Yes, i have read the thread bashing this idea hardcore, but i have a different approach, the game nittos 1320 gave me the idea. Use interchangeable parts and turbo systems, but tons of different parts, not just like a single turbo setup or a single fuel setup. Parts that the player has to pick, they need to pick each size of ic piping, exhaust, low and high compression pistons for na or boosted setups, tire sizes, you pick the psi your setup runs at, results are based on the persons actual knowledge.

Of course this could be a server chosen option, so all of you who race and want to keep the competition dead even can keep it just as you like it, but im sure im not the only player who would like to see this.

Flame suit on.

Everyone would just pick the best options and we'd be back to square one... an even playing field.

These requests are like that Family Guy where Stewie is playing Pictionary or whatever, and the guy keeps screaming "Jackal?, Jackal?, Jackal?, it's a Jackal? Jackal?" If it wasn't right the first time why would it be right the next ten times?

-1 to mods.

Every type of racing is different and not all of them require 600 horsepower

You're asking for what is essentially an engineering sim. You'll end up getting a group of engineers figuring out what gives the best performance and everyone will use that. Back to square one.

Quote from vortes :

Every type of racing is different and not all of them require 600 horsepower

No one said anything about power.

The best options would be found and everyone would (have) use them, end of interchangable parts.

http://www.lfsforum.net/showth ... =2071&highlight=parts

Wait for MWO, that could be your cup of tea.

why does everyone think that there's an ideal performance setup.

Because there is, its almost like the ballast and air restriction, do people drive around with those on all the time? No, because the optimal setting is with them turned off.

Just like the tires. Doing a sprint, 1 to 3 lap race and R1s will be used likely, do a longer race 10 to 15 lap and likely R2s will be used since the R1s will burn up. These are two situations that 90% or more of the players in LFS already know and use. Its rare to find someone who plays with the less ideal performance trade off. R1's would help you in the first couple laps of a race with everyone on R2's, but do you really think you ca get a lead big enough for when you need to slow down from overheated tires.

It is the same principal. If setups were not so personalized to different driving styles everyone would likely get the 'best' setup. But different driving styles require different setups.

Quote from blackbird04217 :

Because there is, its almost like the ballast and air restriction, do people drive around with those on all the time? No, because the optimal setting is with them turned off.

Just like the tires. Doing a sprint, 1 to 3 lap race and R1s will be used likely, do a longer race 10 to 15 lap and likely R2s will be used since the R1s will burn up. These are two situations that 90% or more of the players in LFS already know and use. Its rare to find someone who plays with the less ideal performance trade off. R1's would help you in the first couple laps of a race with everyone on R2's, but do you really think you ca get a lead big enough for when you need to slow down from overheated tires.

It is the same principal. If setups were not so personalized to different driving styles everyone would likely get the 'best' setup. But different driving styles require different setups.

the ballast and air restrictions are meant to be handy caps. i dnt think they really apply in this situation.

the tire situation is tru, i mean it is a generlization that mostly holds true in real life. but they're really isnt a diverse amount of tire characteristics in this game too see people getting clever with tire selection and racing strategies. ie more grip = less life.

i dnt think suspension setups that are personalised towards driving style are the fastest. i always felt its harder to setup are car in this game objectively than it is subjectivly leading to people driving "faster" in personalised setups. dnt get me wrong there's deff personality towards setups, but to the extent it is now.

if u have a very generic system to modify egines yes your gonna have a ideal system. if you dnt give enough options peopl will find the "best".

Engine tuning is not nearly as personal as suspension tuning. For the most part, unless you're talking about F1-level power to weight ratios, more power is better. The number of options presented is irrelevent.

Quote from Forbin :

Engine tuning is not nearly as personal as suspension tuning. For the most part, unless you're talking about F1-level power to weight ratios, more power is better.

this is true until your try and apply it to a certain car. how you make that power is just as important if not more.

take the XRT for example. being a 4 cylinder car, the best way to make the most power would be forced induction. by the time you made the most power you could by that means your gas pedal would be like a on and off switch with a 2 second delay. not pratical

Quote from lalathegreat :

this is true until your try and apply it to a certain car. how you make that power is just as important if not more.

take the XRT for example. being a 4 cylinder car, the best way to make the most power would be forced induction. by the time you made the most power you could by that means your gas pedal would be like a on and off switch with a 2 second delay. not pratical

How would that be any different from the very laggy, turbocharged 500HP GTR cars we currently have?

500cc 2-stroke GP bikes were often described as having a binary throttle, on or off. They were beasts, but they were still ridden quite proficiently by the riders in the series. Likewise with the turbo-era F1 cars.

