sorry, i wasn't very clear.  i meant that literally, not generally.  when you create your simulation, you should have some options under Simulation Settings.  it has a start frame, an end frame, steps per frame, 3 check boxes for different types of collision and a number of draping frames.  the only reason i won't check all three boxes is if i really run into performance issues, and even then i'm more likely to look at the mesh than sacrifice a type of collision testing.

for the Dynamics Controls it completely depends on the conformation of the shirt or other outfit.  i have different settings for different parts, depending on the type of clothing it's supposed to be.  i usually have very little stretch, and i generally use various types of friction to accomplish what many do with constrained groups, but that's about the only constants. 

the controls are ridiculously difficult to interpret though, and would be much better with simple interface enhancements.  if they named parameters based on what they actually meant to normal people, allowed you to set mass or weight instead of density, and normalized the controls so they all generally worked along the same scale (0 to 1, 0 to 10, etc.), it would immediately make the cloth room easier to use.  and the simulations could work exactly the same with the application translating internally.   if anyone knows how to make these suggestions to Smith Micro, i'd definitely follow up on it.