GPGSL Season 8 Round 17 - Bacon, Eggs & Black Puddin' GP - Silverstone - GB [My Mum's black pudding is so black, even the white bits are black!][Final version of both csm mods released]

MDBSnake Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Diax F1 Schreef:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Rico Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > And why ist
> > > this called an Annoucement?
> >
> > It's to inform of the upcoming trial of that
> > qualifying system in the 2 testers races in
> > Luxembourg and GB.
>
> So this means that if you have had a good race
> result, you will start in the top 12? - It also
> means that if you DNF in the race before your
> chances of 'climbing back on the horse' for the
> next race are pretty slim, only 2 of 12 drivers
> get a shot of the Q2 part ....
>
> I don't like it. Have all 22 compete, then let the
> 10/12 quickest battle it out in 'Q2'.

As I said, it's solely a trial. If it doesn't work out, it can be binned and other options could be considered

---

MDBSnake Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Diax F1 Schreef:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Rico Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > And why ist
> > > this called an Annoucement?
> >
> > It's to inform of the upcoming trial of that
> > qualifying system in the 2 testers races in
> > Luxembourg and GB.
>
> So this means that if you have had a good race
> result, you will start in the top 12? - It also
> means that if you DNF in the race before your
> chances of 'climbing back on the horse' for the
> next race are pretty slim, only 2 of 12 drivers
> get a shot of the Q2 part ....
>
> I don't like it. Have all 22 compete, then let the
> 10/12 quickest battle it out in 'Q2'.


I'd agree with Maikel that it maybe punishes DNFs from the previous race a little too much - they already suffer from having no performance boost! Will be interested to see this trialled however.







Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/25/2013 10:32PM by brunoboi.

Should be interesting to see how the trial works out for the testers feature race.

Out of curiousity, back in the days of WGP and W300, did any 1 team dominate most of the seasons?

---

Mullet345 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Should be interesting to see how the trial works
> out for the testers feature race.
>
> Out of curiousity, back in the days of WGP and
> W300, did any 1 team dominate most of the seasons?

w300 was Team Orange. Can't quite remember if anyone dominated in the WGP - all I remember is my team toiling at the back

---

Mullet345 Schreef:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Should be interesting to see how the trial works
> out for the testers feature race.
>
> Out of curiousity, back in the days of WGP and
> W300, did any 1 team dominate most of the seasons?

in WGP possible Subaru Racing followed up by Devil Fox Racing, can't remember much more - with the few seasons it's not really a reference point either

---

If you are racing, keep on racing and get some points!

GPG Super League S11 | Driver #41 | Team-manager | Snake Motorsports Racing Group | Next Race: Emmeloord - Flevoland GP | Constructors: 10th | Best Race Finish: 1st
GPG Super League Season 9 Testers Champion*

W300 was great with KGR Pink cars on the grid!

Kx
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I too agree with Maikel, this makes it even harder to fight back to the top in the next race after a bad finish. Also it's more work for the RDs.
Why not keeping it simple: 6 laps for every driver (->2 flying laps), with only 11 drivers on track at the same time. This way we should also get rid of the problem that after the first runs 1 driver always stays in the pits in the following runs when ConsecutiveCars is set to 22.


brunoboi schrieb:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Shadow are still limping to the the end of the
> season...
>
> Surely, we are the best example of how this
> current season's rules have absolutely worked -
> we've gone from being seen as one of the biggest
> teams consistently challenging for wins to being
> stuck in the midfield pack struggling to get in
> the top ten!
>
> Look at the numbers:
>
> Team | Boost Used | Change in Championship
> position
>
> ONE | 28 | + 9 (11th > 2nd)
> DER | 28 | + 4 (10th > 6th)
> SCR | 28 | + 3 (8th > 5th)
> MAC | 26 | - 2 (9th < 11th)
> SMI | 19 | + 2 (6th > 4th)
> CVX | 18 | - 5 (5th < 10th)
> SMS | 14 | - 2 (7th < 9th)
> TSM | 14 | - 5 (2nd < 7th)
> MPR | 12 | - (3rd - 3rd)
> AMR | 08 | - (1st - 1st)
> TNR | 06 | - 4 (4th < 8th)
>
> I don't think it's a coincidence that the four
> teams who have moved up the championship standings
> are ALL in the top 5 for having used the most
> boost this season! This system was designed to
> help some of the bottom teams who really struggled
> to get on the pace of the higher teams so they can
> enjoy the series more. Am I the only one that
> thinks this has obviously worked? Granted AMR are
> still winning but this may be because their
> immediate rivals - TSM, TNR and to an extent MPR -
> all have had very tough seasons.
>
> The new system does exactly what people wanted it
> to do and has done a great deal to remove the
> advantage of the long term teams. People should
> stop complaining and start focusing on how they
> can further improve their teams. They should start
> looking at how they can use these rules to their
> advantage in future seasons. TSM have arguably
> lost most but I must say that, although I am
> hating every moment of the bloody season, I can't
> wait for S9 to begin our fight back!

