The problem with hotlaps is that they are purely pace, the existing points system does measure racecraft to some extent, and specifically, allows penalisation by license admins for poor racecraft. LFSW pb times are not necessarily even HLVC valid - and most of us, me included, dont want to be bothering with hotlaps.

Quote from Becky Rose :

The problem with hotlaps is that they are purely pace, the existing points system does measure racecraft to some extent, and specifically, allows penalisation by license admins for poor racecraft. LFSW pb times are not necessarily even HLVC valid - and most of us, me included, dont want to be bothering with hotlaps.

I totally agree with all of your points. Earlier in the thread I suggested an "average lap time" or "average race time" way of doing things, but that would rely on some sort of centralized database. I guess the available cheats, corner cutting, etc. kinda ruin the times on LFSW for all intents and purposes.

I reckon you should get 10 points for saying:

"yeah no problem mate it happens"

Quote from Jakg :

well im not an admin of UKCT

Yeah, cough up ya tight git!

@EeekiE.. who says you don't?

i will cough up... one day

Quote :

I reckon you should get 10 points for saying:

"yeah no problem mate it happens"

Actually I have long since felt that saying sorry is letting the other car ahead of you, even if it means loosing half a dozen places. Sorry in words whilst leaving their stricken car for dust isn't really a sorry, when it happens to me, I do my best to smile sweetly whilst being determined to get the place back (and often failing!).

There's definately no points for saying sorry There may or may not be points for MCI interpreted data after saying a line with " sorry " or " sry " in though...

...but there isn't.

Quote from Becky Rose :

I want to avoid having a central database for two reasons, firstly what if the server is temporarily unavailable? Does all racing in LFS stop? If it was LFSW that's fine (and does happen every now and then anyway) but if it's a second server owned by a 3rd party then that is a problem.

Very sensible.

A central database might be useful later on, but only to provide overall stats about a racer's strength. LFSW would be a proper place for that -- if the devs agree to it.

i kind of like sams idea but obviously it requires a lot of trust between server admins a whole bunch of tier 1 servers and possibly also a admin council where long term bans and massive point deductions would have to be justified in front of other admins to base the trust they have in you

although tbh i hate leveling in any wayso im not a fan of the idea to begin with

Quote from Becky Rose :

Sorry for the double post, but i've been glossing over the centralised database concept all day at work because, whilst at work, I didn't really get it (attention span).

I want to avoid having a central database for two reasons, firstly what if the server is temporarily unavailable? Does all racing in LFS stop? If it was LFSW that's fine (and does happen every now and then anyway) but if it's a second server owned by a 3rd party then that is a problem.

Also, the same effect can be achieved by getting agreement from another licensing server group to do license lookups via the daisy chain system, and this method requires less dependancy on a system that is up 24/7 (if the other licensing server is down it's no big loss).

the way i understands axus' idea is that each server would still use its own database and the central one would only be used in case a driver enters a tier of servers that has no record of him in its database
basically just a system to offload the intra server traffic sams system would cause to a centralised server