Quote from sinbad :

I don't care for multi-car classes at all.

Can't please everyone.

Quote :

Wouldn't we all be a bit happier if, say, instead of FXR and XRR we instead had been given an LMP and a Rallycross car and if FZR was simply designed to be as exciting and authentic as possible rather than to "fit" a class?

All things considered I think it'd have been just as fun/boring. Substitute the fun of a variety of competitors in classes with more classes but completely homogeneous competitors in each class. No, I don't think either one is clearly better than the other. Apples and oranges.
How are any of the GTRs less authentic than they would be if they'd been added on their own? They're all made up cars.

Quote :

Not so simple as that, obviously, but there has been all this time wasted "balancing" classes (a joke in itself),

Especially with the game continually WIP.

Quote :

whilst most people just pick one car of the class and stick with it, rendering the others almost irrelevant (for them). Add 3 more cars to the GTR class, and you just have more work "balancing", more compromising of cars, and once the novelty has worn off, 3 more that you largely ignore.

So race on spec-racing servers. If the new cars are designed correctly, each one will have some appeal, the same way real cars each have their unique character. Corvette, Porsche 911, Elise, prototypical english roadsters like TVRs or Wiesmanns, Caterhams, FWD hot hatches, and so on. Each car would have some appealing characteristics that you couldn't get in other cars. And anytime you're doing more than single round racing (leagues), it starts to even out in the championship points. And there's more than a negligible number of players who simply like a particular car type, regardless of their handicap. You only guarantee that some cars will be garage queens if they're redundant. The monotony of redundancy is exactly what multi car classes avoid.
Single-model races might guarantee close racing (provided you've got skill-matched drivers) but also make for some bland races compared to multi-model gigs.

Quote from Breizh :

Can't please everyone.

Never said they could, and I appear to be in a minority. If everyone else finds it a lot more enjoyable to have some different shapes alongside them than to have something entirely different to drive themselves should they choose to then that's fine.

Quote :

All things considered I think it'd have been just as fun/boring. Substitute the fun of a variety of competitors in classes with more classes but completely homogeneous competitors in each class. No, I don't think either one is clearly better than the other. Apples and oranges.

That's where we differ. Where is the "fun" of a variety of competitors? Is there a limit, is a race with 20 different cars more fun just because there are 20 different cars? Why? I've never seen it.

Quote :

How are any of the GTRs less authentic than they would be if they'd been added on their own? They're all made up cars.

Perhaps "authentic" was the wrong word. But I'd rather a car was mimicking a real life equivalent and to hell with fitting it into a "class".

Quote :

Especially with the game continually WIP.

So race on spec-racing servers. If the new cars are designed correctly, each one will have some appeal, the same way real cars each have their unique character. Corvette, Porsche 911, Elise, prototypical english roadsters like TVRs or Wiesmanns, Caterhams, FWD hot hatches, and so on. Each car would have some appealing characteristics that you couldn't get in other cars. And anytime you're doing more than single round racing (leagues), it starts to even out in the championship points. And there's more than a negligible number of players who simply like a particular car type, regardless of their handicap. You only guarantee that some cars will be garage queens if they're redundant. The monotony of redundancy is exactly what multi car classes avoid.
Single-model races might guarantee close racing (provided you've got skill-matched drivers) but also make for some bland races compared to multi-model gigs.

Yes, they can work if you do a full season, or they can not work at all unless they're very similar, to the point of being a waste of time (except that you have different shapes and sounds on track).

LRF has never worked because the cars are different. I'd rather FZ50 was on its own completely rather than (I assume) compromised/balanced in some regard to match RAC. And forget LX6. If these cars were to be balanced to become a truly evenly matched "class", they'd be ruined even more. Would it be more "fun" to drive a crippled FZ50 and overweight RAC and LX6 just because it made the "class" more competitive?

How about slowing them down even more and making it ROFLB4T class?

It's not the shapes. It's the variety of racecraft that different racing platforms provide. It enriches strategic and tactical gameplay. Same reason soccer is better off as it is now than with each team made of clones of 1 guy. And if the cars are going to be different this way, they might as well also look and sound different, yep. I can't see how the game wouldn't be simply more boring with zero esthetic variation, everything else being equal.