Pretty tough season for us indeed, at least 4 fastest laps show that we theoretically have the speed.

---

Some mods
F1 1996 | F1 2002 | F1 2007 | F1 2011 | F1 2013 | F1 2015 | F1 2018

oh dear, I've been in switzerland for two days and this is what i have to read when i come back

to add something on topic: at some point we should try reversing the grid order. so the number one team goes into spot 22, number 2 into 21 etc. i'm not sure but i think there's at least a possibility that the order of teams influences performances in a way we don't or can't control.

---

used to be GPGSL's Nick Heidfeld

Have to say I'm not a fan Dean. As has already been pointed out the guys who have one bad race will constantly be punished as they are likely to be knocked out in Q1 and hence start at the back again, which will essentially create a catch 22 effect where they continually get screwed over.

I'd personally like to see the 2006+ F1 qualifying system trialled.

And as for a perf reset, I'd just leave the series I think if it was introduced.

---

Races: 163 - Wins: 23 - Pole Positions: 24 - Fastest Laps: 22
Season 9: Constructors' Champions

Ferrari2007 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Have to say I'm not a fan Dean. As has already
> been pointed out the guys who have one bad race
> will constantly be punished as they are likely to
> be knocked out in Q1 and hence start at the back
> again, which will essentially create a catch 22
> effect where they continually get screwed over.
>
> I'd personally like to see the 2006+ F1 qualifying
> system trialled.
>
> And as for a perf reset, I'd just leave the series
> I think if it was introduced.

I can understand the logic you're all coming from - I ran a couple of examples just to see how it would function and Michael Pedersen appeared to be at the back virtually every time.

What I'll do instead is to reverse the order of the previous race (i.e. the top 12 of the previous race going into Q1 with those who finished 13th-22nd being put straight into Q2). That way the guys who have a bad race are given the opportunity to make amends in the following race.

---

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/25/2013 11:02PM by Diax F1.

I'm still not a fan of this idea since it really complicates things and since I'm generally not a fan of last race based qualifyings. Even more so not in a game that is to a good extend based on randomness. And what we shouldn't forget is that GP4 isn't Moto GP. In Moto GP there are many overtakes, which makes it relatively easy for a faster driver to fight back to the front of the grid in a race. In GP4 we have seen top cars being stuck behind slower cars for many many rounds, even on tracks where reality would offer many chances to overtake.
The mentioned system might work well in Moto GP, but I don't think it will work in GP4.

Let's have this trial in the test series, but I don't think I'll be a fan of it. Tobi's suggestion ((6 rounds with 2 fast laps and 11 cars on track)) is a lot easier to follow, easier for the RD and not quite as much a gamble as the one lap qualifying. I think I prefer that one.


GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)

JohnMaverick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm still not a fan of this idea since it really
> complicates things and since I'm generally not a
> fan of last race based qualifyings. Even more so
> not in a game that is to a good extend based on
> randomness. And what we shouldn't forget is that
> GP4 isn't Moto GP. In Moto GP there are many
> overtakes, which makes it relatively easy for a
> faster driver to fight back to the front of the
> grid in a race. In GP4 we have seen top cars being
> stuck behind slower cars for many many rounds,
> even on tracks where reality would offer many
> chances to overtake.
> The mentioned system might work well in Moto GP,
> but I don't think it will work in GP4.
>
> Let's have this trial in the test series, but I
> don't think I'll be a fan of it. Tobi's suggestion
> ((6 rounds with 2 fast laps and 11 cars on track))
> is a lot easier to follow, easier for the RD and
> not quite as much a gamble as the one lap
> qualifying. I think I prefer that one.

In truth, MotoGP use the combined practice results to decide who is in that 'top 10' and not the last race results. Obviously that isn't possible here given practice sessions are done with test drivers.

---

I would quite like to see something similar to the F1 Manager game where the FP results help to influence boosts or qualifying performances of the race drivers. I'm not sure exactly how it'd be done in the GPGSL but what do people think about this?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unless I'm very much mistaken... I am very much mistaken!

oensan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I would quite like to see something similar to the
> F1 Manager game where the FP results help to
> influence boosts or qualifying performances of the
> race drivers. I'm not sure exactly how it'd be
> done in the GPGSL but what do people think about
> this?


