What that "most people" don't understand is that the stop line isn't placed randomly or on purpose to bother them. It is placed where the stopping vehicles could be clearly seen from the other road.Googlefluff wrote: ↑17 Nov 2020 19:49I'm curious where you live, because here in British Columbia stop signs are positioned 100% as poorly as they are in the game, and the US follows mostly the same standard from what I've seen. The line is nearly always set too far back from the intersection, behind the crosswalk if there is one, meaning you either have to stop twice (what you're supposed to do) or stop past the line (what most people do).
Is the visibility for the non-stopping drivers that should be granted, not for the driver on the stopped vehicle. Drivers on the road with right of pass need to know that a vehicle is approaching the junction, so they be aware. At the stop point, the visibility for the stopping driver is irrelevant. And yes, that means most times you should had to stop twice, on the mark and later in a point where you will have visibility for your maneuver. It's done that way on purpose.
It's made that way because in lots of stop places and for lots of vehicles, the point where the stopping driver will have visibility is a point where it's vehicle front part will be already inside the other road limits. If you stop directly in the point were you could see the incoming traffic, there's the risk that your vehicle enters the other road lane and got hit for a vehicle that was too near to see you in time to let space (and you wouldn't see it, of course, because you are moving there to be able to see something).
I've been living for 15 years just in front of a a blind street cross with a stop. There had been more than 30 accidents in that time span (and countless "almost", I've been almost crashed 3 times). ALL of them exactly the same. ALL of them neighbors of the zone that known there will be no visibility at the stop line so they stopped straight further. ALL of them overconfident and blaming the "idiot" that put the stop line "too much backwards where I can't see nothing". And by pure luck nobody had been severely injured so far. But it's just a matter of time and neither the neighborhood associations nor the city council know what to do in there so people stop to risk their lives so stupidly.
Unless miss-placements (there's always some, but they are exceptions), stop lines are placed where they must, not where some people would like to (until it's too late for them to regret).
PS: And regarding all of this and the AI: when we stop/yield pass the signed line, the AI will treat us as a danger of potential collision. That's why AI stops so many times unnecessarily. Of course, they could improve a lot the AI so it calculates if our real trajectory is of collision of we would finally stop just at the border (what our brains do IRL constantly at driving). But that's way more CPU costly than to act as it actually does. As like so many other thinks we all want SCS to improve in the AI. That's why they had to simplify it till the point it behaves so ridiculously so many times. And in a game that it's already on permanent CPU bottleneck, every improvement that requires more CPU here means to take it from other places (first candidate: less FPS). SCS can tune parameters for the "safety distances" the AI considers when taking its decisions (I'm sure they had done that at least once this year). But they can't change the general behavior of those decisions, the way they are chosen, without cause consequences somewhere else. Not yet, hope soon.