GPGSL Season 6 Complete!
Posted by GPGSL
I have to say I really don't like this idea I'm sorry. The idea of a promotion and relegation system is the most off putting point to me. I had to wait to get my team into what is now called "the top tier" and I think other people should as well. I think, if it needed to be done at all then it should have just been left that a GPGSL team partners with a team on the waiting list and their testers test for that team. That way, teams on the waiting list would get coverage but still have to wait and GPGSL teams will still have test drivers to call on if they need them.
I also forsee a problem, and correct me if I am wrong with this. Surely if promoted teams start with the base perf then they are the weaker teams. After a number of seasons I think there will be a number of yo-yo teams that just bounce up and down from top tier and bottom tier without any chance of progressing. I know that the argument will be that these teams should sign top drivers and use boosts properly but I know how hard it was to sign good drivers in my first season. Thankfully I managed to get Jack, and then Micheal for this season. I just don't see how a team can develop over a number of seasons.
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/23/2011 06:18PM by CaptinFranko.
I also forsee a problem, and correct me if I am wrong with this. Surely if promoted teams start with the base perf then they are the weaker teams. After a number of seasons I think there will be a number of yo-yo teams that just bounce up and down from top tier and bottom tier without any chance of progressing. I know that the argument will be that these teams should sign top drivers and use boosts properly but I know how hard it was to sign good drivers in my first season. Thankfully I managed to get Jack, and then Micheal for this season. I just don't see how a team can develop over a number of seasons.
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/23/2011 06:18PM by CaptinFranko.
The basic idea could work imho, but there should be some improvements in the rules (for example, if we have same carshape and same base perf it's not so much a GPGSL2, just a way to avoid 11 teams GP4 limit). I think we should stick on Drivers and Testers for S7 and discuss a GPGSL2 for S8.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/23/2011 06:25PM by Gigi4.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/23/2011 06:25PM by Gigi4.
Gigi4 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The basic idea could work imho, but there should
> be some improvements in the rules (for example, if
> we have same carshape and same base perf it's not
> so much a GPGSL2, just a way to avoid 11 teams
> GP4 limit). I think we should stick on Drivers and
> Testers for S7 and discuss a GPGSL2 for S8.
+1
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
-------------------------------------------------------
> The basic idea could work imho, but there should
> be some improvements in the rules (for example, if
> we have same carshape and same base perf it's not
> so much a GPGSL2, just a way to avoid 11 teams
> GP4 limit). I think we should stick on Drivers and
> Testers for S7 and discuss a GPGSL2 for S8.
+1
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
Honestly,
reading all the comments and thinking about this a second time, I'm also more than a bit surprised. Chris' argument with the yo-yo teams is really a big problem. While the top teams, who will never have to fear to be downgraded, make more and more progress, the small teams will never have the chance to catch up because they're totally set back when they're downgraded to the GPGSL-2. Also the fact that main teams could force the test teams to use their liveries or could dictate other things, make the GPGSL-2 teams a rather abulic thing.
I could list a real bunch of other problems now, but I think that they would fit better in a real discussion. That is, why I eventually give a +1 to the idea to talk about this in more details during S7 and stay with the current system for now. I simply fear that this idea is not progressed enough to be implemented without making a bunch of problems arise.
GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)
reading all the comments and thinking about this a second time, I'm also more than a bit surprised. Chris' argument with the yo-yo teams is really a big problem. While the top teams, who will never have to fear to be downgraded, make more and more progress, the small teams will never have the chance to catch up because they're totally set back when they're downgraded to the GPGSL-2. Also the fact that main teams could force the test teams to use their liveries or could dictate other things, make the GPGSL-2 teams a rather abulic thing.
I could list a real bunch of other problems now, but I think that they would fit better in a real discussion. That is, why I eventually give a +1 to the idea to talk about this in more details during S7 and stay with the current system for now. I simply fear that this idea is not progressed enough to be implemented without making a bunch of problems arise.
GPGSL : Team Owner of 'Maverick Track Performance' (MTP)
Tbh I think the idea could work if we just removed the promotion and relegation idea and run it as a GP2 style feeder series.
Interested in managing an F1 team? Sign up for the Grandprixgames F1 Manager game here
Interested in managing an F1 team? Sign up for the Grandprixgames F1 Manager game here
I don't think the promotion and relegation part of it is going to work.
Say Snake and MAC relegate and Kult-Fernsehen.de Racing and Team Alpha promote after the first GPGSL2 season. John Maverick and Ed will then be a team owner as well as a driver (in the main series), something that is not allowed, right?