I suggested something like this a while back, Owen. It didn't go down well.



5 x WCC - S5, S6, S7, S8, S10 | 4 x WDC - S5 Nick van der Voort ; S6, S7, S8 Ed Greenhalgh | 2 x WTC - S6 Stuart Ingers; S8 Andrei Sevastian

brunoboi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Shadow are still limping to the the end of the
> season...
>
> Surely, we are the best example of how this
> current season's rules have absolutely worked -
> we've gone from being seen as one of the biggest
> teams consistently challenging for wins to being
> stuck in the midfield pack struggling to get in
> the top ten!
>
> Look at the numbers:
>
> Team | Boost Used | Change in Championship
> position
>
> ONE | 28 | + 9 (11th > 2nd)
> DER | 28 | + 4 (10th > 6th)
> SCR | 28 | + 3 (8th > 5th)
> MAC | 26 | - 2 (9th < 11th)
> SMI | 19 | + 2 (6th > 4th)
> CVX | 18 | - 5 (5th < 10th)
> SMS | 14 | - 2 (7th < 9th)
> TSM | 14 | - 5 (2nd < 7th)
> MPR | 12 | - (3rd - 3rd)
> AMR | 08 | - (1st - 1st)
> TNR | 06 | - 4 (4th < 8th)
>
> I don't think it's a coincidence that the four
> teams who have moved up the championship standings
> are ALL in the top 5 for having used the most
> boost this season! This system was designed to
> help some of the bottom teams who really struggled
> to get on the pace of the higher teams so they can
> enjoy the series more. Am I the only one that
> thinks this has obviously worked? Granted AMR are
> still winning but this may be because their
> immediate rivals - TSM, TNR and to an extent MPR -
> all have had very tough seasons.
>
> The new system does exactly what people wanted it
> to do and has done a great deal to remove the
> advantage of the long term teams. People should
> stop complaining and start focusing on how they
> can further improve their teams. They should start
> looking at how they can use these rules to their
> advantage in future seasons. TSM have arguably
> lost most but I must say that, although I am
> hating every moment of the bloody season, I can't
> wait for S9 to begin our fight back!


Looking at this it would seem that these rules have actually penalised the 3 teams who actually posed the greatest threat to AMR for this season, those being TSM, MPR and TNR.

As Tom said, we've all struggled this season. MPR may seem to have tread water as we are still 3rd but we are actually currently on the verge of dropping to 4th.

Realistically, with TSM struggling so badly most people would probably expect MPR to be 2nd.

It seems as though AMR's superior perf, coupled with arguably the two strongest drivers on the grid, meant that despite it's limited amount of boost points it was able to stay ahead of the pack while we've all been swamped due to our limited boost compared to say ONE who had enough to spend about 4 at each race.

The problem I see is that due to having such a huge amount of boost available and due to it all going to plan early in the season for ONE they've actually built up an incredibly strong perf, yet still have all of that boost available to them which has meant they've trounced us.

I think the problem is that we've actually turned the series into a championship where you actually want to either finish top, or be last. Finishing 3rd is actually useless as we will just suffer the same problem next season where we simply don't have a strong enough perf to compensate for such a limited amount of boost.

Please can we all have the same amount of boost next season so that this is avoided.

I'm sorry if that seems dickish to the small teams but why should the stronger teams be made to suffer at their expense.

You know how good it felt in season 2 to finish 4th overall? It was great. Season 4 was fantastic as we chased Velox down to the wire in both Championships and even pipped Shadow in the Constructors. You know why that felt like some sort of achievement? Because it had taken time. I'd built up the team through my own decisions and through a whole lot of luck. It wasn't handed out to me in the form of extra boost.

When MAC and Christel arrived did we hand them a shite load of boost? No we didn't. I think you know something is wrong with the rules when they drive a manger out, which is efficiently what happened to Chris.

This isn't a stab at Stu, or Aston or the GPGSL board at all. I love competing against Aston, and I hugely appreciate the board for running this fantastic series which I've now been part of for 5 years.

---

Races: 163 - Wins: 23 - Pole Positions: 24 - Fastest Laps: 22
Season 9: Constructors' Champions

Dan that's nicely explained, a lot better than me!

I agree with what you say where you mention the true AMR threats have all been hit this year. And the gripe being despite the shuffle of order below with the lower ranks progressing, AMR are umtouched from it. The question is have One built up enough momentum to make a challenge with their perf? At the expense of losing 3 other close candidates who have all dropped back?

And the next part about the system also rings true - you want to be up top or rock bottom.

