If you want balanced racing on the oval either run a single car or use a server side handicap system to balance them, driving on a racing track requires far more skill and far more things become important rather than just sitting on an oval flat out simply turning the steering wheel for an hour then making a pitstop and repeating.
Just rethink again, before you post such personal offending BS again. thx.
no wonder if you take away all the downforce
his point is still true you can get away with a lot more setup mistakes on the oval then anywhere else and what really matters in terms of performance is weight power and downforce
so you could either makes those nigh on identical thereby turning 3 distinc cars into one or do some silly extreme balancing which wont work anywhere else but the oval
also keep in mind that thanks to insim you could always code a server app that enforces some intake and weight penalties just for the oval
I did think twice about posting that, and I was sure you'd see it as the joke it was intended to be, I even added the '
' to be sure.Apologies to those who took it seriously
how exactly is that the least bit offensive?
its just that this patch is more of a test than the usual ones and the number of bug report and balance threads alone shows that quite clearly
and once again we have two people beeing a prime example in making themselves look like a fool because A: they do not read the etire thread or do not understand its content and B: using facts on the basis of limited knowledge or lack of experiences.
Still not the truth.
Even with adjusted wings there is a big difference in sets and therefore in laptimes, of course the differences in times are much smaller then on circuit tracks.
But the laptimes are smaller too.
Anyway I understood the sense of this thread in posting experience with the new balancing system rather than blaming drivers for whatever they like.
Keeping this in mind, I hope the devs got the information I wanted to give.
I will not argument on the "noobness" of the oval again.
Think whatever u like of it.
no ones blaming you or calling you a noob jeez stop with the vitctimhood card already
all we are saying is that the oval is a very different track and a balance that works there wont work on the majority of all the other tracks lfs has to offer
To those who thought my post was somehow out of line, let me make the point clearer:
The cars in any class, once balanced, do not need to give the same lap times on ANY track (oval or otherwise). That is not what balancing is. If you take the cars over all the tracks, and sum the laptimes for car, the totals should be similar. So one car is faster on some tracks and vice versa.
The only reason I mention the oval is that, as ant one particular track goes, it is the worst on which to make comparisons, as it is so different to all the other tracks.
Edit: damn that shotglass
The cars in any class, once balanced, do not need to give the same lap times on ANY track (oval or otherwise). That is not what balancing is. If you take the cars over all the tracks, and sum the laptimes for car, the totals should be similar. So one car is faster on some tracks and vice versa.
The only reason I mention the oval is that, as ant one particular track goes, it is the worst on which to make comparisons, as it is so different to all the other tracks.
Edit: damn that shotglass
I did race on ovals quite a bit in N2003, a superspeedway like we have in LFS required you to accelerate for abit then plonk it in top gear and weld the right pedal to the firewall. How you can't see that there's little other than power and drag affecting laptimes is beyond me, all the GTR cars in LFS can take the oval flat with the right setup so that's hardly an issue either. The only track where you don't have to change gear is the oval so I can't really see your argument against using gearboxes as a balancing tool.
sry, if I sounded harsh. This patch includes new stuff in a lot of different parts in LFS, including a new car (tires, clutches, AI, new track, updated tracks and a lot of small options). It is by far one of the most complex patches in LFS, therefor no wonder about bugs here and there. And that's also the reason for the public testpatch.
Thanks for the answer which proves that im right about my previous statement
Besides, where did i said that im against gearboxes as a balancing tool?The purpose of this thread is to get the balance right, so hopefully the ballast added after patch Y is minimal. I know you weren't being too serious but anyway, the beta testers could never get class balancing 100% right. It takes hundreds of people. Even if the beta testers all worked all week on class balancing, they wouldn't find every setup option or possibility to balance the cars. There are pleanty of other things to test, we fixed a lot of things in these last few weeks.
