Some of you guys asked for more power in the GT2 cars. For you horsepower junkies, I've spent some time doing calculations and come up with a spec that I've nicknamed "magnum" after the infamous .357 magnum revolver.
These cars should only need a minor balance tweak to have them ready for the season, so setups should not change dramaticly should we elect to use this specification over the lower power spec.
All 3 GT2 cars will have approximately 357 BHP (the number I came up with based on the percentage difference from ACO GT1 and ACO GT2)
Restriction numbers are as follows:
FXR and XRR: 25%
FZR: 19% (Naturally aspirated cars seem to get hurt a lot worse with restriction than the turbo cars)
Test race conditions will be the same as before, at Kyoto national, with an identical schedule.
Qualifying starts at 1900 CET and will run for half an hour. A short intermission will follow, followed by a 2 hour race.
Server is "n!faculty.racing Event Server"
User password will be released on race day
I'd have to agree, if closely balanced cars is the aim, then something that will help acheive that needs to be done. Assuming they're all equal if they have the same BHP from my standpoint sounds rather stupid, so i'll trust that more thought is being put into the balance of the cars than making sure they have the same power running through them because tyre wear and fuel consumption should certainly be taken into account.
In last years MoE we had 90% of the field running the same car because it had a clear advantage, this time round we have the ability to correct that, and hopefully everything is being considered to make the car choice as (reasonably) insignificant as possible.
I guess proof of whether its evenly balanced or not will be clear when all the applications are in. Hopefully it wont turn GT2 classes into XRR vs XRR etc and we'll see some races where one car has a clear advantage at one round and not at the next, as you tend to see IRL and we saw at BL last time round with the XRRs becoming much more competitive there. Then again, you'd also hope the balance testing isnt based purely on 1 tracks findings because it needs to be balanced over a season, not 1 track. So if this happened to be a track the FXR happened to perform well at, and all others not so well, and you make the FXR slower so its more inkeeping then its going to suffer even more at the other tracks, likewise for the other cars. So far all talk of testing refers to results from KYGP...
And thats the attitude taken to someone who's offering constructive critisism??
Well F**k me sideways!!
For your information, I HAD every intention of being there tomorrow night, and i've just asked Viper if he'll be there and would have spoke to the others who are considering the GT2 class, but frankly im more inclined to say 'go f**k yourself' after reading that!
You've neither responded to my points, or gone on a rant about something im even commenting on!
Not unreasonable they should have equal HP? sure, doesnt make it conclusive though! It's unreasonable to think Weight, Power and ease to drive is everything that plays a part in a race series!
Tell me if im right or wrong here, because you funnily enough failed to comment on them when i brought the question up the first time...
* All the results are gathered from ONE track, despite the series being on 6.
* Power to weight ratio means sod all if one is a gas guzzler or tyre thrasher and has to pit more frequently.
Your going to insult everyones intellegence by saying those 2 factors have ZERO relevence to the equal balance of the GT1 OR GT2 class? Tracks dont have different characteristics, and by matching them all to 1 track means they're balanced at all locations, and that provided all the cars can do the same laptime that just because one car requires a pitstop in <95% or >105% of the time others blow them is fairly balanced, or at least acceptable to MoE?
I guess when this becomes apparent after a race or 2 then its back to the 'shut up and drive' attitude or does the double standards your displaying now, "should have helped", get brought up?
So if you'd kindly get off your high horse and consider for just a moment that people are pointing out potential weaknesses in your charts which you may want to consider rather than telling people to shut up and drive! Incase you hadnt noticed im not the only one wondering about whether or not p/w ratio is the be-all and end-all, arent you going to belittle Banshee for possibly doubting your p/w ratio?
So thanks for the needless rant, and good luck with the testing because frankly i've lost interest in giving up another 2+hrs of my evening in LFS this weekend, and its ironic that quite a few of our drivers have been the ones turning up helping with the balancing information thats got you this far!
Its your call really, either you want feedback or you dont, the 'shut up and drive' attitude is nothing short of an insult from people asking to help make things balanced while arrogantly refusing to accept they're being narrow minded on the areas which come into play.
Give a small look to the entry list, it shows that only 3 teams have entered a GT2 car, why dont you guys loose the GT2 class completly???, my team has entered a GT2 car, but i have strong concerns about the low amount of GT2 cars, i think it will be very boring and not exciting for the GT2 cars @ all, imo you guys should think about loosing the GT2 cars completly and just race with GT1 cars.
Imo my team doesnt mind driving a GT1 or a GT2 car, so lets say there only will be 2 GT2 cars left on the track compared to 20+ GT1 cars...
I think this isnt a good way to race, imo i hope you guys will reconsider this, and loose the GT2 class completly.
Maybe you ought to give it a bit of time to see how the entries play out? Could be that people haven't done their GT2 entries yet because they aren't sure about the restrictions yet.
Ahah, we’ve hit the nail firmly on the head with that reply, all becomes clear!
Point out ONCE where I negatively criticised your system at all.
Point out ONCE where I called you, your system or anyone else stupid or inferred something along those lines.