Thinking about it, the midfield is a very bad place to be next season. I think its going to be tough, because as you say, the current system is going to be good for the top 2/3 and the bottom 2/3 with perf and boosts available and lack of oomph to push to the upper positions. I think the midfield is just going to bob around much unchanged.

Snake and Mac will do well this way.

Reverting to same boosts would be good. It means the year starts with teams like One in place of MPR and TSS which is refreshing.

Otherwise, based on the evidence, I would be looking to blow all my boosts in the first 3 rounds and ride the wave from that as it seems to work for other teams.


Jenson drives it like he owns it; Lewis drives it like he stole it



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/2013 01:04AM by danm.

Everybody is up in arms about AMR winning the last 3 years, why doesn't anyone comment on the fact that MAC have finished last for the last 3 years.

Its just as important, the only difference is that no one cares because it is in there benefit that we are no good.

In my opinion if you are going to try and fix one (AMR dominance) then you have to try and fix the other (MAC struggle).

---

Retro Liveries on the SMD-ZG02![www.grandprixgames.org]
Retro Renders 2.0 on the SMD-ZG02LN![www.grandprixgames.org]

You know guys, playing political games is one thing and you're welcome to do so. But then, please, check your evidence before you throw out paroles.

ONE Racing used their first 4 boosts points at Round 4, and another 4 at round 6! None before.

Demon used 1 at Round 2, and 2 points at rounds 3 and 4.

So much to using all the boost in the first races.


Next thing is that using high boosts always goes along with increased failure rates. So sure a team can blow up all the boost in a couple of races. But if they then DNF because of it, they've lost a lot more than they could have won. Not to mention that such teams will massively lack the extra power later when several teams hit the perf caps and only a boost can make a difference!

And the fact that midfield teams are the losers of it isn't valid either! In fact, the higher you end up in the championship, the less you can compensate for! Granted that maybe this season Ed's perf helped AMR to cover that lack of boost for the most part, but don't forget, for example, that unlike other seasons before, AMR isn't running away with one victory after the other at the end of the season, this time.
There is a 2 point boost gap from each team to the next. If you finish first, you end up with just 12 boost points. So how should that be any better to a midfield team with 18 or 24 points? If you think that attacking from the back with more boost points is the way, then try to use some tactics to finish worse in one season and try your luck! It just could be another facet to the game. But either way, it's not a valid statement that midfield teams are the losers of this. Especially not since next season ONE might have very little boost compared to other teams, so that things might turn around again and mix the grid again. And after all that was what you asked for before this season.


GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)

Well I believe these new rules were actually introduced to help teams such as yours Nathan and Maikel's, but they've actually done the complete opposite and MAC and SMS have fallen behind. Surely a sign that they have failed.

Don't worry though, you'll get a whole chunk of boost and will finish second next season, only to then have none the following season and tumble down the order once again.

But seriously I do agree with you. I'm not saying that ONE and Demon should have been 10th and 11th this season, but approach it from the standpoint of Maikel or Nathan, or even Chris and think how unfair it is for you to see your team absolutely blitzed in the championship by the two new teams, while you have worked to build your team up and move forward.

I'd actually happily start with an equal amount of boost as the teams that finish ahead of us in the Championship if it meant the whole field had an equal amount of boost.

Let's be honest, was the series more enjoyable last season? From my standpoint it certainly was, and not because my team had a better season but because the results weren't quite so mad.

I currently feel that if I don't use any team boost, as I chose not to at the two previous races, I have to settle for at least both cars in the top 10 if I'm lucky.

I just want to point out here that it might also come across as if I'm bashing the new teams. I'm not bashing them at all, it has been a pleasure to be joined by Glen and Rodrigo this season as teambosses. I'm more annoyed with the situation that has befallen those teams, not with those guys themselves.

Edit: Just to add John that this has nothing to do with politicising, or any crap like that I'm just honestly saying how I see it.

I don't see how you can say the mid teams didn't get screwed over though, all of them except VSM (Whatever Rico is currently calling his team) have gone backwards.

And I think I was pretty clear that I wasn't a fan of shaking up the field at all, prior to the start of the season.

---

Races: 163 - Wins: 23 - Pole Positions: 24 - Fastest Laps: 22
Season 9: Constructors' Champions



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/2013 01:32AM by Ferrari2007.

Where's your point, Dan? Last season we had Christel blitzing the field. The year before it was SCR. Both with the old systems. So that's not only a phenomenon of the changed boost system.

And that MAC is still at the end of the field is a mix of bad luck paired with unfortunate decisions. However, seeing that MAC only had 2 boost points less than ONE or Demon it's surely not related to this.

Anyway, what the heck am I doing here? I'm in holidays and supposed to have fun! Consider me out of this discussion for now.


GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)