PTS Patch Notes 26/06

How heavy is the Prototype Exploration Unit?

Pulling that thing with a larger scout is difficult, forget about doing it with a small one.

Even winching it with a larger truck is problematic. It gets stuck on everything and it feels like pulling a vehicle with the parking brake applied.

Kudos on the looks and details of it though, neat gizmo there.

@Roderig0 - I was pulling it around happily with the L0af. Didn’t seem to have any issues? We’re you using the new ford? That’s chronically underpowered.

@FearedFox18 said in PTS Patch Notes 26/06:

Project cars, its the most sim a game can get, everything is tune-able, from tire pressure to spring rebound

You are clearly NOT a sim-racer.
Assetto Corsa Competitzione is currently the most accurate sim out there. rFactor 2 (also another top level sim) is far ahead of Project Cars. I could name plenty of others.
Project Cars is made for the masses. It's dumbed down and has awful low-speed physics.

Project Cars 1 and 2 are nowhere near the most 'sim'. Far from it. PC3 will be even further away.

i never played RFactor so i didnt want to mention it, and completely forgot about Assetto Corsa!!....thank you for reminding me i need to go back and play it!....also i only mentioned project cars, because everything can be tuned in that was the first game to come to mind

last edited by FearedFox18

Hello, I'm actually one of the console players and was watching some of the footage off youtube about the Ford F750. This post is to enhance the realism of the game.
I was doing some research because the engine displacements seemed off in the footage. The 1967-1979 came with a moderately healthy variety of stock V8 engines, 330ci (5.4), 361ci (5.9L), 391ci (6.4L), and a variant had a CAT V8 diesel with an extra 0 added to the end of the model name. The 5.4, 5.9, and 6.4 were typically under square engines, meaning smaller bore than stroke to produce more torque throughout the rpm range than power. Other engine swaps could be any sort of big block engines or diesels. Sadly, I don't know that much about the CAT engine. The choice is ultimately up to you about how to balance the game, but I felt it could be helpful information.

Classic Steering should always be an option

The only way to improve it without impacting negatively the original feel of the series is analogic inputs instead of raw one.
IDK if it was already the case for Snowrunner vanilla, but I am pretty sure it's not on Mudrunner.

Classic steering is 2 importants key features :

  • No automatic inputs
  • The force of physics may modify the turning angle of the wheels
    Those twos should never change.
    We can add a third one which would be :
  • Every vehicle has its own maximum wheel turning speed

What can be improved without touching these above is the impact of analogic inputs.
Analogic inputs is the different angles applied on a stick (light push, medium push, and max push for example).
On Mudrunner it makes no difference. It's either right or left input + the 3 features listed above.
It's already almost perfect like that, but it could be even better if a medium push on the right would stop the wheels at a medium angle for ex.
Another light improvement would be that the light push on the stick would produce a slower steering speed.
It can't really both. Precise angle input, or variable steering speed. I would pick variable turning speed depending of the force applied on the stick. From the deadzone to the max input, turning speed would be 0 to 100%, and 100% would be the set maximum speed of the vehicle driven, which is not always the same obviously.

That is Classic anyways, if they keep the 3 key features.

Now, if some players are unhappy about the classic feel of the gameplay, then, you can add an Arcade Steering, a Sim Steering, a Customizable Steering, a Whatever Steering.
I don't care.

Just don't change the Classic Steering, and don't remove it. You can eventually try to improve the the anologic precision of the inputs, but it is not particularly necessary imo. But I welcome it since it shouldn't have a negative impact. It would provide more "finesse". I am not sure about it, but I think a form of analogic inputs were already implemented in Snowrunner vanilla with the Classic steering.

I like the current names btw.
Classic and Arcade. It is really fitting.

last edited by KSpartan

Where are patchnotes for 6.2? Also, please include vehicle related changes that were dicussed in this thread

Could you guys also fix the front axles of the 6900 twinsteer... the first axle still has less steering lock than the second axle.

last edited by FocusPocus

For the love of all things Holy!! Please. Anywhere but where it is now.

last edited by Dexadrinne

@FocusPocus Correct. The first axle travels around an larger radius as compared to the second axle meaning it doesn't turn as tight.

Look up Akkermann

last edited by FOXCRF450RIDER

@FOXCRF450RIDER said in PTS Patch Notes 26/06:

@FocusPocus Correct. The first axle travels around an larger radius as compared to the second axle meaning it doesn't turn as tight.

Look up Akkermann

I know what Ackermann steering is.

By your logic the Azov's have the wrong steering?

(This covers both ackermann and multi axle steering)

Its in fact the other way around. The second axle is closer to the pivoting/rotating point of the vehicle so it has to steer less.

Just google multi axle steering to learn more.


last edited by FocusPocus

@FocusPocus Dang you're right. I am not sure why but I was thinking of it backwards for some reason!

@FOXCRF450RIDER said in PTS Patch Notes 26/06:

@FocusPocus Dang you're right. I am not sure why but I was thinking of it backwards for some reason!

Hey, sometimes I can also be a backwards thinker. 😛

@FocusPocus It happens. Thanks for that original post. I've now fixed my Twinsteer and Azov 64131