1002 replies to this topic

[dyopp21]

 

 Is it true that you are a "retired" table author? I would so love to see what you could do with all the new stuff in VP10!

 

Yes, for now I'm retired from making vpm tables. But I work when I have time in an original table together with hassanchop. I guess by the time VP10 comes out I'll be almost finished with all the changes at work and I'll have more free time (just now I spend too much free time reading and learning about my work, too many new stuff about windows servers and user desktops ).

 

I was thinking the same thing, mukuste.  Hated to see that he had retired (but I love that he is still involved with the community).  When my friends play on my cabinet and they see the Papa Smurf symbol, they tell me they immediately know it's going to be a great table.  That's a pretty ringing endorsement of his work.  

 

And I want to also say many thanks to both you AND JPsalas for all of your amazing work in VP.  Very looking forward to trying the new things that are coming out.

[mukuste]

Okay, so to all those who find the ball accelerating too fast: I just compared the time the ball needs to roll down the plunger lane on the default-table-physmod (slope 6°) from physmod3, and on some actual video footage of a CFTBL on YouTube. The times are pretty much identical, around 1.7s, and also match well with the theoretical value for a ball rolling down an incline. I'm even more convinced now that the rolling physics are accurate.

 

If you feel that the ball is rolling too fast, please measure this time and report your findings. Maybe some nudging device is interfering, or it's something else. Also make sure the table you're testing doesn't use BMPR. You do need to set the playfield friction to at least 0.08 or so, but I mentioned that in the basic table tweaking guide.

Another thing: people more and more want to have a real table for getting a feel for the new physics without having to tweak anything. Uncle Willy has kindly given a blanket permission to release modded tables. I wouldn't do this for his more recent tables like his MB since he is still actively working on that, but UW has a great back catalog of older tables. Maybe someone of the people who have been modding tables wants to PM me an older UW table they feel plays well with the new physics so I can attach it to the next release?

Edited by mukuste, 30 April 2014 - 08:27 PM.

[ronaldvg]

Want to add something to the discussion of the ball acceleration: when I play on my 42" playfield monitor, most tables with the new physics are very good. I even compared the real Indiana Jones that I have here with the VP version which I adjusted according to Bigboss specs. Very good.

 

I exchanged tables with a friend of mine who uses a 32" playfield monitor and sure enough: he found the speed way to high. I went to him last night and I also thought it was too fast. 

 

That got me thinking: the speed on both is the same, but on mine it is just more visible and the real distance (number of cm on the screen) it travels is longer. Can this have anything to do with the different opinions of the ball acceleration ?? For me nothing has to change.

Edited by ronaldvg, 30 April 2014 - 09:04 PM.

[boiydiego]

i also use a 32 inch for me its the balls that go thru the rails  too fast and sometimes ball acceleration also thats faster

Edited by boiydiego, 30 April 2014 - 08:56 PM.

[BigBoss]

Guys having physics problems send me a pm and I'll link you to all my tables.

The things some of you are describing are how pinball is suppose to behave. On a real table it is supposed to be difficult to catch the ball. It finally is now. Questions about scoop kick outs aren't issues in the new physics but issues in the tables. All kickers need a bit more power with new engine.

[Pinball999]

Hi BigBoss,

 

thanks, much appreciated.

I will send you a PM in a minute, but it seems that my nudge sensor was definitely affecting my tables.

I've changed the deadzone, and the changes of directions are much more natural.

 

One thing is a bit unclear to me though, the position of end angles for the right flippers. Will have a look at your tables to better understand.

[randr]

sending p.m.

[randr]

Okay, so to all those who find the ball accelerating too fast: I just compared the time the ball needs to roll down the plunger lane on the default-table-physmod (slope 6°) from physmod3, and on some actual video footage of a CFTBL on YouTube. The times are pretty much identical, around 1.7s, and also match well with the theoretical value for a ball rolling down an incline. I'm even more convinced now that the rolling physics are accurate.

 

If you feel that the ball is rolling too fast, please measure this time and report your findings. Maybe some nudging device is interfering, or it's something else. Also make sure the table you're testing doesn't use BMPR. You do need to set the playfield friction to at least 0.08 or so, but I mentioned that in the basic table tweaking guide.

Another thing: people more and more want to have a real table for getting a feel for the new physics without having to tweak anything. Uncle Willy has kindly given a blanket permission to release modded tables. I wouldn't do this for his more recent tables like his MB since he is still actively working on that, but UW has a great back catalog of older tables. Maybe someone of the people who have been modding tables wants to PM me an older UW table they feel plays well with the new physics so I can attach it to the next release?

