| Autor |
Tema: PARTS USAGE !! |
52 respuestas
|
|
|
|
#31 Publicado el 26-Sep-2006, 17:59:54
|
Citar
|
Pawel,
That would be the real challenge to be the best while everybody start from the same base line.
Powodzenia (I guess it must mean CIAO in Polish)
|
|
|
|
|
|
#32 Publicado el 26-Sep-2006, 18:07:44
|
Citar
|
0k, after reading that this was the last race for turi, i dedicated some time reading what was i missing... and i get here
come on Mister Salvatore, please, dont be so extremist, this isnt a dictatorial game as other we know... people cant start quitting when they ideas r rejected! honestly, and without trying to offend u, as i have an enormous respect over u and ur ideas, u r looking as a spoiled child :) and i cant think that u cant enjoy the game without that kind of info, i honestly cant imagining it :( dont leave man!!
about the subject!
well, having info for each and every part usage, i think it would be a bad idea... having something like "part usage: medium/high/etc..." in general terms, it will add something, but still i think u can have a very good idea of how the usage works when testing and after a couple of races, of course if u pay attention... it isnt necessary to have lots of spreadsheets, i dont have them, and im very confident i dont have problems with usage (at least not predicted :p)
and to add another thoght, i think that if more info is starting to be published about setups, usage, etc... the game will become on a 'hire the best driver' ability :| and this doesnt look to be very funny...
PS:: again... please, dont leave because of this!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#33 Publicado el 26-Sep-2006, 18:35:02
|
Citar
|
|
Powodzenia means good luck :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
#34 Publicado el 26-Sep-2006, 19:35:36
|
Citar
|
|
I like the way it is now... If it would give all the information we need, it would be boring and too easy... Now we have to predict, and if you gather your data, its not too hard to predict...
|
|
|
|
|
|
#35 Publicado el 26-Sep-2006, 19:46:41
|
Citar
|
I also think that the FOBY politics of the staff is WAY MORE drastic than it should be, but hey - that is not a reason to leave :)
We all play for the joy of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#36 Publicado el 26-Sep-2006, 20:27:37
|
Citar
|
@Marcello, I wrote you a mail about it.
and one to Andi Harlander
So let's share it with others so that you will see that it's deeper than this part usage thingy.
Burn out I guess.
If you do not enjoy doing something and you are force to do it than it's call a burden.
As this should be a game and it's not fun anymore for me, than I better quit it and leave the people who enjoy it to play together without somebody complaining about what they find great.
Ciao Marcello.
Andi
As explain below I do not share the game master 's concept, So as I was in the BETA test group since very first seasons. I tried to express my idea. Something have change some other not.
So I decided that I can put my time in something I will really enjoy to play.
Thanks for your friendly words, enjoy the game and be a champion in M-3 (As I will not be there anymore ;)
Ciao, Turi.
I do not like ,and never did even in F1rem, the REVERSE ENGINERING concept of the game.
if you want to play this game and understannd the rule, first collect data over season, from you and as many other as you can. More you are and less season you will need.
Then predict your race and execute your plan, if you have a bit of luck with the market and you can get a Pilot & TD to make it work.
Otherwise wait for another season and start again ....
I play lot mind games, such a backagammon, chess, Poker, snooker ...
You do not need to play the game to understand the rules, but more you play and better you get.
When you do a move you see the result of it and the consequences.
Though does games are not less fun because of that. On the contrary they exist and still will as long as ther will be players on this planet.
So, don't beg me, I'm not the type of guy that wants that.
My decision is final, I already had to be convinced by Pedro & Olivier, who insisted for me joining the beta group.
Because I knew that the game was this way.
But I though new game new phylosophy.
Not just the same stuff, crunch numbers to start understanding the game rules.
Realy You do not need complicated calculation to do well.
I put some fiigures from my 14 seasons in F1rem and it's enough to do well fom rookie to master.
So do not think that I want changes for my benefit.
NO, I would like to see changes so that this game would become a real master mind, and not a competition of who is better at excell!
BTW excell sucks like al microsoft products.
Lotus 123 rules, DR DOS, Memmaker,Wordperfect.
