There are many ways to solve the performance loss. Loss of performance in the tires doesn't necessarily require tons of rubber lost. Besides, it's not that Prelli's tires create rubber on the track but the way the tires create these pieces of rubber that act like marbles when driven over.
I doubt Pirelli was asked to design tires that make driving outside the racing line impossible
Personally, I don't like the way Pirelli designed the tires. Bridgestone's and Michelin's tires didn't create anything like these marbles so can't Pirelli make tires that wear out normally?
Pirelli was asked to create a tire that deteriorated faster. Every single tire manufacturer can do that. Bridgestone and Michelin were not interested and Pirelli was given a shot at it. Making bad tires isn't that hard, Bridgestone refused because it would've hurt their pride so it's really not that much of an achievement you make it sound like.
Great race from Rosberg, too bad Button had his problem in the pits it would've been interesting to see how the race would've ended without the problem.
Lotus really messed up with Räikkönen. HE was as fast as Button and Hamilton in the first stint and after that it was mostly Lotus who messed his race.
Lotus really messed up with Räikkönen. HE was as fast as Button and Hamilton in the first stint and after that it was mostly Lotus who messed his race.
Well said
Blueflame, I don't know how you perceive your world, but in the real life only actions matter, not the intents. And btw, next time when trying to argue do not pick a reason for doing something if the same reason can been used against some of your favorite drivers. You are really not convincing if you can't hold on to your arguments and values in every case.
You're saying that because Shumacher was willing to do anything to win he's not one of the best drivers ever? Besides, what does winning on merit mean to you? Because all the cars are different and especially in the past the cars broke down quite often, it has never been certain that any driver ''deserved'' to win the championship they won. What's important is that they won. Schumacher has won the championship more times than anyone else and is undisputedly the most achieved driver ever. To me that's the same as the best driver ever. Don't get me wrong, during his reign I never liked some of his actions and rooted for Villneuve, Häkkinen, etc. but I respect Schumacher and would place him as the best driver ever to be in the F1.
Yes, Schumacher might have won one championship by mild cheating, but how does that make him any less driver in the rest championships that he won fairly. He still won 6 championships fairly and that's more than anyone else in the world.
Michael Schumacher has almost twice the amount of race victories (and fastest laps btw.) than the second best driver in number of victories. Do you think he won half of his victories by cheating?
I don't know if you've ever played any sports, but in all sports it's winning that counts, not the way you achieve it. There are rules and referees (in F1 the stewards) who watch that the rules are put to action. The team and driver who win the championship have been the best according to the rules. Period.
I think the fact that Schumacher is still in F1 shows that he loves to race even if he's not realistically fighting for the victories. When Häkkinen quit, he moved to DTM after a while 'cause he couldn't let go of racing. It's the same with Schumacher, only that he's still capable of driving a F1 car very fast.
My God, Whitmash is having favorite drivers!
...and you noticed it after once Hamilton stopped being his favorite driver.
The treatment Kovalainen and Alonso got never hinted anything to you?
Fantastic race from Perez, but I'd like to see a normal race where he succeeds without luck (This time it was the start with full rain tires, last time it was the SC that made him look good)
I admit, he had the pace today, but I just keep wondering how the race would've ended if it hadn't rained this race (or at least not enough to go full wet) or if the SC hadn't appeared last race - The best answer to both cases is that Perez would not have been on points or would've been tenth with no one noticing anything.
Alonso had a perfect race, he was the best driver on the track today. Räikkönen drove also well and the fastest lap he drove proves that there's some speed in the Lotus (or that they had full dry setup all along).
Button and Vettel made a stupid mistake where Hamilton got rid of his mistake that would've really hurt him. (locking up and probably destroying the front left tire in the Q3)
Massa...the guy definitely needs to be replaced and if Perez drives well the next few races he'll probably be the one to replace Massa. I think Massa could be out as early as in the fifth race since he's not contributing at all.
At first I thought it was 100% Maldonado's fault. Now, after watching this multiple times I'm not so sure.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxf0l8lsSUI
Most of the corner they are even, that's true. In the end though Maldonado is just enough ahead to ''claim'' the corner. However, I don't think Maldonado believed for a second that he could claim the entire corner he just came too fast and couldn't do a thing than just keep going and hope Maldonado cedes.