I own a real CFTBL can you pm me the table? 

[The Loafer]

Trying stuff out, leads of course to questions.  I am confused by two options found in the "backdrop/physics & graphics" section, can someone clarify the following?

 

"Override by global physics set (1)".  To me this option states it will override whatever physics settings are set up using "set #1".  However, there is no checkmark to enable this, so does this mean if I don't the global physics to be overridden by whatever is set up as "set 1", I need to BLANK out that box?  IMHO, I think there should be a little box that you need to checkmark if you want to the global physics set 1-4 to override anything.

 

"Overwrite global settings":  To me, this means my global settings will be overwritten if I have this checkbox marked... so if that's true, which set?  If it means simply "don't use global physics, use this table's saved physics", that is cool, then IMHO there's a problem because for example, Big Bang Bar (wonderful table by Uncle Willy) that I got from BigBoss (thanks again!) does not have the check mark there so in essence, IF that's how it works (uses global), then that means all tables use the same physics settings, which I guess its ok since I believe stuff like slope is not part of the global settings.

 

SO anyway, all this say, I think I get how it works but would appreciate confirmation (especially from you Mukuste since you know more than anyone what these settings are supposed to mean) and clarification on the above issues as I think I'm not the only one that may be confused here.

 

recommendation:  if real world physics should be usable for all tables (because gravity is the same everywhere), then I would recommend one particular set be set as a saved default and instead of a checkmark for "override by global physics", it should be just seen as checkmark enables the table's internal physics settings, ie:  "use this table's physics settings".

[The Loafer]

discrepancies for flipper settings between what is adjusted under the flipper settings and within the "global physics options",  Apologies if this has been mentioned previously (thread is becoming rather large...)

 

Under global physics options:

- there is a speed setting, but it is not found under the individual flipper settings?

- strength is listed as 3.000000 but under individual settings its a 4 digit number (ie: 3500)

- where is the mass setting that is found under individual settings?

- there are other settings found under global/flipper settings that are not found under the individual flipper settings.  This may be ok, just want to let you know in case its an omission.

[BigBoss]

Hi BigBoss,

 

thanks, much appreciated.

I will send you a PM in a minute, but it seems that my nudge sensor was definitely affecting my tables.

I've changed the deadzone, and the changes of directions are much more natural.

 

One thing is a bit unclear to me though, the position of end angles for the right flippers. Will have a look at your tables to better understand.

 

So yea, the post I wrote above says something like 70/290. That's like a left flipper / right flipper angle. Some guys use 70, some 290, some -70, some -290.  Starting angles vary. But I have been generally around 238 / 122. In other

 

 

"Override by global physics set (1)".  To me this option states it will override whatever physics settings are set up using "set #1".  However, there is no checkmark to enable this, so does this mean if I don't the global physics to be overridden by whatever is set up as "set 1", I need to BLANK out that box?  IMHO, I think there should be a little box that you need to checkmark if you want to the global physics set 1-4 to override anything.

 

 

recommendation:  if real world physics should be usable for all tables (because gravity is the same everywhere), then I would recommend one particular set be set as a saved default and instead of a checkmark for "override by global physics", it should be just seen as checkmark enables the table's internal physics settings, ie:  "use this table's physics settings".

The way to disable it is to put a 0 in that box. 1 means to use set 1, 2 to use set 2, etc. You can have up to 8 sets. It is useful if, for example, you want to be able to adjust stored set 1 and have all your tables just work. Unfortunately, if someoene else has a different global set 1 or doesn't have one imported at all, you can crash. So I stopped using it.

 

I have been using:

 

Gravity constant: 1

Playfield friction: 0.1

Constant Scatter: 0.5

 

Under preferences --> physics options, the user interface there hasn't been updated. So a lot of values have the wrong meaning and are outdated. 

 

Under table settings, the values transfer fine.  Under flipper, speed = mass, ignore recoil velocity, power law, oblique.

 

 

discrepancies for flipper settings between what is adjusted under the flipper settings and within the "global physics options",  Apologies if this has been mentioned previously (thread is becoming rather large...)

 

Under global physics options:

- there is a speed setting, but it is not found under the individual flipper settings?

- strength is listed as 3.000000 but under individual settings its a 4 digit number (ie: 3500)

- where is the mass setting that is found under individual settings?

- there are other settings found under global/flipper settings that are not found under the individual flipper settings.  This may be ok, just want to let you know in case its an omission.

Speed = mass.

