Reply
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 09/03/2012
Offline
1712 posts
 

Re: Update 2.10: PP recalculation

Jan 29, 2013

I am afraid I see no solution to the problem. Not by tweaking the PP formula, anyway.

 

But increasing the number of cars in the Recommended section of the game by several times (lets say ten times as many) would allow many comparable cars to be raced that had been TESTED to be very close in terms of lap times, and the whole 'tune for a rabbit' process side-stepped. Currently, there's really only a couple of sets of two cars tops that gives very even racing. But up it by a factor of ten or even twenty, and there should be close racing with a choice of maybe five or six different cars on track.

 

And, coding-wise, simply increasing the table of available cars has got to be the simplest thing they could do. In fact, let's face it... why not have EVERY car in the Recommended garage? Bet you could test for a full grid of different cars, all with a pretty much even performance!

 

It seems that PD would rather keep tweaking a broken system, than give us something that would fix the problem once and for all. And easily coded, to boot. And that's quite a shame, IMO.

Message 71 of 128 (249 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
I Only Post Everything
Registered: 05/22/2009
Offline
1034 posts
 

Re: Update 2.10: PP recalculation

Jan 29, 2013

I'll check on the torque numbers later on today and post them tguns Smiley Happy.  As far as alternate tunes go, the C6 has little to no other options in my mind as it already starts out circa 530PP stock so I just dropped the engine slider down to get to spec (could have added weight but then you'd probably end up with an extra 200kg but not a lot of extra hp to compensate).

The C5 should have some possible alternates because I had to tune it up to 510PP, the one I used did have a stage or two of weight reduction so I might test one at stock weight and see if that's any better.

 

 

Photobucket

"Not visualising the equine bestowment via it's verbilisation aperture!"
"Every silver lining has a touch of grey.. "
Message 72 of 128 (245 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Highlighted
I Only Post Everything
Registered: 03/13/2005
Offline
1044 posts
 

Re: Update 2.10: PP recalculation

Jan 29, 2013

Destinkeys wrote:

I am afraid I see no solution to the problem. Not by tweaking the PP formula, anyway.

 

But increasing the number of cars in the Recommended section of the game by several times (lets say ten times as many) would allow many comparable cars to be raced that had been TESTED to be very close in terms of lap times, and the whole 'tune for a rabbit' process side-stepped. Currently, there's really only a couple of sets of two cars tops that gives very even racing. But up it by a factor of ten or even twenty, and there should be close racing with a choice of maybe five or six different cars on track.

 

And, coding-wise, simply increasing the table of available cars has got to be the simplest thing they could do. In fact, let's face it... why not have EVERY car in the Recommended garage? Bet you could test for a full grid of different cars, all with a pretty much even performance!

 

It seems that PD would rather keep tweaking a broken system, than give us something that would fix the problem once and for all. And easily coded, to boot. And that's quite a shame, IMO.


If the recommended list is increased, how do you figure out which cars are close? Would it be based on PP or testing a bunch of cars like it is now? Would the host have to go through a list of 1000+ cars and pick the ones that are closest? Isn't the disallow tuning option pretty much the same as having a garage full of recommended cars?


Message 73 of 128 (235 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 01/04/2009
Offline
8245 posts
 

Please correct the highlighted errors and try again. k

Jan 29, 2013

Gar529 wrote: Isn't the disallow tuning option pretty much the same as having a garage full of recommended cars?

Yes.

Message 74 of 128 (222 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Keyblade Wielder
Registered: 11/24/2010
Offline
8815 posts
 

Re: Update 2.10: PP recalculation

Jan 29, 2013

yea  Ididn't understand his logic with the recommended garage comment either...

 

it seems valid to ask for more cars listed in recommended so that you can just pick a car and force everyone to use THAT car.  It does not seem valid to ask for a bigger recommended garage you can match up different cars, because that's not what the recommended list is really for. 

 

BTW, I think if someone's position is "the PP system is broken so we shouldn't use it" then that is another thread topic/debate and should not be part of the discussion about examining what happened and whether it was good, bad, or in between.  Especially when the same person keeps saying it over and over again with no new observations attached.

aka Ex_Stream_Tuna -FR's & Racing done here. ExXboxfan = Netflix only
GT Saturdays Event Thread

Track ShareEx's Racing Videos SupaTunaGTPhoto Mode Pictures
Message 75 of 128 (218 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 09/03/2012
Offline
1712 posts
 

Re: Update 2.10: PP recalculation

Jan 29, 2013

No, No Tuning options don't solve the issue. As many upgrades cannot be removed, they are not equivalent at all. Unless you have a stock version of every car as well as a weight reduced, engine stage upgraded one, you can't use ANY car. That's kind of the point of it...