20 cars per class is a lot. That's obviously beyond feasible for LFS, right now. 10 too. I think 4-6 cars per class is probably optimal. Some classes will have less. e.g. there's really not much room for much in the UF1 or XRG/XFG class. Even the TBO class is a bit hard to add to. It could really use some engine variety, but that's about all that's missing. The LRF class could certainly use at least a few very real archetypes.. Like I described above. And then you can take each new road car model and make a GTR out of it so long as it's not redundant; an MR engined GTR is the most glaring hole right now.
So yeah, not 20, but not just 3 either.

How is the FZ5 compromised or even crippled? What you're saying sounds like you can't even tell if it is..? LRF doesn't "never" work. There's certainly lots of tracks where the gaps are too big, but in e.g. Bean0's (I think?) LRF league, there was still excellent racing. It was still really fun.

.. Did something change? What I remember is that the LX6 is what leaves the other cars in the dust. But for argument's sake, why handicap the FZ and RAC when you can just make the LX faster? A few years ago I made a 6 car class using Tweak, and the cars were very fun. I don't see at all how making a competitive class can only happen with crippled or boring cars.
It's now irrelevant but just for illustration: The class I'd made was the regular LRF class + the XRG as a vette, the XFG as a 1600cc rally kit car on slicks, and the XRT as an F360. It was a blast and the fine tuning left for a precise balance wasn't going to ruin how fun the cars were. Each one's character was uncompromised.

Now, I'm saying this for road cars and not exclusively. I don't think it's a bad idea to have some stand-alone models, especially race cars.

Quote from Glenn67 :

What, You don't have that psychic ability yet? Back to demo then until you have mastered the art!

I can remember back in 2005 times when I actually turned LEFT on BL1's T1, just to avoid being hit by those 300mph guided-missiles (XFGs)

Quote from Bean0 :

The rotating brake discs got me thinking.
They can't be purely to look nice on zoomed slowmo vids.

The best reason I could think of is that they can now have some sort of heating/cooling calculations applied.

GTA SA, GTA IV and a considerable number of other games (even shooters if I'm not mistaken) have rotating brake discs, and I don't really think they have some sort of heating or cooling calculations applied.
But I'd love to see something like this on LFS, and you certainly have got a point.


Well, I know we're only supposed to expect the Scirocco and the already released features from the TEST Patches... However, I can't help expecting (and hoping for) a lot more, specially because I like this game a lot. Of course, I won't be dissapointed if we only get the Scirocco, but I expect many things from this next patch: physics (tires, maybe suspension and some other updates), brake heating (it's possible!), and possibly the remaining car interiors. I also expect/hope some of these get released year: damage (breakable parts [bumps, doors, windows, mirrors], better collisions) and new interiors (if they don't get released on this next patch).

Although I don't think we'll get all of this in 2009, I believe all of these things will get released at some time.
I'd also love to see some real time reflections as a graphical update.

Quote from Breizh :

It's not the shapes. It's the variety of racecraft that different racing platforms provide. It enriches strategic and tactical gameplay. Same reason soccer is better off as it is now than with each team made of clones of 1 guy. And if the cars are going to be different this way, they might as well also look and sound different, yep. I can't see how the game wouldn't be simply more boring with zero esthetic variation, everything else being equal.

20 cars per class is a lot. That's obviously beyond feasible for LFS, right now. 10 too. I think 4-6 cars per class is probably optimal. Some classes will have less. e.g. there's really not much room for much in the UF1 or XRG/XFG class. Even the TBO class is a bit hard to add to. It could really use some engine variety, but that's about all that's missing. The LRF class could certainly use at least a few very real archetypes.. Like I described above. And then you can take each new road car model and make a GTR out of it so long as it's not redundant; an MR engined GTR is the most glaring hole right now.
So yeah, not 20, but not just 3 either.

How is the FZ5 compromised or even crippled? What you're saying sounds like you can't even tell if it is..? LRF doesn't "never" work. There's certainly lots of tracks where the gaps are too big, but in e.g. Bean0's (I think?) LRF league, there was still excellent racing. It was still really fun.