Grosjean could've seen the situation early and let go but instead tried to maintain his position too long, even when it was evident he couldn't win. Once he runs out of track he turns right and actually hits Maldonado - not the other way around. He could've just went to grass and lost time but chose to ram Maldonado hoping he'd survive.
To summarize: Maldonado came too fast, but Grosjean could've prevented the crash by smart driving. Both are partially at fault and it is a racing incident. There was no penalty since Maldonado didn't cause and ''unavoidable accident''.
To add: I don't like Maldonado one bit, the way he commented about the crash ("It was a clean one. There was very little contact – very little, not enough to put him out.") was just ridiculous and shows he didn't bother seeing the replay and doesn't care what happened. That's not professional at all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxf0l8lsSUI
Most of the corner they are even, that's true. In the end though Maldonado is just enough ahead to ''claim'' the corner. However, I don't think Maldonado believed for a second that he could claim the entire corner he just came too fast and couldn't do a thing than just keep going and hope Maldonado cedes.
Grosjean could've seen the situation early and let go but instead tried to maintain his position too long, even when it was evident he couldn't win. Once he runs out of track he turns right and actually hits Maldonado - not the other way around. He could've just went to grass and lost time but chose to ram Maldonado hoping he'd survive.
To summarize: Maldonado came too fast, but Grosjean could've prevented the crash by smart driving. Both are partially at fault and it is a racing incident. There was no penalty since Maldonado didn't cause and ''unavoidable accident''.
To add: I don't like Maldonado one bit, the way he commented about the crash ("It was a clean one. There was very little contact – very little, not enough to put him out.") was just ridiculous and shows he didn't bother seeing the replay and doesn't care what happened. That's not professional at all.
I fail to see how Hamilton underperformed, he's just not as good as Button and had some bad luck along the way with safety car and Perez. There was nothing Hamilton could've done more - Button outperformed him last year and I believe he will continue doing so this year as well. Hamilton is extremely fast in one lap, but as the importance of qualifying is diminishing because of the new tires and DRS zones, Hamilton's weaknesses in saving tires when driving long stints is just too much for him. He has to slow down too much to save the tires.
Perez drove well, but I think he's the one who benefited most from the SC. Without the SC Perez would have had some real issues with his tires lasting and I don't think he would've made it to points without the SC.
Apart from the good start, Massa was bad. He needs to be replaced but to whom, I don't know
Räikkönen drove well mostly when he didn't have any traffic. To me it just seemed that he couldn't drive well when he was behind someone. Räikkönen was fast when he got to drive alone but as soon as he caught someone he started having problems and couldn't follow the driver in front of him as close as he'd probably wanted. He really wasn't as aggressive as he used to be. Few amazing performances yes, but then again losing two points for letting Kobayashi past after the SC was a big mistake. He can still drive but I think this weekend showed that he still hasn't regained the form he had before and I'm guessing it'll take maybe even as long as half a season to get back the ''Iceman'' we know and love to watch.
S.E.T.H, based on this discussion I have come to these two conclusions:
1. You are an idiot
2. You can't drive shit.
You are saying that f-view should be banned because it allows you to see better and thus makes you faster. Seeing a bit more does not help your times if you know how to drive. However, if you don't know where your tires are (meaning you have never before played any racing games and have no idea about racing) it might help you to get better lines. Once you know where your tires are, the f-view doesn't help anymore. This should occur after playing the game a few hours.
You mention that you were 0.2s faster with f-view. Please provide further details about this. 0.2s can come from anything. With noobs it's common to have a lap variation somewhere close to a second. How did you exactly calculate this difference?
Also I know we all would love to see your best laps with- and without the f-view to see exactly how this magical tool gives you an advantage? Have you considered that 0.2 seconds means nothing if you are ten seconds away from the world record?
1. You are an idiot
2. You can't drive shit.
You are saying that f-view should be banned because it allows you to see better and thus makes you faster. Seeing a bit more does not help your times if you know how to drive. However, if you don't know where your tires are (meaning you have never before played any racing games and have no idea about racing) it might help you to get better lines. Once you know where your tires are, the f-view doesn't help anymore. This should occur after playing the game a few hours.