 

The Recommended list is not necessarily for picking races by just ONE car. There are already a couple of pairs that give you quite close, competitive races. Widening the choice of cars widens the selection of similarly performing cars, to the point where a full grid of different cars could be a reality. Admittedly, in its current size, yes, it is not easy to get a close race, but if the recommended list WAS every car (or at least ten or twenty times bigger), I think it would be quite easy to test for comparable lap times, and have 'groups' that would allow virtually spec closeness without spec blandness.

 

What is the PP system for? Maybe I'm missing the point, but I thought that it allowed for equivalency, so that close racing could be achieved without everybody in the same car. Well, it was not very good before this update, and consensus seems to be that it has got a lot worse. And as Lobby hosts can't impose PP and HP/weight restrictions, what's a host to do? Particularly as there is no way to scrutinize entered cars...

 

All I'm trying to suggest is, if the system is broke, and an easily coded alternative that actually gets the job done exists, what's the pragmatic solution to close, even, dissimilar car racing? I offer up a vast increase of the size of the Recommended Garage as something that would WORK with no extra coding to ensure compliance or lobby options. You can already select multiple cars from the Recommended Garage, and the drivers themselves can pick and choose... even pick and choose colors, too!

 

If you want to easily enforce close even racing, I honestly see no other way unless a complete rewrite of the PP system is coded. I know which one would be easiest!

Message 76 of 128 (210 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
I Only Post Everything
Registered: 05/22/2009
Offline
1034 posts
 

Re: Update 2.10: PP recalculation

[ Edited ]
Jan 29, 2013

Add more cars to the recommended list or rewrite the entire PP system?

I'd offer up a third option, revert the PP system to it's previous state and allow hosts to impose PP, weight AND power restrictions. That would likely be the easiest of all options.

From what I remember of the old PP system it provided a decent balance between multiple cars when balanced / restricted by all 3 options, there will always be a handful of "best cars" whenever you run a wide field but rest but at least restrictining PP / power / weight together brought the cars to a more even state.

Photobucket

"Not visualising the equine bestowment via it's verbilisation aperture!"
"Every silver lining has a touch of grey.. "
Message 77 of 128 (201 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Gaming Beast
Registered: 12/24/2010
Offline
2071 posts
 

Re: Update 2.10: PP recalculation

Jan 29, 2013

I would also like them to impose a TQ restriction. This number comes into play just as much as the others. I always thought the PP system didn't calculate how much TQ your car had as much as it should. As well as how much Aero really affects the car. I don't think drag really comes into effect as much as it should. 

 

I remember taking a 600 PP Tommy Kaira ZZII I believe. The one that looks like a Ferrari. And I blew the doors off of the Ford GT (also 600PP) I had much greater downforce numbers and it just seemed like I was still able to have just as much power and even less weight. This gives me an Idea, I'm gonna try that out again to see how it is now. Maybe, just maybe, things have evened out between the two. ???

 photo 3da2a2f2-f5ac-48ee-92a6-ef916fe7b8b4.jpg
Message 78 of 128 (196 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 01/04/2009
Offline
8245 posts
 

Re: Update 2.10: PP recalculation

Jan 29, 2013

tguns16 wrote:

I would also like them to impose a TQ restriction. This number comes into play just as much as the others. I always thought the PP system didn't calculate how much TQ your car had as much as it should.


I think it vastly over-rates the benefit of torque (and always has); nobody who's going quickly uses a combination of the bottom half of the tachometer and full throttle when racing so the pp-effect of torque should be smaller.  The reason #pp FF races had moslty Hondas at the front was their lack of torque to fatten up their pp compared to other FFs.  RX-8s and S2000s in RWD #pp similarly 'benefitted'.

 

Aero is underrated by the pp system, that much I agree with.

Message 79 of 128 (189 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Gaming Beast
Registered: 12/24/2010
Offline
2071 posts
 

Re: Update 2.10: PP recalculation

Jan 30, 2013

Thanks Clacksman, I obviously got that one bass akwards. Smiley Happy

 photo 3da2a2f2-f5ac-48ee-92a6-ef916fe7b8b4.jpg
Message 80 of 128 (178 Views)
Reply
0 Likes