Hey!
Since lots of races hosted with your mod are very long (8-12 hours) engine management is very important. You guys did a great job providing us with cars that last that long! There is just one question I have concerning the value "Lifetimevar" in the engine.ini file.
LifetimeAvg=93600 // average lifetime in seconds
LifetimeVar=14400 // lifetime random variance
These are the values used for all of your cars. I found an interesting statement(ISI) about those values:
- Quote :
- This section calculates the engine life dependant on rpm, oil temperature relative to optimum, and statistical treatment of average life. The following is from ISI, courtesy of Maxsilver. I have edited the original to fit with the numbers in this file -
"The LifetimeAvg and LifetimeVar are ... the mean and one standard deviation of a normal distribution.
- Quote :
- The section in italics at the beginning of that quote is a later explanation provided by ITT based on some correspondence with ISI. So the engine lifetime fits a normal distribution in the statistical meaning of that term. 68% of engine lives will fit within LifetimeAvg ± LifetimeVar, and 98% within LifetimeAvg ± 2 x LifetimeVar, all modified by the RPM and temperature effects.
This means the reasonable Lifetime of a engine for this mod is from 50400secs-136800secs(14 hours to 38 hours) which is a huge spread and makes it very hard to calculate which engine boost settings/revs to use.
I know you try to be as close to the real thing as possible where engine failures happen from time to time but i think the spread is too big right now ( and i didnt even consider extreme liftime differences of more than 3x Lifetimevar). We should have atleast a basis which we can use to calculate with.
Preparing alot for a 12h event with 4 or more ppl and getting smashed by the high variance is very frustrating and shouldnt happen in a game.
You guys obviously picked those values for a reason, though. Is there any explanation why the variance has to be that high? And is there any chance that you might reconsider the values for the variance?
Regards
Markus