.. Did something change? What I remember is that the LX6 is what leaves the other cars in the dust. But for argument's sake, why handicap the FZ and RAC when you can just make the LX faster? A few years ago I made a 6 car class using Tweak, and the cars were very fun. I don't see at all how making a competitive class can only happen with crippled or boring cars.
It's now irrelevant but just for illustration: The class I'd made was the regular LRF class + the XRG as a vette, the XFG as a 1600cc rally kit car on slicks, and the XRT as an F360. It was a blast and the fine tuning left for a precise balance wasn't going to ruin how fun the cars were. Each one's character was uncompromised.

Now, I'm saying this for road cars and not exclusively. I don't think it's a bad idea to have some stand-alone models, especially race cars.

It's a matter of opinion, so I won't press the point any further. But for the sake of clarity.
If you have a lightweight low powered "7" type car, and a big heavy powerful 911 type car, then obviously they cannot be balanced for fast and slow circuits at the same time. Getting them balanced for an entire "season" across all the circuits is not easy, and don't tell me it's more fun to start a race knowing really it's two seperate races (one with one bunch of identical cars, and another with the other bunch).
It only works if the cars are similar in terms of power to weight, so unless you "cripple" one with excess weight, or the other with not enough power, or both, then it doesn't work.

Which is why I always wonder which of the cars in the current "classes" have been compromised to "fit" the "class".

At least in the case of TBO the cars are similar enough in type for you to be able to keep them in the same ballpark power to weight wise without something being off.

Are you claiming that this was actually two separate races and no fun at all?
(Sorry for the quality, it appears to get worse every time google switches codecs.)
Didn't you drive yourself in the Road Sport Summer Cups? I can't imagine anyone claiming that the format didn't provide some of the best racing possible in LFS.

Vain

Quote from Vain :

Are you claiming that this was actually two separate races and no fun at all?
(Sorry for the quality, it appears to get worse every time google switches codecs.)
Didn't you drive yourself in the Road Sport Summer Cups? I can't imagine anyone claiming that the format didn't provide some of the best racing possible in LFS.

Vain

If the laptimes are close at that particular circuit then it can work, I'm quite sure I never said to the contrary, but given equally skilled drivers in such different cars it only happens at certain circuits.

I did drive in the first Roadsport Summer Cup. It was fun. But at somewhere like Aston National, the Raceabouts were in a race that was seperate from the FZ50s, and of course that did not make it better.

Not to mention the fact that it's always better to be in the car which is fastest along the straights if laptimes are identical for 2 seperate cars.


I digress a little toward minutiae and I haven't really added anything to my opinion posted above. Anyway, multi-car classes just aren't worth the hassle in my opinion so I'd really prefer it if they didn't bother trying to add more cars to classes we already have and just made each new one the way they'd make it if it was the only car in the game.

For a league there is absolutely no problem in having totaly different cars...
Some will be better in SO some in KY3 for example...
Drivers will fight against more and less skilled drivers during the season but what's the problem?
Different strategies... Knowing how to use your advantages...
The more cars, the more liberty of choice, the more people will like it
Now let's just wait for 2-3 LMP cars

Quote from Breizh :

And in leagues?

Leagues would be somewhat different of course, if the drivers have to chose one car and have to stick with it. Still, there would be favoured cars dominating the field.

Quote from Breizh :

Why exponentially?

Quite easy maths. Every car you add has to be put in balance with all other existing cars, so every additional car doubles the workload.

say we have three cars, and add one car, you'd have to "balance" it three times, once to each of the exisitng cars.
If you add 2 cars, you'd have to "balance" them 7 times, each new one with each old one once, plus once the two new cars.

Still, this is very simplified, as finding a balance even between two cars is a lot of work that needs lot of tinkering and testing.

Sinbad - I certainly don't have in mind such disparate models as the current LRF, specifically. I do think something like (repeating but it's a perfect example) Vette/F430/911/M3/etc, would work out great in LFS.

Again, why cripple one when you can improve the others? This is all philosophical and not the actual brass tacks.. I don't see how it's impossible to reach a good enough balance when you're not limited to real cars (could argue that they provide ready-made balancing, but that's something else) but have a clean slate to start with like Scavier do. They can take the characteristics that make each major car type (american muscle car, italian exotic, etc) in reality and improve on them towards the sole purpose of racing them in LFS' virtual world.

Even if there are a few odd balls in the car set. They're still very fun often enough, thanks to LFS players not being equal. Incidentally, the more different cars, the better the odds of these unequal players finding a non-handicapped (ballast/restrictors) car to compete with; which in my experience LFS players are happy to do.