By the way, to others who talk about perfect balancing, that will never happen and it's not the aim. The aim is that some of the cars are better on some tracks and some are better on others. What we don't want is what we had before, FZR the best choice on all tracks regardless (or in the TBO class you had to have a FXO to be competitive, regardless of which track you were on).
FZR's at the new SO pwn all the other GTR's 
about 1 - 2 seconds faster per lap than the FXR, on average...adds up after a 20 lap race...
EDIT: After a 20 lap race, the 3 FZR's pwned the other cars, and finished 40 seconds ahead of the last placed XRR...
about 1 - 2 seconds faster per lap than the FXR, on average...adds up after a 20 lap race...
EDIT: After a 20 lap race, the 3 FZR's pwned the other cars, and finished 40 seconds ahead of the last placed XRR...
Ok, looks like the ballast will be must again.
But is there anyway that ballast be in HL mode too, cos hotlapping with different car is just stupid. And since now HL's will be reseted i think that ballast in HL mod should be ok?
But is there anyway that ballast be in HL mode too, cos hotlapping with different car is just stupid. And since now HL's will be reseted i think that ballast in HL mod should be ok?
I've found the same is true on Westhill (running AI, not humans). the FZRs lead, the XRRs run second, the FXRs are far behind in third. Even with having to make an extra stop for fuel over 100 lap race, and even with their increased tire wear, the FZRs are still the lead cars.
I'm hoping the Masters of Endurance guys will give the new test patch a try on various tracks and see what they think. I have a feeling that even after the changes, the FZR is going to be the dominant car on most tracks.
I believe once the human element is added, in that the FZR's H-shifters need to be somewhat taken care of and is somewhat easy to make mistakes with, that the balance won't need to be as drastically changed (80+kg) as in X. From my brief experiences with the GTR's around BW (a few laps each), the FXR and XRR are initially much easier to drive smoothly consistently than the FZR. If the FZR is faster but requires a lot of concentration not to make a big (race-ending) mistake, then I think the balance is effective.
But the problem then lies in noob drivers who get pwned by FZR's...
All cars should be equal (within 0.2 sec per lap roughly), and then it's down to the driver...that is the fairest way IMO...
I don't think that is fair. Firstly, equal on what track? If they are fairly equal on a fairly long, high speed track then one car will be better on shorter, tighter tracks (and vice-versa). Also, should the FXR be as fast as the FZR when it has the multiple advantages over the FZR (AWD, a more foolproof shifter, reduced fuel consumption, reduced tire wear)?
IMO, the FXR needs to be slower, because it has other advantages that can make up for some of that deficit, and that make it easier to drive and more likely to survive a full race. The XRR also needs to be slightly slower than the FZR, since it has tire, fuel, and transmission advantages. The only question is, how much faster does the FZR need to be to make races fair and interesting. I think we'll only know that once the GTR leagues (MoE and others) have a chance to put the new cars through their paces.
I think the FZR shouldnt be able to kill itself unless theres a decent amount of abuse handed to it, and it should be weighed down a little in return. It'd work better at endurance level as well as sprint races, which lets be honest is what 95% of the people driving the car are using it for.
They need to be competitive at multiple uses, evenly spread over various tracks but competitive to race together over 6 laps as they are over 6 hours. How you do that i dont know, but if close racing in a multi-car class is the aim, it needs to be looked at from as many angles as possible.
In sprint races tyre wear and fuel econ makes no difference, its down to which car puts its power down the best, handling and ease to drive. The FZR is already easily the fastest, the FXR the slowest. I *hate* rwd cars (with a passion) and i can drive the FZR cautiously round most tracks considerably quicker than i can get the FXR round being as heavy and aggressive as i see fit. I remember spending about 30 laps in the FXR and doing a so-so lap, and within 5 laps i'd gone about 3/4sec faster taking corners with extreme caution, that was round one of the longer Aston tracks, and it just seemed very wrong that someone who couldnt drive rwd cars in comfort could go faster in the FZR over a FXR with such ease and little effort, if i can do that then imagine what a decent (!!) driver can do with the FZR.
