How about an option to "play it safe" if X seconds in the lead. Similar to how qualifying is done. I should be able to select how my driver goes through each particular stint in the race.
Example, Races that are going to have a change of weather. Why would I want my driver needlessly pushing in weather that he sucks in. Why can I not just simply wait for the weather to change to a more favorable situation and then tell him to move like he has a purpose.
Maybe at about 20 seconds in the lead, there should be some option to reduce risks so that you dont make a costly mistake (which doesnt seem to happen in the game anyway so whatever I guess)
Also an option for dry risks and wet risks seems like a good idea. I certainly know that my driver is alot better than most under certain weather conditionas and very mediocre at best under different conditions. Why cant I take advantage of a favorable situation and simply play it safe when the situation is not as advantageous for me?
I dont neccesarily mind that the strategy for the race is a basic strategy. The problem is that some races are anything but basic and require more than what the game can offer to accomidate.
How about - play it safe when you are x sec. in the lead and less than x laps left? Therefore you can slow down only after last pit.
The point I was trying to make is that yes, I'm sure the admins could add all kinds of IF statements to hand ridiculous amounts of control to the players - but where do you draw the line between "Keep It Simple Stupid (KISS)" mechanics, and over-the-top levels of configuration (and the more than likely ensuing confusion)?
Also, how difficult would this then be to analyse your data afterwards? What if my driver is borderline "x" seconds in the lead? Does he run one lap with 50 risks to extend the lead, then next lap with zero, which then closes the gap? I guess we'd need risks used PER LAP, not just race, or indeed stint...
But again, when would you use this, a specific lap, you might already be leading by a minute and this causes a part failure, or maybe when you are within x seconds of the leader or car in front, but then it would be used at the start.
Truly by saying this I would counter with the weather changing during the race as being too many variables. I would most likely be right.
To say that a race is not complex is just so horribly wrong.
Quote ( Chris Williams @ May 8th 2009,16:03:07 )
but where do you draw the line between "Keep It Simple Stupid (KISS)" mechanics, and over-the-top levels of configuration (and the more than likely ensuing confusion)?
KISS mechanics would be for rookie and amateur groups. At that point you should have enough of a basic grasp for the game that you would likely want something more complex at that point. Maybe not everyone shares this sentiment (and I dont care what any of you think anyway) but personally I see it as playing the same game with bumping up the difficulty level. You play on easy in rookie with no 90% rule. Then you move to amateur where the only real change is that the 90% rule applies and you are not reset back to a standard value at the beginning of the season. After that you get a tech director in Pro. Finally you get... umm... yeah there is nothing after that. I guess you become a master regurgitator and then eventually an elite regurgitator, but aside from that there is absolutely no difference between elite and pro. Which is like saying ok medium difficulty is the same as extra hard.
That is really the one and only reason that I have said that you might wait until master to be able to set variable risks within the race under certain circumstances. Possibly dry/wet specific risks in Pro with the addition of a TD. Then be able to go stop by stop and set risks dependent on your position on the inlap in Master. It is at least SOMETHING that progresses the game forward as you move up through the stages of the game.
The more I read your posts Frank, the more i wonder to myself "why do you play this game"? You obviously don't like it. So if I am to believe you, there is no point playing the game beyond Pro because all you do regurgitate everything you've done in Pro. Oh well, I will just ignore all those managers from Master and Elite that keep saying they are always learning something in this game.
As for the changes you are proposing, I can only see it being more beneficial if the race was live (it's not and probably never will be) and you could be Ross Brawn sitting on the pit wall and changing your strategy on the fly as the race dynamics change. Otherwise all you are doing is complicating the hell out of the game trying to preempt every scenario that might ever occur. You would be better off going down to the track and betting on the horses.
all i think we need here is the ability to select the risks for each racing stint. Anything more than that and think you are starting to over complicate matters, especially for those that have just started.
For those who want the ability to have wet/dry levels of risk, then surely this is achieved with the above. At the moment when the weather changes we come in to changes tyres so we automatically move on to the next stint. Maybe the rain doesn't come as soon as you hope and therefore your strategy is messed up by having an unscheduled stop, but thats the way its like now and I wouldn't want that to change.
The only other suggestion I read that could be good is the ability to push for 5 laps. Again If that was wanted then why not have an additional 2 check boxes alongside the ones for risks that allow you to state how many laps to push at the start and the end of each stint.
for example:
Stint 1: [fuel] [clear risk] [overtaking risk] [blocking risk] [laps to push at start] [laps to push at end] Stint 2: [fuel] [clear risk] [overtaking risk] [blocking risk] [laps to push at start] [laps to push at end] Stint 3: and so on....