Those were the time ;))
|
|
|
|
|
|
#37 Publicado el 26-Sep-2006, 21:03:15
|
Citar
|
PLEASE: NO MORE FEEDBACK, NO MORE INFORMATION.
DO YOUR HOME WORK, TEST, TAKE NOTES, CREATE YOUR OWN PROGRAMS. IT'S HARD, BUT IF IT WAS EASY IT WOULDN'T BE FUN!
Note: Are capitals allowed?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#38 Publicado el 26-Sep-2006, 21:07:14
|
Citar
|
|
Quote ( Rui Fonseca @ September 26th 2006,21:03:15 )
Note: Are capitals allowed?
Yep, at the beginning of a sencence and at the beginning of some words :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
#39 Publicado el 26-Sep-2006, 21:11:49
|
Citar
|
Salvatore,
io no so niente in relazione a parts usage. Ma nessuno (o pocchi) lo sa.
Lo sai come io che questo giocco bisogna molto "lavoro" e questo mi piacci.
No me piacerebbe vedere un "newbie" vincere un gara e io arrivare secondo.
Non lasci il giocco.
A presto.
translation: if the game was easy it wouldn't be funny
|
|
|
|
|
|
#40 Publicado el 26-Sep-2006, 21:18:58
|
Citar
|
|
Quote ( Rui Fonseca @ September 26th 2006,21:11:49 )
io no so niente in relazione a parts usage. Ma nessuno (o pocchi) lo sa.
Lo sai come io che questo giocco bisogna molto "lavoro" e questo mi piacci.
No me piacerebbe vedere un "newbie" vincere un gara e io arrivare secondo.
Non lasci il giocco.
A presto.
Other languages then english is forbiden in forum (exept international forum) :P
|
|
|
|
|
|
#41 Publicado el 26-Sep-2006, 21:35:49
|
Citar
|
|
I'm just trying to be friendly with Salvatore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#42 Publicado el 26-Sep-2006, 21:38:17
|
Citar
|
|
Rui> So u dont like, when "newbie" finishes before you? :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#43 Publicado el 26-Sep-2006, 21:48:46
|
Citar
|
|
|
|
|
|
#44 Publicado el 26-Sep-2006, 21:49:07
|
Citar
|
|
Neither a newbie neither Kim Raevels, or expecially KIM, that is in the some group than me :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
#45 Publicado el 27-Sep-2006, 12:29:48
|
Citar
|
@ Salvatore: don't whine mate
we all have to guess the tyrewear, usage and stuff
what's the fun about the game if you can predict everything?
So stop complaining, and FOBY
everybody has to FOBY
|
|
|
|
|
|
#46 Publicado el 27-Sep-2006, 12:48:20
|
Citar
|
|
Quote ( Salvatore Difficile @ September 26th 2006,20:27:37 )
As explain below I do not share the game master 's concept, So as I was in the BETA test group since very first seasons. I tried to express my idea. Something have change some other not.
So I decided that I can put my time in something I will really enjoy to play.
You did not share the game master's concept at the other game either but you did play it so that's not a very justifiable reason to quit. Yet you didn't act like a 3 year old child trying to get your ideas through. And by all means I do declare that we CAN'T please everyone, so you are free to choose to play or not to play.
If your decision is final I will personally miss your presence both at the game and in the forum (though not the childish posts ;)) and I am sure you will miss that at least a little as well ;)
And last but not least you are welcome back any time!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#47 Publicado el 27-Sep-2006, 13:06:00
|
Citar
|
|
Quote ( Turi @ September 22nd 2006,09:13:42 )
While feedback to me has always been a big issue, but the admin feel that most things MUST NOT be clear, supposedly to not ruin the game. As any system administrator knows: security by obscurity = no security at all.
In an ideal world there is no reason to go for "security by obscurity" because even if you knew all that is obscured, you still would need to get the "fingerspitzengefühl" to be able to play the game "like the pro's". But this is probably a very hard thing to achieve as gamedesigner.
edit: typo
|
|
|
|
|
|
#48 Publicado el 27-Sep-2006, 13:30:53
|
Citar
|
Vlad
Keep up the good work, there are many players that enjoy it as it is.