In endurance races the bigger picture finally comes into account, then the fuel econ, tyre wear and clutch overheat are something to use as positive/negative reasons to pick a specific car over another. While i dont care for public server racing, it surely should be a balanced playing field there too, just as it should for endurance racing for those who find that aspect appealing. How you make it even on all ground i have no idea and wouldnt envy the task of trying to make it even, but those are my thoughts on it and i think sprint races actually get overlooked because of things that matter in 100+ lap races but make sod all difference in a 10 lap race.
Also, if the XRR effectively gets -30kg (X's +30 removed) and gets the Seq box, while the FXR only gets -20kg and the Seq box, that means the FXR is effectively 10kg heavier as a result of moving from X to X30 at least, Do people actually consider it quicker than the XRR, over any distance, where it needs to lose ground on the other 2 cars? Seems a bit of an odd one to me, i wouldnt have thought anyone would consider this a competitive car for racing in anyway, easier to drive is one thing, but its still considerably slower everywhere anyway and now its lost 10kg over the other 2 it would seem.
They need to be competitive at multiple uses, evenly spread over various tracks but competitive to race together over 6 laps as they are over 6 hours. How you do that i dont know, but if close racing in a multi-car class is the aim, it needs to be looked at from as many angles as possible.
In sprint races tyre wear and fuel econ makes no difference, its down to which car puts its power down the best, handling and ease to drive. The FZR is already easily the fastest, the FXR the slowest. I *hate* rwd cars (with a passion) and i can drive the FZR cautiously round most tracks considerably quicker than i can get the FXR round being as heavy and aggressive as i see fit. I remember spending about 30 laps in the FXR and doing a so-so lap, and within 5 laps i'd gone about 3/4sec faster taking corners with extreme caution, that was round one of the longer Aston tracks, and it just seemed very wrong that someone who couldnt drive rwd cars in comfort could go faster in the FZR over a FXR with such ease and little effort, if i can do that then imagine what a decent (!!) driver can do with the FZR.
In endurance races the bigger picture finally comes into account, then the fuel econ, tyre wear and clutch overheat are something to use as positive/negative reasons to pick a specific car over another. While i dont care for public server racing, it surely should be a balanced playing field there too, just as it should for endurance racing for those who find that aspect appealing. How you make it even on all ground i have no idea and wouldnt envy the task of trying to make it even, but those are my thoughts on it and i think sprint races actually get overlooked because of things that matter in 100+ lap races but make sod all difference in a 10 lap race.
Also, if the XRR effectively gets -30kg (X's +30 removed) and gets the Seq box, while the FXR only gets -20kg and the Seq box, that means the FXR is effectively 10kg heavier as a result of moving from X to X30 at least, Do people actually consider it quicker than the XRR, over any distance, where it needs to lose ground on the other 2 cars? Seems a bit of an odd one to me, i wouldnt have thought anyone would consider this a competitive car for racing in anyway, easier to drive is one thing, but its still considerably slower everywhere anyway and now its lost 10kg over the other 2 it would seem.
I think the big problem with the FXR is that it's a car without a home. Logically, it should be heavier and have less power (more weight and drag due to AWD). The problem is that it has all of the AWD drawbacks without enjoying any of the benefits. Driving on a completely dry track on a clear day, there's no real advantage to AWD - only disadvantages. For the FXR to really shine we need very cold track temps, loose surfaces (marbles), and inclement weather. Until LFS includes at least one of those, there's really no good reason to use an AWD car over the others.
Similarly, if LFS modeled changing (or at least changeable) track temperatures, the FZR would lose a lot of its luster real quick. The very first race with a 110*F track and FZR lovers would be wishing their engine was at the other end of the car because the back tires would be boiling from doing all the work.