Coleus - It's an abstract argument. Show the empirical data for it being exponentially unfeasible in LFS' case: 4-5 cars per class. E.G. Why couldn't an MR GTR be added to the XRR/FZR/FXR, or something like a VW Beetle to the UF1 and as a racing version to the XFR/UFR, and why Vette, F360, and M3 type cars couldn't be added to the LRF class? Especially when you don't have to aim for an exact balance but only to fill the present performance cloud like I described. Each car will be balanced towards the average performance, not necessarily interdependently with every other car at the same time.
It just doesn't seem exponentially unfeasible to me. What does seem absurd or unfeasible is getting a balance worked out that could be broken by the next update in a WIP game like LFS.

Quote from ColeusRattus :

Quite easy maths. Every car you add has to be put in balance with all other existing cars, so every additional car doubles the workload.

so it is 2^n

well, I dont know why there is no sticker at Hosts section of the forum with Balance restrictions where you can find balancing for any combo you desire

Quote from farcar :

• The next patch will have the Scirocco, new physics and not much else.
  
• Late this this year we will receive new content. (This is the 'I'm expecting some good releases this year' thing that Scawen said....)
  
• June 2010 S3 will be released with another bundle of new content (tracks & cars) and a revamped game structure (integrated leagues/rankings revampled LFS World etc)
  
• December 2010 LFS will be open to modding.
  
• January 24th The first crappy iteration of Nordschleife will be released.
  
• January 25th 2011 The Four Horsemen of the Apocolypse will arrive....
  

Those last three points did me in. Funny!

Quote from Breizh :

Again, why cripple one when you can improve the others?

In the case of the 7 type car vs. 911 type car then it's the only way to do it.

(Captain Obvious Say): A 7 is fast because of low power and low weight, a 911 is fast because despite its weight it has (relatively) a lot of power.

For even laptimes on every circuit you need cars with very close power to weight ratios, but of course even that is not a guarantee as the 911 and the 7 could both have identical power to weight ratios.

So reduce the weight of the 911 to help it on the tight twisty circuits, and you've got to reduce the power output too or else it becomes even more of a straight line missile on fast circuits with long straights.

Increase the power of the 7 to help it on fast circuits with long straights and you need to increase its weight too or else it's faster by an even larger margin on the tight and twisty circuits.

Or perhaps you mess with tyre sizes in the hope that slowing the 7 through the corners will help keep the 911 in touch on the twisties, but then oh, now it's even slower on the fast circuits, so it needs more power, and now it cooks its tyres whilst the heavy 911 works its fat rubber gently..... It goes on.

So I guess "crippling" a car is a good term in that situation, in one way or another. And it applies to varying, usually lesser extents to most other class balancing situations imo, but especially if engine size and weight differ significantly from car to car. You can balance anything if you're prepared to mess with everything, and imo that's A: not worth it, and B: not going to improve anything.

Quote from sinbad :

In the case of the 7 type car vs. 911 type car then it's the only way to do it.

(Captain Obvious Say): A 7 is fast because of low power and low weight, a 911 is fast because despite its weight it has (relatively) a lot of power.

For even laptimes on every circuit you need cars with very close power to weight ratios, but of course even that is not a guarantee as the 911 and the 7 could both have identical power to weight ratios.

So reduce the weight of the 911 to help it on the tight twisty circuits, and you've got to reduce the power output too or else it becomes even more of a straight line missile on fast circuits with long straights.

Increase the power of the 7 to help it on fast circuits with long straights and you need to increase its weight too or else it's faster by an even larger margin on the tight and twisty circuits.

Or perhaps you mess with tyre sizes in the hope that slowing the 7 through the corners will help keep the 911 in touch on the twisties, but then oh, now it's even slower on the fast circuits, so it needs more power, and now it cooks its tyres whilst the heavy 911 works its fat rubber gently..... It goes on.

So I guess "crippling" a car is a good term in that situation, in one way or another. And it applies to varying, usually lesser extents to most other class balancing situations imo, but especially if engine size and weight differ significantly from car to car. You can balance anything if you're prepared to mess with everything, and imo that's A: not worth it, and B: not going to improve anything.