You mention that you were 0.2s faster with f-view. Please provide further details about this. 0.2s can come from anything. With noobs it's common to have a lap variation somewhere close to a second. How did you exactly calculate this difference?
Also I know we all would love to see your best laps with- and without the f-view to see exactly how this magical tool gives you an advantage? Have you considered that 0.2 seconds means nothing if you are ten seconds away from the world record?
FIA has banned the reactive ride height system developed by Lotus. No explanations, nothing but the word that it's banned. It seems like FIA has started actions to ensure that the smaller teams can never rise to the top because even legal innovations will be banned.
On second thought, FIA is probably covering Ferrari's ass. The last season they tried to stop Red Bull with their innovations and now it's Lotus.
It's strange how FIA can give green light to an innovation but when big teams start whining they'll immediately ban the system for no apparent reason.
On second thought, FIA is probably covering Ferrari's ass. The last season they tried to stop Red Bull with their innovations and now it's Lotus.
It's strange how FIA can give green light to an innovation but when big teams start whining they'll immediately ban the system for no apparent reason.
Going with my second character, lvl 18 Breton thief (chose Breton because of the magic resistance). It's completely different playing as a character who relies mostly or completely on stealth and daggers.
I got bored playing as a mage/battlemage when got destruction, heavy armor, block, restoration, enchanting, smithing and alchemy to 100. Had over 1k armor in full heavy dragon armor with free destruction spells and full immunity to magic if using a shield (without a shield only had something like 80% damage reduction from magic). Funny thing is that I completely missed the warrior, mage and thief stones in the beginning so didn't use them in any point of the game.
I got bored playing as a mage/battlemage when got destruction, heavy armor, block, restoration, enchanting, smithing and alchemy to 100. Had over 1k armor in full heavy dragon armor with free destruction spells and full immunity to magic if using a shield (without a shield only had something like 80% damage reduction from magic). Funny thing is that I completely missed the warrior, mage and thief stones in the beginning so didn't use them in any point of the game.
The enchanting ability is way too powerful when all benefits stack. I'm currently messing around with 800+ heavy armor, free destruction spells and 92% resistance to magic (assuming I'm wearing a shield-can increase it to 100% but that would increase destruction spell cost and I'd have to start watching for my mana again). Nothing can kill me right now. I'm just gathering strength to play the main questline through (have left it mostly untouched because I don't need shouts) and perhaps start a thief/assassin which I've heard is much harder to play.
Master level spells were a huge disappointment by the way. They take forever to load and don't do nearly enough damage. Frankly, every destruction spell that doesn't have a stagger effect, if doublecasted, is rubbish.
Master level spells were a huge disappointment by the way. They take forever to load and don't do nearly enough damage. Frankly, every destruction spell that doesn't have a stagger effect, if doublecasted, is rubbish.
No, you can't put the same enchant twice. There are 2 different enchants for chestopieces that have ''destruction costs less'' ability. The otheris pure ''destruction coss less'' and in the other it reuces destruction less but also has increased mana reg.
After getting enchantment to 100 I found out a rather interesting thing. If you enchant your ring, amulet and helmet so that destruction magic costs less, and then double enchant your chestplate with destruction costs less and destruction costs less & more mana reg. enchantments your destruction spells don't really cost at all. I currently don't need mana to cast expert level destruction spells (don't have master yet so can't say anything about that).
Then I got an idea about heavy armor since I don't need mana or mana regeneration and I currently have heavy dragon armor to protect me and free spells to use as much as I please. Not bad, not bad at all.
Then I got an idea about heavy armor since I don't need mana or mana regeneration and I currently have heavy dragon armor to protect me and free spells to use as much as I please. Not bad, not bad at all.
''Being fast is only 1 of the keys to being a formula 1 driver'' It quite obvious that being fast doesn't mean being consistent so there's only one obvious explanation to the term fast= being good in hotlaps.