However, to me it will only be an enhanced version of what F1rem would have become, if the site was still own by somebody with a brain.
However, what I was asking for was not an enhanced version but a game like there is no other one.
In addition, you might have a short memory, but I do not, and what I am asking here is the same as I was asking to Pedro at the time.
In addition, the reason why Pedro never wanted to changes was that he did not have the time to re-invest in making such a drastic change.
Also, because there were 1600 players playing the game and they would not have understood that the site could have received less attention that it needed.
Though we had started with Pedro, Chris, Hans, Olivier and a few others a F1rem Light version were to put in new idea and development.
Then Pedro sold the site and you know the story.
Below what I aimed for when I asked changes to the game concept.
You might not have understood it.
You might have but did not want to go that way.
In either case, you can consider me a 3-Year-old children, if you want to.
But then I can tell you that articulating such a structured way of thinking in a 3-year-old children's brain. I like to see what this children would become.
So here, the concept you fail to understand from my request and which could have been interesting to debate between players and admin.
Any game is a set of rule clear and concise. (GPRO IS NOT)
These can be as basic as tic-tac-toe (9 slots you play the X I play the O the first one who align 3 wins)
To more challenging set of rules.
Let us have chess as an example.
Why, because chess is easy to learn.
In les than 10 minute, you know how to move the piece on the board; you know the aim of the game.
There is nothing like luck involved in it (no dice like in backgammon for example).
You can build a program on a Cray computer (one of the most powerful one) and still one man's brain can win!!!
So In my lost quest to move this game to such a concept, I strive to move the game from a look a like F1rem concept to something more subtitle.
Where all player would know how to play and what consequence they would face before they do this or that move.
But still some player would be better than others, because they can think fast, they can pick a strategy out of many that will work better than anybody else strategy and win the race and the championship.
With such a game, we could add as many features as we want. Because adding a new features will not say reconsider your know how.
But here a new rule integrates it in you thinking process.
Some says that if the game would such it would be boring.
They prefer to find out by reverse engineering what the rules are by analyzing the data.
In a few seasons from now, as the formula are the same for all, and the possibilities are what they are, there are not a lot of variety in strategy that is possible.
When a few group of people will have crunch enough number to have a competitive advantage on any solo player or new group. The game will end-up in always having the same people racing in Elite and the one that would be able to afford the best Pilot & TD will only win the game.
For the rest they will use there excel to solve all other aspect of the game. From set-up to money management as well as race strategy.
Thrilling isn't it?
That was it was in Firem after 15 season and I played 14.
That what it will be within 3 seasons, in GPRO as reusing the expertise of rem will speed-up the process.
Want to Bet?
Turi, Happy to have some spare time for other thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#49 Publicado el 27-Sep-2006, 13:50:55
|
Citar
|
|
Quote ( Salvatore Difficile @ September 27th 2006,13:30:53 )
Vlad
Keep up the good work, there are many players that enjoy it as it is ... [snip] ... Turi, Happy to have some spare time for other thing.
I quote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#50 Publicado el 27-Sep-2006, 14:05:57
|
Citar
|
|
Quote ( Salvatore Difficile @ September 27th 2006,13:30:53 )
Happy to have some spare time for other thing.
Writing long posts maybe? :-))
Come on Salvatore, you made your point, stop explaining it.
You are beginning to sound like someone who does not get what he wants.
I allways respected you, actually looked up at you, at playing F1REM or GPRO.
Stop playing or keep playing, it's only a game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#51 Publicado el 27-Sep-2006, 15:23:24
|
Citar
|
don't pick too hard on Turi, for he has a very valid point.
His chess-argument is a fundamentaly different point of view than the reversed-engineering one.
You cannot blame him for not wantting to put in the effort to solve the engineering puzzle and thus work out the 'rules' and only then being able to get to the strategic & management part of the game.
As for knowledge of how which things work together in roughly what way, I am inclinded that GPRO could help the managers alot more then it does now. (this coming from a numbercruncher like me :p)
Yet, i can live with the current policy, cause with a little efort, you can already learn alot..