I would suggest the term push would need to defined, whether it would mean double the risks used during the stint, + a certain amount (either fixed or dependent on your group), or 100% risks...
just bringing this up... I did not want to use risks on the first 5 dry laps that we had last race, but because of this limitation (that doesn't make sense) I had to tell my driver to push like an idiot with wet tyres on dry track of 47 degrees. this one is not such a complex change, is just I think its pretty obvious that if I have wet tyres and the track is dry, I don't want him to push like crazy on that first period, but I do want him to do it after when the track is dry, and I have dry tyres.
I think it's totally obvious and makes perfect sense. If you are allowing different risks for the weather, then why not take in to account the compound being used in case someone is starting with rain tyres on a dry track.
Quote ( Daniel Douglas @ November 6th 2014,11:57:02 )
No, that is not obvious at all and is a tactical decision.
Why anyone would start that race on wets is beyond me anyway. Talk about laying down rubber (regardless of risks).
well, I believe each one of us should have the option to select whatever tactic we want to use, and not be limited by the system in this particular aspect.
Seems a good suggestion. Off course GPRO is not real F1. But any thing that makes GPRO more close to real F1 will be great and make game more interesting. Will be tough on scripts for sure.
Quote ( Hélio Romeu @ November 6th 2014,12:10:51 )
well, I believe each one of us should have the option to select whatever tactic we want to use, and not be limited by the system in this particular aspect.
Personally I can´t say I have anything against it...although it seems for me just a big bluff...of course , up to a certain level where people make so many different choices (sometimes we can call them mistakes too) this could have an interesting effect to watch (not just positive , but dissapointing too) ...
that makes me think , this particular change will just "tickle" people´s private impressions of the game , make them feel like they´re behind the wheels for a few laps...but litteraly , I don´t think this is a tactical improvement...the main choices u need to make and improve at the top levels, at least ,won´t give u too much tactical adavantage , but more like it will give u a higher probability of making mistakes if u don´t pay attention to all your race configuration screen
For the best teams and experienced managers ,adding this idea will probably take a few seconds to set it and just leave it as it is(don´t know about the work the admins have to do to implement it though)... this is no part of changing the balance between favorites and underdogs in a certain race...it´s effect is 0 compared to the already existing choices that a manager can make in the upper levels and not just only...
Quote ( Hélio Romeu @ November 6th 2014,12:10:51 )
well, I believe each one of us should have the option to select whatever tactic we want to use, and not be limited by the system in this particular aspect.
The real world doesn't work like that. You are playing a game that has a system. It takes effort to change that system. It's not going to be changed on a whim, there needs to be some tangible benefit.
I think that we have unfortunately already gone quite a ways down this slippery slope with the introduction of "CT Wet" vs "CT Dry" risks, and I think that's a bad thing. The system that we currently have allows for variations in strategy based on how you predict the weather will unfold. Do you start on dry tires or wet tires? If you go for wet tires in the dry, do you push 100CT like you might otherwise if the compounds match? If you know that you cannot push 100CT in the dry with wet tires without doing serious damage, does that skew your decision more towards starting on dry tires in the dry? It should have.
I keep seeing these sorts of threads popping up, and I feel like they're almost always in response to someone having taking a gamble that didn't pay off. Instead of blaming themselves for having taken the gamble instead of the "safe" option, they try to blame the lack of flexibility in the system for essentially forcing them to make a poor decision, like so:
Quote ( Hélio Romeu @ November 6th 2014,11:47:29 )
I did not want to use risks on the first 5 dry laps that we had last race, but because of this limitation (that doesn't make sense) I had to tell my driver to push like an idiot with wet tyres on dry track of 47 degrees.
The obvious solution in this case was to start on dry tires, not to blame a broken system.
One of the most important aspects of the game is the uncertainty built into it. We all have tools and formulas for getting ideal setups, tire distance, fuel consumption, and even wear. Weather is one of the few areas of the game where we still have some measure of uncertainty, and it is that small degree of uncertainty that provides room for error and allows the better tactical managers to separate themselves from the rest of the pack. The recent trend towards making this game easier by giving managers options to adjust for every possible contingency is very concerning.
Quote ( Hélio Romeu @ November 6th 2014,11:47:29 )
just bringing this up... I did not want to use risks on the first 5 dry laps that we had last race, but because of this limitation (that doesn't make sense) I had to tell my driver to push like an idiot with wet tyres on dry track of 47 degrees. this one is not such a complex change, is just I think its pretty obvious that if I have wet tyres and the track is dry, I don't want him to push like crazy on that first period, but I do want him to do it after when the track is dry, and I have dry tyre
So what you are saying is you want the benefit of starting on the wet tyre without any of the negative side of it..........