Has anyone ever said that Räikkönen didn't work with the team properly? Yes, he did not care for politics and that's why Ferrari didn't suit him. Where did you get that general opinion from? Räikkönen won the championship in his first year and in the second massa didn't. It was clear that in the second and third season of Räikkönen's Ferrari career Ferrari supported Massa more. When Massa got injured and Ferrari concentrated on Räikkönen, Räikkönen won Beligan GP even though the car's development had been frozen months ago and the new car was about 0.5-1.0 seconds slower than the top cars when they stopped the development process.
The reason Räikkönen wasn't consistent in most of his seasons is that the car either sucked and he had to push it at the extreme limit or that the car broke down in half of the races.
You can't compare Massa's performance with Räikkönen to his performance with Alonso since he had a head injury between. Also Alonso was hired to be the top man and Ferrari's known to choose their number one driver and support him at the cost of the other driver.
Just for fun, let's use your style of comparing drivers: Rosberg has outperformed Schumacher and Schumacher has outperformed Barrichello and Massa. Massa has outperformed Räikkönen once so he adds to the list. Barrichello has outperformed Button in 2008 so he adds to the list. Button has outperformed Hamilton, who's ''outperformed'' Alonso...eventually getting through all the important drivers in F1 right now (and probably many of the former champions as well).
Result: Rosberg is the toughest driver on planet. Don't you agree?
You'll probably see the fallacies of logic in only monitoring one season's performance and using that to construct an opinion about the best drivers.
Oh, and Blueflame: Räikkönen, Rosberg(has both Finland's and Germany's nationalities), Kovalainen and Bottas all have Finnish nationality so if Bottas joined F1 next year there would be a new record: 4.
Actually, it's not nearly the same.Being fastest a special stage is more like being fastest in a qualifying lap in F1. Not nearly as important in terms of the final results, but still. Being fastest in a quali is quite hard isn't it? It's about as hard to be fastest in a special stage.
Räikkönen in his first year had Ogier as a team mate who's driven all his life and was supposed to be the next superstar of rally. Räikkönen did extremely well that year. This year Ogier drove about as fast as Loeb and could've challenged him if not for the team orders. Ogier got a lot more speed when he got into factory team so Kimi would've driven much better in his second year if he had gotten to the factory team.
What's your point here? Are you seriously implying that Räikkönen can't drive anything else than hotlaps? Räikkönen has won a F1 race where he started from 17th position so you are clearly lost here.
So you think Loeb would get better position than 5 in F1 if he drove for 2 years? Or maybe a top 5 in NASCAR? Kimi was racing against people who've rallyed their entire lives. Getting fifth in a race with a worse gear than the best seems quite a good accomplishment to me. Not to mention that he's had the fastest time of a special stage.
Räikkönen has third most fastest laps in F1 so I don't think he's overrated. The man's fast, one of the fastest ever.
To get a ''neverending enchantment'' Just make a lesser damage enchantment to you weapon (you can choose how much it does damage and the more it does damage the less uses it has) and then get the soul siphon perk from enchanting that grants all your death blows recharge 5% of your weapon's enchant. With quick math, if it takes an average of 5 blows to kill your opponent, make at least 100 uses for the enchant. I would go for 150-200 because you never know when you might need most of your enchant for a really tough boss.
You didn't say anything about a full season. ''Would 3 Finnish F1 drivers be the most in F1 at any one time?'' Salo, Häkkinen, and JJ Lehto were all three racing in Japanese and Australian GPs in -94.
We've had 3 Finnish drivers in F1 (Häkkinen, Salo, Järvilehto) before so it wouldn't be a new record. 4 Finnish drivers would be a record but it doesn't seem likely to happen in close future.
Ricciardo was at times great and at times invisible. I doubt Caterham would want to take an inexperienced second driver unless they were paid handsomely for it. They still have to develop the car a lot to be able to push for points and Ricciardo wouldn't help them get those points or help them in constructing the car nearly as much as Trulli can.
I'm really looking forward to the next season. Räikkönen has proved that if he gets the full attention of a team he can bring outstanding results with a lousy car. Renault has won championships and they know how to win, even though their name changes to Lotus. With a paying driver as a second driver to boost their economy, I think Lotus will have a chance to be in the top 4 teams next year.