The thing I disagree with Turi is, on the effect it would have on gameplay if we woudl go with the chess-argument. Let's suppose we would know that a soft tyre would wear e.g. (and i am just making this up !!!!) ((0.75 * temperature) + (0.20 * circuittyrewearatribute) + (0.01*risk)) % dropoff in wear per km....AND fueluage = (level_engine * x)+(damage_gear*y)+(driver_experience*risk*z)+(circuitfuelatribute) etc L / km etc etc
you would IMO still need an excel sheet to be able work out the best strategy given YOUR car and YOUR driver and YOUR pitcrew and YOUR goals and YOUR longtermplans...
If I lower the risk, I might just sqeeuze out the extra laps of my tyre and not pit an extra time, but what fuel do i need to take and if i increase the risk, what will it do to my parts wear, and if I choose different tyres, what will happen then to the trade-off...
Numbercrunchers will always have a tool which helps them, being a chessed or a reverse-engineered game, because a sim like this is based on formula's.
(new) Ppl would be overwhelmed by all information and still have trouble making sense of it... now they have little (maybe too little) information, of which they cannot make sense (yet) either. Too much exact information will lead to overestimating the need for exactness, where rough indications of wear, fuel etc is usualy enough to get by. Also, GPRO cannot give exact information, because so many variables are involved and you as manager influence it by your choices.
Let me conclude by saying that I am sad to conclude this game is not appealing enough for ppl like Turi, and for Turi personaly I am sad to see him quit.
I cherrish his motto: the stream does not carry off the rock by force, but by sheer perseverance.
Salut Turi, may the GPRO bug lay dormant in you, ready to bite you when you least expect it...
|
|
|
|
|
|
#52 Publicado el 27-Sep-2006, 16:13:37
|
Citar
|
|
Quote ( Hans Barf @ September 27th 2006,15:23:24 )
this game is not appealing enough for ppl like Turi,
I think that big number of unknown factors and balanced randomnes is the only thing that can defend the game from script writers.
It just cant be like chess (or maybe i just cant imagine how).
|
|
|
|
|
|
#53 Publicado el 29-Sep-2006, 10:33:32
|
Citar
|
|
Quote ( Salvatore Difficile @ September 27th 2006,13:30:53 )
In addition, you might have a short memory, but I do not, and what I am asking here is the same as I was asking to Pedro at the time.
In addition, the reason why Pedro never wanted to changes was that he did not have the time to re-invest in making such a drastic change.
Also, because there were 1600 players playing the game and they would not have understood that the site could have received less attention that it needed.
Why do you think I am in any different situation?
Quote ( Salvatore Difficile @ September 27th 2006,13:30:53 )
Though we had started with Pedro, Chris, Hans, Olivier and a few others a F1rem Light version were to put in new idea and development.
Then Pedro sold the site and you know the story.
Yes I remember that. Don't you remember that I joined you at the 3rd race I think? ;)
Quote ( Salvatore Difficile @ September 27th 2006,13:30:53 )
Any game is a set of rule clear and concise. (GPRO IS NOT)
These can be as basic as tic-tac-toe (9 slots you play the X I play the O the first one who align 3 wins)
To more challenging set of rules.
Let us have chess as an example.
Why, because chess is easy to learn.
In les than 10 minute, you know how to move the piece on the board; you know the aim of the game.
There is nothing like luck involved in it (no dice like in backgammon for example).
You can build a program on a Cray computer (one of the most powerful one) and still one man's brain can win!!!
I fully understand what you want, but as Pawel above said I can't imagine how this game could work that way. Showing some of the currently hidden parameters is not the way to go in my opinion.
Quote ( Salvatore Difficile @ September 27th 2006,13:30:53 )
Some says that if the game would such it would be boring.
They prefer to find out by reverse engineering what the rules are by analyzing the data.
I think you mean here relations between things, not rules? The rules of the game are pretty clear and well explained I think. But why do we want to give the relations on a plate to the new player? This only takes one part of the game play away...
|
|
|
English
Deutsch
Română
Italiano
Português
Português
Français
Polski
Русский
Български
Македонски
Српски
Nederlands
Vlaams
Suomi
Lietuvių
Čeština
Magyar
Eesti keel
Slovenčina
Türkçe
Shqip
Ελληνικά
Hrvatski
Bahasa Melayu
Dansk
Pirate