I think that balancing the cars so that they behave the same way and achieve similar lap times on every LFS track is pointless and also impossible. If you'd try it, you'd end up with a bunch of identical cars. There should be cars (in one class) that are somewhat specific and each has it's "favorite" environment. This could be quite interesting in leagues and tournaments where tracks change, but where you have to stick to one car.

In one-off pickup races, everyone would probably pick the same car (which is obviously the fastest for the current track). Whether this is good or bad is very subjective and I don't want to get involved in this debate, I don't have a clear opinion about this anyway.

I have a short thread somewhere where I was looking for a combination of two different cars with similar laptimes, to induce many overtaking situations in one lap (FZ5 vs. restricted FBM on Aston Historic Rev). I found a good combination, but on a different track it didn't work and I had to play with the restrictions again. My conclusion? You cannot have many different cars that are mutually competitive on different tracks.

To sum it up, I have no idea why I am writing this, probably just too much time on my hands today Good thread anyway

Quote from Breizh :

Sinbad - I certainly don't have in mind such disparate models as the current LRF, specifically. I do think something like (repeating but it's a perfect example) Vette/F430/911/M3/etc, would work out great in LFS.

Again, why cripple one when you can improve the others?

Indefinately? Scavier can balance them as much as they can and have time. Other ways than restricting would be plainly artificial because race cars are balanced by weight/intake restrictions.

That's right Sinbad. Does that also apply to normal cars like the 4 more conventional ones I mentioned? I don't think so.
Even unbalanced as the LX and FZ are, they're still close enough to be fun on at least a couple of tracks. Not that this is some golden standard, but it's certainly not a waste of time either.

AndRand - I don't understand what you're trying to say.

I meant that if you want to "improve" the cars every time you add another one it is a lot of work every time.

What I propose is to balance them roughly and leave the rest to the hosts admins - subsection at hosts section where you can find things like Airio LFS tracker to enforce restrictions and other options easily would help a lot.

Yes, but the salient point is whether it's not feasible at all, as opposed to a lot of work. Anyone who's followed LFS for a while knows that Scavier aren't above putting in a ton of time and effort into something, if it's worth it.

I'd agree that server-enforced balancing would work for pick-up races, and for the cars to be left "stock" in leagues. Provided that the overall performance distribution was evened out by balancing. I don't think it's so difficult to get that right with conventional cars, rather than the oddball mix we have right now in the LRF class.
I'll concede it might be a wild goose chase in some cases, while LFS is still WIP.

I always have great races at servers with balanced cars (Ready2Roll lately). Not many hotlappers there, apparently , and ppl come for close racing.

I watched the LX/FZ5 race at AsHist (or GP) - it was great. I wouldnt mind another "odd" car in the LRF class like real heavy GT car (more than 2T RWD, 500hp) or... I dont know, a FWD hot-hatch. Maybe some pick-up races would be there instead of all-drift class.

That Summer Cup LRF league was a blast.

The LRFs aren't so much drift as they're inaccessible for anyone that's either new or hasn't had a lot of hours playing them. What the LRF class needs are easily exploitable cars, like a low-tech vette. The F430 I'd made was less easy to flog but extremely flexible compared to the RAC.

Honestly, I dont know why there are no races with one LRF and FWD-R class?
- FZ5 - 265hp/t
- XFR - 275 hp/t
- UFR - 304hp/t
- RAC - 311hp/t
- LX6 - 358 hp/t
VWS will fit there fabulously.

Yet I cant really imagine any car layout missing in such class, maybe this real heavy limo (4x4 maybe not RWD), maybe something light with tDi torque characteristic.

I only got to try that once a really long time ago, but IIRC UFR/XFR vs LRF is very track dependent. Works on a few tracks and everywhere else the R's walk away where slicks and downforce matter. It's fun while it lasts though.

Isn't the VWS slower than the FXO?

Yes it is slower, what about forcing non-slicks tyres on XFR and UFR?

Quote from Breizh :

everywhere else the R's walk away where slicks and downforce matter.

The FWD GTRs don't have downforce. The slick tyres are enough to give them their advantage on twistier circuits.

Quote from Breizh :

Isn't the VWS slower than the FXO?

Yes - heavier and less power.

Well dang.. I coulda sworn I'd seen wings on those GTRs.