With the ghostcar / saving the state of the car you are forgetting that we have an additional issue here: it is not neccesarily said that the driver who lost the connection will reconnect. How is LFS supposed to know whether lfsaccount b is connecting for lfsaccount a?

Then something like a password would need to be entered as the race started, incase of such a thing, which would then mean another verification thingy that Scawen would have to add, quite alot of work I guess..

Quote from Hoellsen :

With the ghostcar / saving the state of the car you are forgetting that we have an additional issue here: it is not neccesarily said that the driver who lost the connection will reconnect. How is LFS supposed to know whether lfsaccount b is connecting for lfsaccount a?

Yes, that is a good point. If Scawen was to code this, I think it would be easy enough for him to support XML files containing team lineups.

For example:

XML would be the best way to do this IMO and it could also be used to track the number of laps driven by a team etc. Obviously if the server did that it would be useful.

Hmm if we are dreaming of Scawen coding things to solve this, in my opinion coding up a system where damage gets outputted and then when rejoining added as a time/repair penalty is a halfsolution.. if the coder from heaven is going to tackle this problem a nicer solution would be to rember the car state... as in when you rejoin you get the same exact car, serverside option ofcourse, so same fuel, tirewear and engine damage... that would make it in a sense the same car, so it's just one car that starts and finnishes..

again just my 2 cents

I have a cracking idea...make it so if someone leaves due to engine troubles, how about make them drive with a few % more restriction to counteract is back?

Quote from mcgas001 :

I have a cracking idea...make it so if someone leaves due to engine troubles, how about make them drive with a few % more restriction to counteract is back?

And in this masterplan, how is it determined how much engine damage one had, or if he even disconnected because of them?

The best solution(with no hassle from anyone), is just to re implement engine damage repair, but (like someone said) make it LONG enough, and also force the driver to shut down the engine, while it is being repaired(to add to realism). I for one see it as the easiest and most practical solution.

Quote from DeadWolfBones :

Actually, the tracker keeps a log of every event that happens on the server. We're using that to narrow down the list of disconnects and evaluate how we want to deal with them.

Does that mean you are willing to go through all that after the race or that you can make a script who can evaluate and make descisions?

Quote from Cawwa :

Does that mean you are willing to go through all that after the race or that you can make a script who can evaluate and make descisions?

It means that in this case we are going through them manually and that in the future we will be looking into ways to avoid having to do that again.

So what about, making different penalty?

He've all seen how much time reparing stuff costs and such. And i think we can well agree upon SHIFT + P to be a drivers mistake. So it could be good ebough to make a SHIFT + P penalty something like 2 laps penalty or even 3, while DC still costs a team 1 lap.
But in this case you would most probably end up with same unsportsmanship as in last race. But it would hurt also, so it would make them think 2 times before doing it. Just penalise everybody harder, and we will see more mature racing imo.

Quote from PwrSlave :

So what about, making different penalty?

He've all seen how much time reparing stuff costs and such. And i think we can well agree upon SHIFT + P to be a drivers mistake. So it could be good ebough to make a SHIFT + P penalty something like 2 laps penalty or even 3, while DC still costs a team 1 lap.
But in this case you would most probably end up with same unsportsmanship as in last race. But it would hurt also, so it would make them think 2 times before doing it. Just penalise everybody harder, and we will see more mature racing imo.

But what happens when somebody lags out while being stuck in the gravel? (highly unlikely but could still happen)

Or when doing some other stupid mistake... nobody says that you can't have a big drivers mistake and a dc... So that would give one lap penalty less than the way of behing honest (which should give less penalty imho.)

Indeed if you make a shift-p harsher then just a disco, peepz will just always pull the plug for a few second and reconnect..

if this is all about how to prevent teams form being unsportman like... just make the rule that if anyteam is proven without a doubt that they are breaking the rules with intend that they will be banned from MOE racing for X seasons... anyone breaking the rules will make room for people who care about fair racing and sportmanship.

Quote from auch_enne :

if this is all about how to prevent teams form being unsportman like... just make the rule that if anyteam is proven without a doubt that they are breaking the rules with intend that they will be banned from MOE racing for X seasons... anyone breaking the rules will make room for people who care about fair racing and sportmanship.

how do you want to prove it?

I don't wanna bash the idea, but from my point you simply can't prove that a timeout was caused by pulling the plug, pc failure or connection breakdown
So we get back to square one with having wild guesses and more work load for the admins.

Yes thats the problem; how to proove it


Thats why i suggested penalise it too. So the ones who cheat, will think twice before DC intentionally, in order to gain those fes sec in pit stop. I know its not entirely fair towards the fair teams, but knowing somebody gained a place or 2 just because of this dirty play stinks to the sky.

Quote from PwrSlave :

Yes thats the problem; how to proove it


Thats why i suggested penalise it too. So the ones who cheat, will think twice before DC intentionally, in order to gain those fes sec in pit stop. I know its not entirely fair towards the fair teams, but knowing somebody gained a place or 2 just because of this dirty play stinks to the sky.

And now it gets unfair to the honest teams who get a penalty for having a problem they can't influence...
That makes, when you are at the beginning of the stint and in the last sector of a long track like as5 more or less:
1 lap for timeing out in the last sector and there loosing the whole lap
+1 lap penalty for timing out

= +2 laps...

Thats not fair either...

(Comming from a team that seems to have a least one timeout per race)

Quote from three_jump :

And now it gets unfair to the honest teams who get a penalty for having a problem they can't influence...
That makes, when you are at the beginning of the stint and in the last sector of a long track like as5 more or less:
1 lap for timeing out in the last sector and there loosing the whole lap
+1 lap penalty for timing out

= +2 laps...

Thats not fair either...

Well no, its not fair - but then again maybe it is, it may be unfortunate if when and where you time out, but it could happen to anyone, anytime anyplace,.... so maybe it is fair, but very bad luck and bad luck does happen IRL.

You have to draw a line somewhere.

(if I understand correctly)

A few teams have received an email by us (usually to the address of the person that filed the team's application). The email is about our investigation on that matter. It might sound a bit formal, but as we had to send several mails, I opted to go that route instead of trying to come up with an all personal text every time.