Also, you could just as easily remove the turbo and get it to a state of tune where it makes 300HP, just based upon the fact a typical 1000cc 2-cylinder 4-stroke motorcycle makes ~150HP in street tune. Add two more cylinders of the same size as the other two and you double the power output. 350-400HP would not be unheard of, based upon the current 200HP World Superbikes, and it would be totally lag-free.

Quote from Forbin :

How would that be any different from the very laggy, turbocharged 500HP GTR cars we currently have?

500cc 2-stroke GP bikes were often described as having a binary throttle, on or off. They were beasts, but they were still ridden quite proficiently by the riders in the series. Likewise with the turbo-era F1 cars.

Also, you could just as easily remove the turbo and get it to a state of tune where it makes 300HP, just based upon the fact a typical 1000cc 2-cylinder 4-stroke motorcycle makes ~150HP in street tune. Add two more cylinders of the same size as the other two and you double the power output. 350-400HP would not be unheard of, based upon the current 200HP World Superbikes, and it would be totally lag-free.

because the turbo model currently is wrong, as it stands the power comes on linearly.

those 2stroke Gp bikes prob were not going from 100hp to 600HP

at this point i want to make it clear that im for this for the ability to try and out engineer someone. its sorta just as u said i would love the option to sorta design my own Na XRT with 300 Hp and race against turbo cars. if done right (easier said than done) both version should be able to coexist on track. and if not i still would love to beble to race it against same version.

i guess maybe because i have no problems hoping into a car with less power and trying to chase down faster cars. some seem to get uptight if someone else wins because they had a faster car.
i comeplely understand the oppsing arugument, i just don't agree with it. i do respect the difference in oppinion though

Quote from lalathegreat :

i guess maybe because i have no problems hoping into a car with less power and trying to chase down faster cars. some seem to get uptight if someone else wins because they had a faster car.
i comeplely understand the oppsing arugument, i just don't agree with it. i do respect the difference in oppinion though

I encounter this on every motorcycle trackday I attend. I ride a 2006 Suzuki SV650 and the engine is completely stock. The only thing I changed that might affect power output a little is the full race exhaust. The primary benefit is that it's lighter than the stock unit.

In other words, my bike is making a mere 70HP from a 650cc v-twin. In racing terms, this makes it a lightweight-class bike. Most guys are out there on 600cc 4-cylinders making 110+ HP (middleweight-class) or 750cc 4-cylinders making 140HP (heavyweight-class), while others are on 1000cc 4-cylinders making 170HP (unlimited-class). All of them weigh about the same, in the 350-400 lb range, plus rider weight.

In the intermediate-level group, I was the fastest guy, no question, regardless of what anyone else was riding. And I found absolutely no satisfaction in that. So I was faster than a guy who couldn't handle his bigger bike. So what? There was no real challenge.

When I got bumped up to the advanced group, it was all I could do to keep up with the bigger bikes. Sure, I could hang with them in the corners, and then they'd just blow me away on the straights. Again, where's the fun in that?

In the case of a trackday, it really doesn't matter. You're out there for yourself, just having fun. It's not a race.

In racing, though, the idea is you're always looking for an edge over the competition. Why would you want to intentionally handicap yourself?

Quote from Forbin :

When I got bumped up to the advanced group, it was all I could do to keep up with the bigger bikes. Sure, I could hang with them in the corners, and then they'd just blow me away on the straights. Again, where's the fun in that?

In the case of a trackday, it really doesn't matter. You're out there for yourself, just having fun. It's not a race.

In racing, though, the idea is you're always looking for an edge over the competition. Why would you want to intentionally handicap yourself?

i guess that scenario is alot more subjective than i thought i personally enjoi that type of challenge. not saying thats how i want every race to be.

i would not intentionally hadi cap myself unless i was racing far less skillfull people. i was just saying that some people when they loose can't help but blame it on the car before them selves. they want to feel the were beat on completly even ground

Well, interchangable parts could be cool. Just think though; you don't NEED to go insane on tuning. My car on Nitto Legends only has 345hp; otherwise, if I put more boost into the engine, the engine is ruined. So, you can more power in, without going insane. Still, LFS is cool the way it already is; I just want to paint my cars flat or matte colors though.

Just one key thing to point out; if LFS staff wanted this in their next game, they should make a very simple demo and send it to a selected group of LFS gamers. Let the gamers try the demo out, and then survey the entire group. LFS staff could have results that the gamers liked it and that is was fun... or the gamers thought it wasn't a bad idea, but ... or have a total fail altogther. So, this would actually have to involve making a demo and experimenting with the demo. Who knows? It could be a better game, or a worse game.

Quote from LFSn00b :

It would just get worse. As above posters said, someone will just find the best combination, and everyone will use it, so not much difference will happen.

Who says it all has to be the same? And how would you know it would get worse? Have you tried it? People could make thousands of combonations for lets say the XRT. Just make the customization levels like Nitto: Nitto has four shops in the game, each with different kinds of parts to them. Like turbos, engines, bodykits, wheels, the whole shibang. So like I said before; this idea needs to be experimented.

I'd understand a few levels of stiffness in the suspension and ARB's so we'd have less variety in setups in regular cars, but a whole engineering - no thanks, I got tweak to give me POWAAA

Quote from GrIp DrIvEr :

Who says it all has to be the same? And how would you know it would get worse? Have you tried it? People could make thousands of combonations for lets say the XRT. Just make the customization levels like Nitto: Nitto has four shops in the game, each with different kinds of parts to them. Like turbos, engines, bodykits, wheels, the whole shibang. So like I said before; this idea needs to be experimented.

No. No it doesn't. It needs to be forgotten. Forever.

Quote from tristancliffe :

No. No it doesn't. It needs to be forgotten. Forever.

Ok let me give you an example. The XRR, that is pretty much the XRG, right? The XRR is modified heavily to the point where it isn't a normal car anymore, but a racecar so it does very well on the track. Interchangeable parts can make the car better for the track, and they just don't have to be power. It can be less weight, better suspension, better clutches, etc. Interchangeable parts just make the racing experience different. Think of Forza for another example.

Alright, let's take the Forza example.

You have a performance rating and performance classes. Regardless of how the Forza devs try to balance this system, there will always be one car with a certain set of parts that will give the best performance in a class. How do you find this? Trial and error. What happens when everyone finds out this combo? Everyone uses it. What happens if someone doesn't know this specific combo? They lose, or are otherwise at a severe disadvantage.

How is this better than everyone just driving the same car in the first place? No tedious testing to find the best combo of car and parts, just straight up, head-to-head racing.

Sure, there may be some testing to get the suspension setup right, as in LFS now, but that's far more personal than just how much power your car makes and how light it is. When something is wrong, you can feel it. There's hardly ever a need to compare lap times to get the suspension right. Either it feels good or it doesn't.

Quote from GrIp DrIvEr :

Ok let me give you an example. The XRR, that is pretty much the XRG, right? The XRR is modified heavily to the point where it isn't a normal car anymore, but a racecar so it does very well on the track. Interchangeable parts can make the car better for the track, and they just don't have to be power. It can be less weight, better suspension, better clutches, etc. Interchangeable parts just make the racing experience different. Think of Forza for another example.

If the XRG isn't quick enough for you, drive the XRT. If that isn't quick enough for you drive the XRR. If that isn't quick enough for you, move onto the single seaters. If that isn't quick enough for you, download a Space Shuttle simulator.

So, by your example, we already have interchangeable parts. Hurrah.

/topic

Quote from Forbin :

Alright, let's take the Forza example.

You have a performance rating and performance classes. Regardless of how the Forza devs try to balance this system, there will always be one car with a certain set of parts that will give the best performance in a class. How do you find this? Trial and error. What happens when everyone finds out this combo? Everyone uses it. What happens if someone doesn't know this specific combo? They lose, or are otherwise at a severe disadvantage.

How is this better than everyone just driving the same car in the first place? No tedious testing to find the best combo of car and parts, just straight up, head-to-head racing.

Sure, there may be some testing to get the suspension setup right, as in LFS now, but that's far more personal than just how much power your car makes and how light it is. When something is wrong, you can feel it. There's hardly ever a need to compare lap times to get the suspension right. Either it feels good or it doesn't.

My thoughts exactly. The multi-car class stuff only works if it's incredibly well regulated, and modifications amounting to thousands of possible combinations just make it less and less likely that every car on a grid will be equally matched.

It just doesn't make any sense to have all that stuff when the main purpose of the software is to make it possible to have fair and competitive online racing. (LFS)

I don't play a game like LFS to find out if my car which doesn't exist is faster than someone else's car that also does not exist. I don't want to play Forza to find that out, it's the worst part of the game. You enter a server, someone wins the race by a country mile in a particular car, and soon after more and more of those cars that showing up (because people have seen which car is the fastest in a certain class, so they go and make their own), and you just think, wtf is the point of all this?

I like the way you can tune cars in Nitto 1320 Legends, with loads of parts for each car and thinking carefully about what you do you your car, but putting that into a sim like LFS, and that could be very complicated.

Forza's system is stage based
if you guys are picturing a system where power is increased by a system where each stage increases power then clearly that isnt gonna work.
i have something far more sophisticated in my head.

Quote :

It just doesn't make any sense to have all that stuff when the main purpose of the software is to make it possible to have fair and competitive online racing. (LFS)

the reason some people want it? its an aspect of racing that exist in real life. just like actual driving and setting up suspension some people actually enjoy it and would like to experience it.


unless your a suspension guru this game isn't fair i dont see wat the difference is