The rest of it sounds interesting though
Say Snake and MAC relegate and Kult-Fernsehen.de Racing and Team Alpha promote after the first GPGSL2 season. John Maverick and Ed will then be a team owner as well as a driver (in the main series), something that is not allowed, right?
The rest of it sounds interesting though
Diax F1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CaptinFranko Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Gigi4 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > The basic idea could work imho, but there
> > should
> > > be some improvements in the rules (for
> example,
> > if
> > > we have same carshape and same base perf it's
> > not
> > > so much a GPGSL2, just a way to avoid 11
> teams
> > > GP4 limit). I think we should stick on
> Drivers
> > and
> > > Testers for S7 and discuss a GPGSL2 for S8.
> >
> >
> > +1
>
> +2.
>
> Considering I came up with the idea in the first
> instance (as stated on the announcement), I shall
> point out that my initial plan was for this idea
> to be implemented in Season 8 rather than Season 7
> to give people time to get ready for the change
> (though some of the board considered that this
> idea should be implemented immediately for Season
> 7 - and I wouldn't mind it either way).
>
> All the comments I have read have some merit, thus
> I shall respond:
>
> @John Maverick: This idea came from the logic
> that, with the top teams predominantly running
> away with things at the top and the bottom teams
> struggling for points, the series would stagnate
> unless a team elected the leave the series (or
> were kicked out). By having the promotion and
> relegation aspect, it could potentially help
> prevent such an issue.
>
> @Tom Pellatt: Read my response to John - but I
> agree that it feels a little rushed. Also, I feel
> I should note that they are still your drivers. If
> one of your drivers ever was banned for two races
> for inactivity, you could take your tester from
> the partner team without it counting towards your
> three transfers for the season.
>
> To me, it seems viable. The GPGSL has done test
> feature races in the past - the only difference
> would be that it would be for all 17 races (and it
> would just be the race everyone sees, meaning less
> work for the RD in comparison to the
> aforementioned feature races).
>
> @Connor Steer: Stu answered that one for me, so I
> have no more to say.
>
> @Owen Edwards: Read my response to John.
>
> @Chris Copeman: GPGSL teams would still have their
> test drivers to call on - after all, the partner
> team in the lower tier would only be loaning the
> test drivers of the GPGSL team.
>
> Also, I must admit that I do see a problem with
> teams being unable to progress beyond a yo-yo
> state - and in hindsight, I realise that it would
> be necessary to make changes in order to prevent
> such a problem if this idea comes into force. I
> have in mind a simple potential solutions: reduce
> the gap between the top and bottom teams in the
> GPGSL.
>
> @Gianluigi Silvestre: See the top of this post.
>
>
>
> On reflection (and reading further comments), I
> realise that it was a tad foolish to only have the
> discussion with the GPGSLRS in regards to this
> idea - and that by attempting to rush it out for
> Season 7, it has come across as a really poor
> idea.
I know you have already answered this but to reiterate my point I think this would do exactly the opposite. As I said before if we have promotion and relegation then teams are never going to have the chance to develop to get anywhere near the top teams.
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/23/2011 07:17PM by CaptinFranko.
-------------------------------------------------------
> CaptinFranko Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Gigi4 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > The basic idea could work imho, but there
> > should
> > > be some improvements in the rules (for
> example,
> > if
> > > we have same carshape and same base perf it's
> > not
> > > so much a GPGSL2, just a way to avoid 11
> teams
> > > GP4 limit). I think we should stick on
> Drivers
> > and
> > > Testers for S7 and discuss a GPGSL2 for S8.
> >
> >
> > +1
>
> +2.
>
> Considering I came up with the idea in the first
> instance (as stated on the announcement), I shall
> point out that my initial plan was for this idea
> to be implemented in Season 8 rather than Season 7
> to give people time to get ready for the change
> (though some of the board considered that this
> idea should be implemented immediately for Season
> 7 - and I wouldn't mind it either way).
>
> All the comments I have read have some merit, thus
> I shall respond:
>
> @John Maverick: This idea came from the logic
> that, with the top teams predominantly running
> away with things at the top and the bottom teams
> struggling for points, the series would stagnate
> unless a team elected the leave the series (or
> were kicked out). By having the promotion and
> relegation aspect, it could potentially help
> prevent such an issue.
>
> @Tom Pellatt: Read my response to John - but I
> agree that it feels a little rushed. Also, I feel
> I should note that they are still your drivers. If
> one of your drivers ever was banned for two races
> for inactivity, you could take your tester from
> the partner team without it counting towards your
> three transfers for the season.
>
> To me, it seems viable. The GPGSL has done test
> feature races in the past - the only difference
> would be that it would be for all 17 races (and it
> would just be the race everyone sees, meaning less
> work for the RD in comparison to the
> aforementioned feature races).
>
> @Connor Steer: Stu answered that one for me, so I
> have no more to say.
>
> @Owen Edwards: Read my response to John.
>
> @Chris Copeman: GPGSL teams would still have their
> test drivers to call on - after all, the partner
> team in the lower tier would only be loaning the
> test drivers of the GPGSL team.
>
> Also, I must admit that I do see a problem with
> teams being unable to progress beyond a yo-yo
> state - and in hindsight, I realise that it would
> be necessary to make changes in order to prevent
> such a problem if this idea comes into force. I
> have in mind a simple potential solutions: reduce
> the gap between the top and bottom teams in the
> GPGSL.
>
> @Gianluigi Silvestre: See the top of this post.
>
>
>
> On reflection (and reading further comments), I
> realise that it was a tad foolish to only have the
> discussion with the GPGSLRS in regards to this
> idea - and that by attempting to rush it out for
> Season 7, it has come across as a really poor
> idea.
I know you have already answered this but to reiterate my point I think this would do exactly the opposite. As I said before if we have promotion and relegation then teams are never going to have the chance to develop to get anywhere near the top teams.
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/23/2011 07:17PM by CaptinFranko.
I don't like to this idea, to promotion and relegation... because problems posted by other drivers, speccialy Stefan said: "Say Snake and MAC relegate and Kult-Fernsehen.de Racing and Team Alpha promote after the first GPGSL2 season. John Maverick and Ed will then be a team owner as well as a driver (in the main series), something that is not allowed, right?".
I like the idea to make GPGSL2, but without promotion and relegation!!
One Racing driver and team manager
GPGSL-3: champion in 2007/2013/2014!
GPGSL-4: testdrivers champion in Season 11!
I like the idea to make GPGSL2, but without promotion and relegation!!
One Racing driver and team manager
GPGSL-3: champion in 2007/2013/2014!
GPGSL-4: testdrivers champion in Season 11!
Incident 2k9 Escreveu:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think a 'franchise' model might work better in
> this case, but it still might be a struggle to get
> more teamowners and drivers.
Right. But without promotion and relegation. Only make GPGSL2 and I suggest create a performance ranking. When a team wants to retire from GPGSL, the most pointed team on 2nd division enter on GPGSL.
But, repeat: WITHOUT PROMOTION AND RELEGATION!!
One Racing driver and team manager
GPGSL-3: champion in 2007/2013/2014!
GPGSL-4: testdrivers champion in Season 11!
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think a 'franchise' model might work better in
> this case, but it still might be a struggle to get
> more teamowners and drivers.
Right. But without promotion and relegation. Only make GPGSL2 and I suggest create a performance ranking. When a team wants to retire from GPGSL, the most pointed team on 2nd division enter on GPGSL.
But, repeat: WITHOUT PROMOTION AND RELEGATION!!
One Racing driver and team manager
GPGSL-3: champion in 2007/2013/2014!
GPGSL-4: testdrivers champion in Season 11!
I LOLLED ! The GPGSL will die a hasty death now i suppose. Totally unacceptable rule changes rushed in on a dictorial way.
Promotion/relegation? How on earth did you guys think this would work in an acceptable way? it wont.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If in doubt, Flat out."
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/23/2011 08:04PM by Rico.
Promotion/relegation? How on earth did you guys think this would work in an acceptable way? it wont.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If in doubt, Flat out."
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/23/2011 08:04PM by Rico.
GPGSL Announcement
In response to the large negative response regarding the introduction of the GPGSL-2, I personally have decided that it will not be implemented in Season 7.
I apologise for putting forward such a flawed idea to the GPGSLRS - and decree that any further rules changes from henceforth must be discussed with the entire GPGSL community instead of just through the GPGSLRS before they are put into action.
This may earn me some ire from the rest of the GPGSLRS, but I believe that, in respect of the comments made by many respected members of the community, the suggestion would have potentially destroyed the GPGSL.
To the rest of the community, please accept my humble apology - and I dearly hope this sorry mess can be forgotten about as we all prepare for Season 7.