NEED I MAKE MYSELF ANY CLEARER FOR YOU!!?? If your system IS purely based on bhp then now I will call you and your system stupid and destined to fail, and I’ll withdraw my faith in your ability (trust me its looking thin either way!) to balance these cars suitably.
So that was your problem, you cant read, easily jump to conclusions and become extremely sensitive to criticism, particularly when you read it wrongly and get your knickers in a twist! So basically all these insults have been based on your inability to read properly.
“Gas Guzzling sure didn't keep the FZR from being the dominant car last season by a fairly large margin”
exactly, it was shit balancing.
“Tire Eating sure wasn't what held back the FXR last season.”
exactly, it was shit balancing.
But now you have the ability to balance them, and when you’ve got them doing identical lap times, do you want the gas guzzling and tyre eating to screw things up? Obviously not, so they have to be taken into account regardless of them being able to do the same laptime.
If your already considering the things being pointed out, then what’s the problem with just saying ‘yes, we are aware of this, thank you eitherway’ rather than rudely telling people to shut up and drive!? Fact is, you hadn’t said if you’ve looked into it, and im trying to make sure that this isn’t being overlooked if all that is being compared was fastest laptimes on one location, as I say, all it takes is for you to say these results already take it into consideration, that’s the next step in balancing, or you don’t give a hoot and would rather play hopscotch.
“hmmm.... you're good at stating the obvious”
Yes, and your crap at reading peoples posts correctly, seems were both good at stating the obvious!
“See above statement about independant tests”
Oh I see, you don’t want me to ask if you’ve covered potential problems ive spotted, for that I get insulted, but you’re willing for everyone to go off make up their own set of random numbers and you’ll be very forthcoming will you? Maybe I will do that, and at the first sign of a question I’ll go off on a clueless rant on them, before calling them a tosser.
“You could have been part of the solution too.”
Until you opened you mouth I would have been part of the solution! was that the intended impact?
“Never actually said those things”
Well f**k me, you don’t know what a question mark is do you!? When a sentence ends with this funny little squiggly character (?) it means it is a question, not a statement. It means I am asking you to clarify the sentence, with that clarification I can then form a better opinion of whether your working outs are infact worthless or actually have an ounce of merit to them.
“, and have actually considered them.”
So what your saying is, the only point I made differently to Banshee (Not viper!) happens to be something you agree on!?!? But hey, tell me to shut up and drive and continue to make a class A prat out of yourself.
“Your call, but really it's like voting for the president over here in the USA. If you don't turn up and vote, you really don't have a reason to complain about who's elected.”
Does that mean that just like all the votes that were made null in Florida, we can disregard your comments under the conclusion that you cant really read too good and are possibly stating the wrong opinion? Hey, I’d vote, but you know what, if one of the presidential candidates referred me a tosser can you guess whether or not I’d be voting for them?
In conclusion, you wrongly assumed (well, mis-read) I was calling your system stupid, assumed I wouldn’t have helped out, started ranting about something I hadn’t even suggested, refered to me as a tosser, and confirmed that everything that ive said you are either planning to look into or have already done so. Don’t expect me to not take offense when you cannot read and jump to the conclusion of what someone else thinks of your method.
Do you now see why reading what people post more carefully can actually help?
Pretty pleased with the results and have made one small change to the restriction levels, that could still be changed again before the green flag drops at Kyoto.
FXR and XRR 25%
FZR 20%
Was actually quite pleased with how closely balanced all 3 cars were going into this session, coming out the FZR needs a bit of work and more drivers available to put it through it's paces. Thanks to Mercury Racing Team, Orange Racing Team, Triple Seven Racing, and Zwarte Wind Racing for thier time and effort.
Next week we will test at South City Long.
Same Bat Time, Same Bat Station.
And if we all cool down a bit, maybe we can actually work on the questions at hand instead of telling each other what everyone did wrong and what not.
We know the balancing for GT2 isn't where we wanted to be at at this time. We are working on it and we are hoping to get it solved rather quickly. Such things, as you correctly noted, can't be done over night and so we can just ask you guys to have a little trust and a little support while at the same time we can only say that we DO note your criticism and try to apply it to our work. But please do also keep in mind that even if you think you are right, we also might have an opinion that might be different. I am pretty positive if we work together instead of point fingers, and that counts for everyone, inlcuding the admin team, we will find a good working solution.
-
(KeiichiRX7)
DELETED
by KeiichiRX7 : not worth the arguement
If you look, all i ever did was ask if any of the things i'd mentioned were considered, because i havent yet seen any talk of testing being done anywhere other than KY3, and i also wanted reassurance that pitting differences would be taken into account.
Instead, i get a jackass who cant read and decides to start insulting me, suggesting i have no right to comment on things, and should just shut up and drive! I think im well within my rights to say thats bang out of order!
You can go **** yourself! If you cant bloody read what someone says and start going off on your high & mighty rants then thats not my fault.
I am pretty positive if we work together instead of point fingers, and that counts for everyone, inlcuding the admin team, we will find a good working solution.