| Autori |
Temë: Different risks for dry and wet |
354 përgjigje
|
|
|
Quote ( Michael Keeney @ June 15th 2018,21:48:23 ) Anyone got any new thoughts on it? The OP got an overwhelming positive response and it wasn't implemented.
IMNSHO balancing Off/Def risks for both wet and dry track needs more tactical analysis & skills than setting them separately.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Tomek Kiełpiński @ June 18th 2018,09:31:00 ) IMNSHO balancing Off/Def risks for both wet and dry track needs more tactical analysis & skills than setting them separately.
I'd argue this statement is massive trolling because there is no balance. Regardless of what you may believe. Unless you categorically do not want to overtake ever unless you're passing people due to driver errors, Wobbly tyres or boosts. They have failed to present the true Overtake figures for obvious reasons. If the data was presented you'd find everyone would be running a certain OT/DEF risk. Making the feature obsolete.
|
|
|
|
I actually agree with Tomek here.
If I have a driver who is very good in wet conditions, but more prone to DE in the dry, I can't afford to push too hard in the wet laps, as there is too big a risk that I will lose the time when it is dry. So balance is needed.
With different strategies, there is no thought needed as you can set up as if it were both a fully wet race, and fully dry one.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Mark Pinnick @ June 18th 2018,13:27:18 ) I actually agree with Tomek here.If I have a driver who is very good in wet conditions, but more prone to DE in the dry, I can't afford to push too hard in the wet laps, as there is too big a risk that I will lose the time when it is dry. So balance is needed.With different strategies, there is no thought needed as you can set up as if it were both a fully wet race, and fully dry one.
Are you discussing clear risks or Overtaking/Defending risks?
|
|
|
|
I believe the principal applies to both, but you can already tailor clear risks for wet and dry.
For the record, I'm not saying that the suggestion should or shouldn't be implemented, just agreeing with the statement that it requires more thought when you have to put one setting to cover a variety of scenarios.
In fact, currently you really need to consider both independently, and then consider the combination. If you could enter a different figure for each, the combination effect would, largely, be nullified.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Michael Keeney @ June 18th 2018,13:20:17 ) They have failed to present the true Overtake figures for obvious reasons.
What are those true overtaking figures?
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Jukka Sireni @ June 18th 2018,18:36:17 ) Quote ( Michael Keeney @ June 18th 2018,13:20:17 )
They have failed to present the true Overtake figures for obvious reasons.
What are those true overtaking figures?
Probably 1:20 - 1:26 imo.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, but I meant that how they are calculated (vs. the shown ones).
|
|
|
|
|
#339 Postuar 19 Qershor 2018, 13:32:14 (Së fundi edituar 19 Qershor 2018, 13:34:25 nga Robin Goodey)
|
Citim
|
Quote ( Jukka Sireni @ June 19th 2018,13:27:25 ) Yeah, but I meant that how they are calculated (vs. the shown ones).
I suspect Michael means that the official figures include things like driver mistakes, overtakes done via boosts, overtakes of smoking cars (all things that will artificially make it look like there are extra overtakes) - so the figures don't perhaps show the 'real' picture of 'normal' overtakes between two cars actually racing.....
|
|
|
|
|
Mistakes are not included. Boosts and smoking cars are impossbile to include from history.
|
|
|
|
Essentially what im getting at Jukka is if you were to analyse the top say 20 or 25 managers per race in elite and Master. Therefore eliminating any potential low risk managers and the data was just to include people actually pushing. Then the true overtaking figures would be closer if not worse than the figures I proposed above.
I mean we all know it anyway. But it would have been nice to represent the figures as such but its difficult to do
The overtaking figures itself highlights what the true problem is when it comes to overtaking. This I feel was overlooked when the overtaking/defending formulas were put in place. It's not simply down to the overtaking skill of the track but another characteristic has arguably a bigger weighting when it comes to overtaking.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Jukka Sireni @ June 19th 2018,13:49:38 ) Mistakes are not included. Boosts and smoking cars are impossbile to include from history.
Impossible to include or exclude from the data?
How about showing data that only includes people running at a certain CT or within a CT window etc?
No1 on 50CT has a problem passing a 0Ct car for instance. So managers going through the motions will knock the figures out massively.
|
|
|
|
Maybe I was a bit vague. What I meant was that they can't be included into criteria with which the results are taken. So yeah, excluded. Or at least not in large scale to produce stats like /gb/TrackOtStats.asp
I could look at one race if I could make some sort of splitting to idfferent kind of overtakes. (wobbling/smoking/others).
|
|
|
|
|
If the OT stats were taken from a competitive environment it would be great. However this would most likely be too complex to achieve.