Dean - GPGSLRS
In response to the large negative response regarding the introduction of the GPGSL-2, I personally have decided that it will not be implemented in Season 7.
I apologise for putting forward such a flawed idea to the GPGSLRS - and decree that any further rules changes from henceforth must be discussed with the entire GPGSL community instead of just through the GPGSLRS before they are put into action.
This may earn me some ire from the rest of the GPGSLRS, but I believe that, in respect of the comments made by many respected members of the community, the suggestion would have potentially destroyed the GPGSL.
To the rest of the community, please accept my humble apology - and I dearly hope this sorry mess can be forgotten about as we all prepare for Season 7.
Dean - GPGSLRS
@DEAN, thats the only good step you could make my friend 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If in doubt, Flat out."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If in doubt, Flat out."
Rico Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I LOLLED ! The GPGSL will die a hasty death now i
> suppose. Totally unacceptable rule changes rushed
> in on a dictorial way.
>
> Promotion/relegation? How on earth did you guys
> think this would work in an acceptable way? it
> wont.
Without meaning any offence Rico does have a point. Is it time for a FOTA style team owners association I wonder. We could call ourselves...wait for it....the GPGSL Teams Association. Or GTA for short...Who wouldnt want to be a member of GTA We could be based in San Andreas as well...
GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/23/2011 09:08PM by CaptinFranko.
-------------------------------------------------------
> I LOLLED ! The GPGSL will die a hasty death now i
> suppose. Totally unacceptable rule changes rushed
> in on a dictorial way.
>
> Promotion/relegation? How on earth did you guys
> think this would work in an acceptable way? it
> wont.
Without meaning any offence Rico does have a point. Is it time for a FOTA style team owners association I wonder. We could call ourselves...wait for it....the GPGSL Teams Association. Or GTA for short...Who wouldnt want to be a member of GTA
We could be based in San Andreas as well...GPGSL - Christel VXR team Boss S6-S8, S12 Onwards
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/23/2011 09:08PM by CaptinFranko.
Turbo Lover Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rod_vs Schreef:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Incident 2k9 Escreveu:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > I think a 'franchise' model might work better
> > in
> > > this case, but it still might be a struggle
> to
> > get
> > > more teamowners and drivers.
> >
> >
> > Right. But without promotion and relegation.
> Only
> > make GPGSL2 and I suggest create a performance
> > ranking. When a team wants to retire from
> GPGSL,
> > the most pointed team on 2nd division enter on
> > GPGSL.
> >
> > But, repeat: WITHOUT PROMOTION AND RELEGATION!!
>
>
> AND BRNO!!!!
CaptinFranko Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rico Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I LOLLED ! The GPGSL will die a hasty death now
> i
> > suppose. Totally unacceptable rule changes
> rushed
> > in on a dictorial way.
> >
> > Promotion/relegation? How on earth did you guys
> > think this would work in an acceptable way? it
> > wont.
>
> Without meaning any offence Rico does have a
> point. Is it time for a FOTA style team owners
> association I wonder. We could call
> ourselves...wait for it....the GPGSL Teams
> Association. Or GTA for short...Who wouldnt want
> to be a member of GTA We could be based in San
> Andreas as well...
me.I would prefer being a CosaNostra member.
:P
My GPGSL Career
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rod_vs Schreef:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Incident 2k9 Escreveu:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > I think a 'franchise' model might work better
> > in
> > > this case, but it still might be a struggle
> to
> > get
> > > more teamowners and drivers.
> >
> >
> > Right. But without promotion and relegation.
> Only
> > make GPGSL2 and I suggest create a performance
> > ranking. When a team wants to retire from
> GPGSL,
> > the most pointed team on 2nd division enter on
> > GPGSL.
> >
> > But, repeat: WITHOUT PROMOTION AND RELEGATION!!
>
>
> AND BRNO!!!!
CaptinFranko Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rico Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I LOLLED ! The GPGSL will die a hasty death now
> i
> > suppose. Totally unacceptable rule changes
> rushed
> > in on a dictorial way.
> >
> > Promotion/relegation? How on earth did you guys
> > think this would work in an acceptable way? it
> > wont.
>
> Without meaning any offence Rico does have a
> point. Is it time for a FOTA style team owners
> association I wonder. We could call
> ourselves...wait for it....the GPGSL Teams
> Association. Or GTA for short...Who wouldnt want
> to be a member of GTA
We could be based in San> Andreas as well...
me.I would prefer being a CosaNostra member.
:P
My GPGSL Career
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.