I firmly believe that the ability to change track and air temperatures would add a huge amount to the variability and enjoyment of races in LFS. In fact, it could very well be the single most important factor in mitigating car strengths and weaknesses, and adding some spice to the game.
True, changing conditions would play a huge factor, although you have to wonder how much, afterall unless its random (meaning people dont know the temp and cant act upon it before the start grid) it means someone somewhere decides what gets used, at least as a starting point, a range, or something like that, and it'll only be the happy medium for all cars... which is really what we have right now. It'd be awesome when true environmental factors come into play like time & weather, but im not sure adjustable ambient temps would change much unless people made a concious effort to vary them rather than pick the 'community agreed value' and used that all the time.
I have no idea if LFS simulates air/surface temps, but it'd be nice if the British tracks were colder, Fern Bay was +15'c and Kyoto was +5'c as to reflect their respective geographical locations. But thats all for another discussion in half a dozen years time when were chatting about S3 patches i guess
But I suppose your right, the AWD would plain suck on a level playing field, but at the same time i think it needs to be helped out so it isnt the car nobody drives competitively, which is what the car always has been and always will be until the day extra track variables come into play. To me the FXR was unpopular to race with on X and now with X30 its effectively 10kg heavier in comparison so what hope does it have of becoming wanted? Its the ugly duckling of the GTR class and its got a long wait till that will change on the basis of these changes.
MoE already gives this car 110% points compared to the other GTR cars because its there for all to see how uncompetitive it is, and its just got comparetively slower.
I have no idea if LFS simulates air/surface temps, but it'd be nice if the British tracks were colder, Fern Bay was +15'c and Kyoto was +5'c as to reflect their respective geographical locations. But thats all for another discussion in half a dozen years time when were chatting about S3 patches i guess
But I suppose your right, the AWD would plain suck on a level playing field, but at the same time i think it needs to be helped out so it isnt the car nobody drives competitively, which is what the car always has been and always will be until the day extra track variables come into play. To me the FXR was unpopular to race with on X and now with X30 its effectively 10kg heavier in comparison so what hope does it have of becoming wanted? Its the ugly duckling of the GTR class and its got a long wait till that will change on the basis of these changes.
MoE already gives this car 110% points compared to the other GTR cars because its there for all to see how uncompetitive it is, and its just got comparetively slower.
That's something that I proposed in the Improvements section quite some time ago. Not only vary the temperatures by location, but by time of day as well. While an afternoon at Fern Bay may have 90*F ambient temps and 120*+ track temps, early morning at Blackwood would be considerably cooler (even more so than Blackwood in the afternoon). This would make it fairly realistic and allow a lot of temperature variation, without requiring anyone to manually change anything (other than picking a track/time, of course). I would think that would be a fairly straightforward change, but I really have no idea.
While it might be a bit heavier than it was in X10, it's got a better gearbox which should help offset some of that. Probably not enough to make it competitive on the current tracks, but if you make it too much faster you'll get complaints about the car that's easiest to drive being almost as fast as the harder cars (I haven't checked, but it might already be faster than the XRR on the tight tracks where it has a torque and traction advantage).
I don't see the problem in making the FZR the fastest car on pace, even including pit stops it should be theoretically much faster and if well driven it should walk away from FXRs IMO. The trade off being that it's much harder to drive. With an FXR you've really got to be trying to get into trouble whilst the FZR will bite at the slightest mistake, easy to make and hard to correct if you're tired with worn out tires.
I do see a problem making the fzr fastest car on pace on all tracks, since it is way easier to drive than xrr.
The balance we have in X10 is somehow quite good between fzr and xrr in terms of a longer races where pitstops come into count.
But on shorter races the fzr still kinda walks all over the xrr.
The balance we have in X10 is somehow quite good between fzr and xrr in terms of a longer races where pitstops come into count.
But on shorter races the fzr still kinda walks all over the xrr.
GTR : Class balancing
(112 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG