couldn't quite get right in a handful of laps in real life. I wish I could drive over the bridge and past the pub and hop on Thunderbolt and get some laps in as well! Great job on this one though.