Its basic risk vs reward , you are risking starting on the wet tyre, the potential reward is to not wear the tyres enough to not have to pit during the wet period therefore gaining time.
Quote ( Kevin Mcferrin @ November 6th 2014,13:25:52 )
The obvious solution in this case was to start on dry tires, not to blame a broken system.
completely agree ...this is where the tactical decision should have been made
Quote ( Kevin Mcferrin @ November 6th 2014,13:25:52 )
I keep seeing these sorts of threads popping up, and I feel like they're almost always in response to someone having taking a gamble that didn't pay off. Instead of blaming themselves for having taken the gamble instead of the "safe" option, they try to blame the lack of flexibility in the system for essentially forcing them to make a poor decision
excelent point ... +1
Quote ( Kevin Mcferrin @ November 6th 2014,13:25:52 )
One of the most important aspects of the game is the uncertainty built into it. We all have tools and formulas for getting ideal setups, tire distance, fuel consumption, and even wear. Weather is one of the few areas of the game where we still have some measure of uncertainty, and it is that small degree of uncertainty that provides room for error and allows the better tactical managers to separate themselves from the rest of the pack. The recent trend towards making this game easier by giving managers options to adjust for every possible contingency is very concerning.
I don´t find it concerning as long as u always get the possibility to activate/deactivate such an option....that´s why I don´t have anything against it
The Gpro comunity has grown a lot ...same has happened with people interests and reasons for which they keep playing this game...
but for the people who really wish to achieve something in this game , they should know that Gpro will never be F1....one of the main bases of success is the accuracy of the gathering data process..too many changes and options will waste this process and compromise their own development
Then why my driver is pushing like an idiot even if the track is not clear. Why can't I tell him to stop pushing the car like crazy if he can't overtake anyway to save some car wear.
Quote ( Ceapa Florin @ November 6th 2014,12:46:31 )
For the best teams and experienced managers ,adding this idea will probably take a few seconds to set it and just leave it as it is(don´t know about the work the admins have to do to implement it though)... this is no part of changing the balance between favorites and underdogs in a certain race...it´s effect is 0 compared to the already existing choices that a manager can make in the upper levels and not just only...
Well, it would open up at least 2-3 strategy options that I can think of that would work in all levels.
Firstly, in races that have a variable temperature you can play with risks so that you tyres can make it if temps rise. Currently you can use fuel but that does not always work that well. Granted, the differences in temps are usually small but there are cases you could make one stop less, if this system would be used.
A second strategy option that would be more feasible compared to current fuel induced pits is a fast first stint for frontrunners who could pull enought of a cap in their first stint so they can avoid being blocked by the midfield. Example: The fastest way to go is a 2 stopper but you have some 10% wear left over in every stint. As it stands it is not feasible to do a quick 1st stint and use the tyres to their ideal wear later with less fuel initillay because you will spend a few laps being blocked by the symmetrical drivers that usually negates any benefits you might have had. If you can however use a little more risk in your first stint you could pull it off a bit better while risking DMs and higher wear. This is probably more feasible in the lower leagues but still.
A third thing to concider is that initially the pack is very much together and if you are in the midfield your CT has less effect because you almost never have a CT in front of you. So you could try to go low risk at first and then try to push after the trains have become less common.
I havent done any calculations on these so they are just observations so they could be very wrong. And it would add a layer of complexity that most newcomers couldn't do, because tyre wear vs. risk vs. temp in the 1 - 2 laps accuracy is not really that easy concidering temp is always in a random window.
in race setup and strategy i think that would be nice if we get options for risks between pits , for example in until pit one i use for example 20-30-0-5 of ricks after pit one i can use only riscks for clear track etc ...
I like the idea the as it was originally presented. Risks in stint 1, risks in stint 2, risks in stint 3, etc.
I spend most of my race-prep time in setting up car. Not near as much time deciding risks, so don't think it complicates things much for the managers.
Quote ( John Henderson @ November 6th 2014,14:54:04 )
Then why my driver is pushing like an idiot even if the track is not clear. Why can't I tell him to stop pushing the car like crazy if he can't overtake anyway to save some car wear.
I think the bigger question is how? How many risks can you take behind someone that you are easily keeping pace with? Is your driver doing donuts behind them to kill time while they wait for a passing opportunity?
Not a serious backing of the question, just an amusing thought.