Last edited by Juzaa, .
And why do you think the oil level was dropping? The reason for the oil getting low has to be caused by some sort of a mechanical failure. If the gearbox was fine the oil level would not drop enough to force Vettel to shortshift.
Do you remember Vettel looking through the telemetry data after his tire was destroyed? I'm quite sure RBR couldn't hide the truth from Vettel since Vettel will most likely go through the telemetry data after this race as well. If Vettel found out he had been cheated how do you think he'd react? The risk the consequences of lying to Vettel will keep RBR from lying to him.
People talk about a lot of things of which they have no idea whatsoever. There were stupid claims that NASA's moonwalk was a fraud at that time but did the fact that some people thought so make their claims any more credible? All that matters is hard evidence and currently we have none supporting this conspiracy theory. Translated: we don't have any theories that would be credible, only speculations based on our imagination.
Alonso's overtake from button was magnificent, too bad I couldn't see more than the first 40 minutes of the race. Webber's victory might be set up and then again, it might not be. Honestly, if Webber's victory wasn't set up it probably would've been set up if Vettel hadn't had problems because thanks to the victory Webber was third in the overall points, winning Alonso by a single point. Congratz to Vettel for astonishing dominance and a well earned championship victory.
Button drove well the entire season and was the second best driver in the grid. The 43 point difference between him and Hamilton (although some of that came because of Hamilton's gear problem) proves that you don't get points by crashing no matter how fast you are (referring to Hamilton and his ''superior skill compared to Button'' in case you didn't notice). Button's championship victory with Brawn was mainly because of the car but now he showed that he's truly capable of competing in the highest level and that he's among the best drivers in the grid.
Button drove well the entire season and was the second best driver in the grid. The 43 point difference between him and Hamilton (although some of that came because of Hamilton's gear problem) proves that you don't get points by crashing no matter how fast you are (referring to Hamilton and his ''superior skill compared to Button'' in case you didn't notice). Button's championship victory with Brawn was mainly because of the car but now he showed that he's truly capable of competing in the highest level and that he's among the best drivers in the grid.
Well it is rumored that Kimi wants a share of Williams which might ruin everything if Frank Williams doesn't want to sell a portion of the team to Kimi. Räikkönen has also been spotted negotiating with Lotus (Renault) so it seems Williams might not be his only option. Räikkönen for Renault and Bottas for Williams might be possible. I'd hate to see both Räikkönen and Bottas in Williams since I don't think Bottas is ready for a teammate as fast as Räikkönen. Bottas would lose to Räikkönen in all races and that would not be good for his reputation or to his future in the sport.
I don't think you grasp the rules here at all. If we have a situation where Hamilton comes charging 200mph to the same corner being few car lengths away form Massa clearly braking too late will it be Massa's fault to turn in? Based on your ''rule'' it would be acceptable to ram a corner with way too much speed and if someone turnes in normally he should take the blame.
The key term in this scenario and all the scenarios before is ''being alongside'' which you do not seem to fully grasp. If you watched the race from BBC I think David Coulthard approached the situation well. If someone has the full comment that would be welcome but basically he said that Hamilton crammed himself into a corner where there was room for only one driver and (which to me seems to be the case in almost all Hamilton cases) if Massa had not turned in he wouldn't have made the corner at all because he had to turn in. On the other hand Hamilton was alongside so it is debatable that Massa no longer had the choice to dive to the corner because Hamilton was alongside and he should've just driven off the track. Coulthard also said that this was a racing incident and he would give neither a penalty and that because of Lewis' reputation if there was a penalty it should be given to Lewis.
Personally, I think Massa should've known Hamilton was there and he should've left Hamilton room and if Hamilton forced him to go wide (which would've most likely been the case) he should've complained that to the jury saying Hamilton pushed him out of the track and Hamilton might have been penalized. I don't know if I'd have given a penalty to Massa considering all the circumstances and the fact that Lewis wasn't penalized for turning on Massa in Japan. Then again, the jury have more angles and data we could dream of so the penalty given to Massa was most likely the right solution.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG