To sort this out in a fair way to everyone, why don't the devs lower the power of the FXO but on the settings, make a turbo pack available if people want it. So, non-turbo it is balanced, and with the turbo it is as fast as it is now. Same with the faster GTR cars. Lower the speed and make it available if wanted.

They should also make it a server option. If the server wants just the slower pack then theres an option but it can also host a server with chooseable options, turbo or non-turbo. That's the best way. So instead of lowering the power forever they should have the choice of going back up to high power.

The FXO doesn't need to be slower, the XRT and RB4 don't need to be faster. Pick the car you want to drive and drive it. If it's not fast enough and you want to win, choose a faster one.

/me puts on flamesuit

if you want an example of the FXO being TOO quick, watch the STCC race, i think it needs more pronounced understeer and XRT size (maybe a TINY bit bigger) tyres, and it would be in competition again

All of the cars are in the same class. You can't have a TBO league with 1 car faster than the others.

There was an exact problem like this in a discussion about Masters of Endurance. You can't have a GTR class when all the cars aren't the same speed. It's not fair.

Quote from nutty boy :

There was an exact problem like this in a discussion about Masters of Endurance. You can't have a GTR class when all the cars aren't the same speed. It's not fair.

before you go there, i say that the XRR and FZR should be equal - The FXR's 4WD makes things easier, so its unfair if it can keep up with less effort!

Don't have one then. Have an FXO league, every sane driver will pick the FXO currently anyway in a TBO league because it's faster, so you could wait for ballast or go for the FXO.

Also, about your MoE comparison, if you read the thread several of the drivers felt there was no need for handicapping or evening out the field at this time, and didn't mind it even if it meant the entire grid consisted of FZR's.

@jakg: If we made them all equal and the FXR was quicker because of it's 4WD then it'd be an exact repeat of before so yeah your right.

@NotAnIllusion: Yeah so in the GTR league everyone chooses FZR. But what's the point. That's just really forcing people to choose the FZR to be competitive. If people don't like the FZR what's the point on driving it if you don't want. You have to to be competitive though. If they balanced it everyone could drive the car they want.

Quote from Jakg :

before you go there, i say that the XRR and FZR should be equal - The FXR's 4WD makes things easier, so its unfair if it can keep up with less effort!

Hmm, but doesn't the FWD of FXO make things easier too?

Quote from nutty boy :

If we made them all equal and the FXR was quicker because of it's 4WD then it'd be an exact repeat of before so yeah your right.

i say that the XRR should be a tiny bit quicker than the FZR, but that it be slightly harder and snappier, and that you need to learn how to use the turbo to keep it that bit quicker, and that the FXR is a little way behind

Balancing them in specs is waste of time and could make the cars too similar. I think it would be much better if the cars were specced independently and then server-side (or w/e) ballast would be applied if the specific league/race would deem it necessary.

Quote from nutty boy :

All of the cars are in the same class. You can't have a TBO league with 1 car faster than the others.

Server setup restricitions are much better than trying to balance cars other ways. For example you could have no locked diffs and something other than fully adjustable race suspension on a car by car basis.

Also I think the road cars should have the gear ratios removed from the setup and simply allow limited final drive alterations as IRL.

All that hassle with server side options would be useless, too time consuming anyway, if we just had differential update which would make the locked diffs suck.

Quote from ajp71 :

Server setup restricitions are much better than trying to balance cars other ways. For example you could have no locked diffs and something other than fully adjustable race suspension on a car by car basis.

So wouldn't that mean my idea of having the choice of low power and high power is a good idea?

Quote from Blackout :

All that hassle with server side options would be useless if we just had differential update which would make the locked diffs suck.

Yes but if the locked diffs suck then that would mean LFS would not be realistic. We want it to be as reallistic as possible.

i think all the other cars should be quicker!

@Blackout: Ballast should IMO be done anyway because some leagues in LFS would probably prefer to handicap faster drivers with it, which is done in RL leagues as well.

@Nut: I don't think locked diffs are as common as you think, not every race car uses them. I'd imagine LSD's and active derivatives of ~ are much common in the motorsports world. Locked diffs are currently vastly superior to LSD's in e.g. FWD cars where they promote negligible amounts of understeer and turn into corners just fine, I think their competitiveness vs LSD's is somewhat exaggerated (which again IMO is because the LSD's do not have pre-load, and the LD's don't have enough understeer (grip model?)).

OK then. Instead of making the Locked Diff crap, get rid if it altogether. Still more reallistic than making it crap.

Quote from nutty boy :

So wouldn't that mean my idea of having the choice of low power and high power is a good idea?

It seems daft to be making a car less powerful than the road version to compensate for racing upgrades.

Why the hell did we create this topic then. We're talking about making the cars slower for racing.
Exact thing you just said was daft.

I'm all for competitive racing of different drivetrains and engine layouts within a supposed class, but ATM I'm not entirely happy with slowing any car down too much. IRL, racing has already been strangled by too much rule making and forced mediocrity. FYI, Nascar is already regulating the number of coils, wire diameter, etc specs of their springs! Madness.

My point is, fix the problems of what makes the slow cars unrealistically slow before anything too drastic is done to slow anyone down. Anyone who's driven cars with similar power to weight ratios to XR GTT and RB4 would agree that RL equivalents of such cars are a tad faster. ATM, lets just use optional ballasts for the GTR class while narrowing the tires of the FXO to RB4 widths to level the playing field. After turbo modelling, powerbands and aero are properly done, then we can really balance the cars properly without resorting to artificial means.

Quote from nutty boy :

Why the hell did we create this topic then. We're talking about making the cars slower for racing.
Exact thing you just said was daft.

LFS is currently appears to be simulating pure road cars (given by the lack of any competition equipment) that have ended up with fully adjustable racing suspension, free choice of gear ratios, live brake bias, racing diffs (even LSDs aren't realistic in a hot Astra) and other advantages due to the physics engine (infinite chassis strength, fast gear shifts, engines take massive abuse upon full throttle engine braking).

So why on earth would you then take a full race car, less engine and then bastardize the one of the few standard components to create a full race car with less power than the road car?

Maybe you'd do it because the tyres are too big for the TBO class regulations.

The whole debate on that context is fricken rubbish, all this preservation of the car in its road going form, modifying from road going blah blah blah. ITS NOT A REAL CAR, it's statistics are arbitary. Who says it doesnt have a sodding great steal bulk head as part of its passenger safety cell that adds an extra 90kg? Who says they "FXO Road Car" fully complies with TBO class regulations without modification? Who says?

Certainly not any of us saying, "yes but this is the FXO we cant make it slower to race it because the FXO is real to me yah, man!".

I'll tell you who says, the devs say, and they're totally bloody wrong atm.

no car should be slower. its fine how it is. please. just leave it.

Yes, please change it.
Full support for Becky's post.

Vain

Quote from NotAnIllusion :

The FXO doesn't need to be slower, the XRT and RB4 don't need to be faster. Pick the car you want to drive and drive it. If it's not fast enough and you want to win, choose a faster one.

/me puts on flamesuit

+ 1,000,000.

*Dives into the nearest lake*

Quote from Captain Slow :

no car should be slower. its fine how it is. please. just leave it.

Just wish they make RB4 and XR GTT as good as they realistically should be. Can't believe the RB4 has such puny tires. 215/45/16s? Even my friend's Corrolla comfortably fits 215/45/17s as the optimal size and it's supposedly nowhere close to the RB4's league! Wow. I agree that the TBO class would be much more fun if FXO wasn't slowed down and that all the corrections I suggested in a previous thread of mine (Severe 4WD defeciency in LFS). We're better off fun and realism wise if the RB4 and XR GTT get the powerbands they deserve. They could use slightly better tires. For instance, the RB4 could use a decent set of 225/45/16 for starters instead of the current sorry excuses for RB4 tires. My, even my 80's Mitsubishi needs 205s to ge the most out of the chassis without chassis mods.

Since these improvements don't seem to be coming any soon, we can only dream. BTW, 240 width tires for a car like FXO is just HUMUNGOUS. The FXO's nowhere as large or heavy as a Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, yet its tires are even WIDER than the Evo (235/45/17)! Just shows how much the developers were trying to overcompensate for FWD deficiencies.

FTM, dropping the FXo's tire size to the current RB4 size should do the trick. A quick band-aid until LFS S2 is closer to completion.