Quote ( Malcolm Christiansen @ November 6th 2014,15:08:49 )
I think the bigger question is how? How many risks can you take behind someone that you are easily keeping pace with? Is your driver doing donuts behind them to kill time while they wait for a passing opportunity?
Not a serious backing of the question, just an amusing thought.
Yeah, it's the way risks and overtaking are calculated. The blocker has a much larger advatage compared to current F1 but realistic in terms of the first half of the 2000's - unles you are 1-1.5 seconds faster per lap you shall not pass and even then it was tricky. That's the reason behind the reduction of downforce, DRS-KERS gimmicks etc. Now in a real life F1 the driver behind would coast untill a pitstop window opened up and either try an undercut or overcut. I am not entirely sure how the calculation is done done in terms of tyre and car wear when it comes to CTR vs OTR vs BR but I usually asume CT risks for all calculations. So yeah, he is unable to pass and would be able to keep up without any risk but is being futile and still pushing all the way in my eyes...
Quote ( Gustav Gerretz @ November 6th 2014,14:33:52 )
Well, it would open up at least 2-3 strategy options that I can think of that would work in all levels.
Firstly, in races that have a variable temperature you can play with risks so that you tyres can make it if temps rise. Currently you can use fuel but that does not always work that well. Granted, the differences in temps are usually small but there are cases you could make one stop less, if this system would be used.
A second strategy option that would be more feasible compared to current fuel induced pits is a fast first stint for frontrunners who could pull enought of a cap in their first stint so they can avoid being blocked by the midfield. Example: The fastest way to go is a 2 stopper but you have some 10% wear left over in every stint. As it stands it is not feasible to do a quick 1st stint and use the tyres to their ideal wear later with less fuel initillay because you will spend a few laps being blocked by the symmetrical drivers that usually negates any benefits you might have had. If you can however use a little more risk in your first stint you could pull it off a bit better while risking DMs and higher wear. This is probably more feasible in the lower leagues but still.
A third thing to concider is that initially the pack is very much together and if you are in the midfield your CT has less effect because you almost never have a CT in front of you. So you could try to go low risk at first and then try to push after the trains have become less common.
I havent done any calculations on these so they are just observations so they could be very wrong. And it would add a layer of complexity that most newcomers couldn't do, because tyre wear vs. risk vs. temp in the 1 - 2 laps accuracy is not really that easy concidering temp is always in a random window.
As I said , I don´t have anything against it...my only question stays the same...does it really pay off , if this changes need a huge amount of work from the admins ?...does it realy pay off in the upper levels where the balance between managers is very tight??...does it serve each manager´s private management and financial plan ??does it really bring a plus in the attempt to try and control as much as possible the uncertainty aspect of a race condition?
If u ask me this change could bring more positive effects in the lower levels only(mostly because of the variety of strategies u can find in there)--> still if u wanna build a long term strategy u will need to adapt your playing style to the upcoming levels...in the upper levels this might be a choice for managers who wish to contain a certain minimal result...I doubt they wouldn´t be able to do that in the current system as well...but it´s hard for me to see right now what´s in for winning or higher objectives , as it will still be imposible to use a higher CT risk than 100 to make up for the time loss while saving your tires
Edit : let´s also keep in mind that a tactical plan or even a one race strategy will always need more than just the possibility to transmit to your driver how much of his current potential should he use , and when exactly...
Quote ( Ceapa Florin @ November 6th 2014,15:34:08 )
my only question stays the same...does it really pay off , if this changes need a huge amount of work from the admins ?
In theory (if you don't know the code it is hard to estimate) it shouldn't be that much of work because they were able to introduce the wet risk setting. Interface change would add inputboxes behind fuel inputbox in the race strategy screen and in the pit function you would just change CT variable as they do now in the weather change routine. So in theory not much work at all. BUT I could be very wrong here, it all depends on the way the thing is coded.
Quote ( Ceapa Florin @ November 6th 2014,15:34:08 )
If u ask me this change could bring more positive effects in the lower levels only(mostly because of the variety of strategies u can find in there)
As most players are in lower leagues it is not that much of a problem. As it stands they have much less to play with as it is so why not give them something to toy around with. It could infact give you some more insight into risks and tyre wear a bit faster. As it stands it takes ages to figure out as you have to find a race ona track with equal T and wear to actually test any risk influence in fine detail.
English
Deutsch
Español
Română
Italiano
Português
Português
Français
Polski
Русский
Български
Македонски
Српски
Nederlands
Vlaams
Suomi
Lietuvių
Čeština
Magyar
Eesti keel
Slovenčina
Türkçe
Shqip
Ελληνικά
Hrvatski
Dansk
Pirate