Strength - this is your old default value. Change it to use the new number like 2400. It's probably not being used because you don't have the override in the flippers set for your table.

The other settings are to be ignored. As I said above, the U/I wasn't updated to reflect the new internals yet.

[StevOz]

A nudge causes the table to move under the ball, for the most part the ball will not and cannot change it's direction or velocity, unless it come in contact with a table element moving toward it because the ball and table surface are close to frictionless and the greater the speed of the ball the greater it's enisure . The only instances where the ball can change direction or velocity mid playfield is when the ball has low velocity or more so high spin and these are very minor changes to it's path.

[mukuste]

Yes, the UI for flipper settings hasn't been updated everywhere, and also the Override and Export features may not work properly. Sorry, this is still in development and I haven't fixed all the UI stuff.

 

StevOz: the table moves under the ball, which is equivalent to the ball moving over the table in the opposite direction. So, yes, the ball does get a short burst of velocity relative to the table. Then, as the table swings back to its original position, a velocity in the opposite direction applies. After the whole movement completes, the ball will have almost the same velocity and location as before except for some minor effects from friction, unless a collision occurred of course. No need to discuss this anymore, I know how to do it and have a prototype working, now it's mostly tuning the parameters.

[The Loafer]

Thanks bigboss and mukuste for the answers, appreciate it.

[lio]

While not directly related to any physics changes:

 

It seems that if I run the VP_physmod3.exe prior to VPinball990.exe  VPinball990.exe will crash as soon as I try to create a new table or open an existing one.

If I run 9.2.1 in between then 9.9.0 works so it seems VP_physmod3.exe writes some reg keys that cause the crash for 9.9.0.

I can reproduce this 100%: run VP_physmod3.exe, exit - run VPinball990.exe and try to create a new table -> crash - now run VPinball921.exe, exit - try the exact same thing in 9.9.0 again and it no longer crashes.

[slashbot]

While not directly related to any physics changes:

It seems that if I run the VP_physmod3.exe prior to VPinball990.exe VPinball990.exe will crash as soon as I try to create a new table or open an existing one.
If I run 9.2.1 in between then 9.9.0 works so it seems VP_physmod3.exe writes some reg keys that cause the crash for 9.9.0.
I can reproduce this 100%: run VP_physmod3.exe, exit - run VPinball990.exe and try to create a new table -> crash - now run VPinball921.exe, exit - try the exact same thing in 9.9.0 again and it no longer crashes.

I think a different vp regkey should solve your problem including always have to change the x and y nudge speed when change to physicmod and 9.9.0.
Im using 9.9.0 and the physicsmod on my Pinballx frontend but always have to change the nudgespeed because the two use the same regkey.

Anyone have succefull physic modded banzai run?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[zeenon]

 

I exchanged some physicmod tables with bigboss and all the tables i load dont start.No error messagehttp://www.youtube.c...?v=fNsmzqXfGD8I got the roms so thats not the problemchecked the ntfs permissions all seems ok.Tried to run as administratorTried to save the table with another nameUac is disabledTried different vp versions tables are loading in vp921 but not in physicsmod2Anyone could help?Edit:Tested on my 2th pc and there it works, so it must be something non vp releated.Ill let you know if i figured it out what the problem.Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Problems solved must be some kind of bug in physicsmod2?
I imported a physics set under the global physics options, now all tables bigboss send me are working.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

 

Just a quick question, I'm seeing the same issue as slashbot, but does importing the physics set break anything if I want to go back to the official 990 release? I don't want to test out the phys-mod and break the current 990 playability on my cab.

 

Z

[boiydiego]

me also same as the 2 above me !!

[Bob5453]

me three. I quit downloading all new VP versions when I read a month or so ago about it changing registry info and messing with previous versions, so I am in limbo now and back to playing video games.

[Pinball999]

Hi BigBoss,

 

I've tried some of your tables, thanks a lot for sharing!

In the end, it seems like we just have different tastes.

 

Apparently, you like fast tables with more slope (PAPA style), when I prefer to have slower games.

I'm achieving good results when decreasing the slope by 0.5 or 1 on Elvira and the Party monster, or Dr. Who.

But IMHO, it's not better than some tables that have been perfectly tuned by some authors with the old engine. (Centaur, AFM beta 5 come to mind).

 

I guess I will stick with 9.9 for the time being. (while still making some attempts to get it right with physics3)

Mukuste is still improving the new physics, and I'm sure that it will be THE physics to use in the end, it's just a matter of fine tuning.

 

Cheers.