During any race when a manager is pushing. They can only really compare themselves to managers running similar clear track risk or strategy etc
You can immediately dismiss anyone running low CT for instance or anyome finishing bottom 15 in a group. Then you dont include any overtake when car in front has wobbled etc.
It's difficult to achieve for sure.
Perhaps given us a snap shot of a medium OT track with a very short lap length but only include accounts that finished top 20 or top 25 etc. This would immediately dismiss any managers in low CT Ne going through motions. Dismiss any DMs and any laps smoking etc I the data if possible. Also dismiss when a manager is overtaking when on 0% energy.
Perhaps someone else has a better idea what to present. So many things affect the figures.
Anyone in and around Elite know the overtaking problems.
|
|
|
|
I managed to calculate some stats for the last race.
Status OTs Blocks Ratio
nothing 18163 85194 4,6905
bad 1604 2458 1,5324
tech 4053 832 0,2053
b+t 273 33 0,1209
And just for clarification, overtake and block here, like in the stats page, are what is commented in the old screen. So it misses some overtakes that happened, and counts some overtakes that eventually didn't happen.
There is not enough data for past races to get similar stats.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So 4.6905 against the 'official' figure of 2.7461?
Ouch
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Michael Keeney @ June 22nd 2018,12:04:31 ) What does Bad mean?
B+T?
Bad tyres?
Bad tyres + tech problems?
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Michael Keeney @ June 22nd 2018,12:04:31 ) What does Bad mean?
B+T?
Surely bad tyres, and B+T is bad tyres and tech?
EDIT - Ninja'd lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is there a reason why commentary misses overtakes or non overtakes.
Have you explored why this happens? Is it formula based?
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Robin Goodey @ June 22nd 2018,12:04:34 ) So 4.6905 against the 'official' figure of 2.7461?
Ouch
This race was 3.674 in total, though, so quite a bit higher overall than the average for the track even adding the B & T figures back in
|
|
|
|
|
|
#352 Postuar 22 Qershor 2018, 12:14:30 (Së fundi edituar 22 Qershor 2018, 12:15:45 nga Jukka Sireni)
|
Citim
|
Quote ( Michael Keeney @ June 22nd 2018,12:06:18 ) Is there a reason why commentary misses overtakes or non overtakes.
Have you explored why this happens? Is it formula based?
It's a buggy/featuresque race script. I did look at it once, but I don't remember exactly how it worked. Anyway, based on my experiences looking at races, if you overtake someone, but then get blocked, you may get blocked back so badly that you fall behind the car you initially passed. And if the car in front of you (Y) overtakes another car (X), at first you try to overtake Y (if you can reach him), and if you fail, you get blocked, but the block may place you in front of X.
|
|
|
|
Really appreciate the feedback. It doesnt go unnoticed . Means a lot.
This data includes all cars right? Is there anyway of filtering between Pro-elite or Master-elite and only include top 20-25 of each group?
|
|
|
|
Elite
nothing 108 505 4,675925926
bad 12 15 1,25
tech 35 2 0,057142857
b+t 1 0 0
Master
nothing 451 3316 7,352549889
bad 29 95 3,275862069
tech 159 16 0,100628931
b+t 16 0 0
Pro
nothing 2343 15305 6,532223645
bad 119 318 2,672268908
tech 772 107 0,138601036
b+t 22 2 0,090909091
Master, lap>9, pos<21
nothing 138 1589 11,51449275
bad 14 72 5,142857143
tech 16 1 0,0625
b+t 6 0 0
With equalish speed it is indeed quite hard to pass, but isn't that quite realistic? Maybe there could be some more randomness to give a bit more hope (and some uncertainty even when big pace difference).
|
|
|
|
It's realistic at some tracks but not others due to certain characteristics. Once you know these characteristics it becomes predictable.
Im not sure about extra randomness to overtaking. Perhaps allowing us an opportunity to improve our blocking or overtaking more than currently that is.
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Română
Italiano
Português
Português
Français
Polski
Русский
Български
Македонски
Српски
Nederlands
Vlaams
Suomi
Lietuvių
Čeština
Magyar
Eesti keel
Slovenčina
Türkçe
Ελληνικά
Hrvatski
Bahasa Melayu
Dansk
Pirate
