| Author |
Topic: Random is getting beyond a joke. |
6268 replies
|
|
|
Quote ( Gavin Mackenzie @ October 14th 2018,14:49:57 ) Who cares about 620 races ~20,000 participants, its about ratio of DNF causing punctures and pitting that I would question.
We see punctures in f1 all the time and nothing to do with rarity of the races!
If you replaced the word "puncture" with "engine/MGUK failure" would you be more satisfied? We get a lot of those in F1.
At the end of the day it's just a way of saying you didn't finish the race because of a random occurrence. What it says specifically is irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
|
If it were a street track then the probability of dnf from puncture should be high, a track like Paul Ricard where there is miles of runoff then unless you hit someone, you will get back to the pits.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Josh Clark @ October 14th 2018,14:57:17 ) If you replaced the word "puncture" with "engine/MGUK failure"
Stupid argument imo. All im saying is if you want to pretend this is a reflection of real life racing then DNF randoms should be more realistic, a high ratio of puncture DNF's is not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would expect subclasses of randoms like:
Pittiing randoms:
two cars collide, one pits for wing, the other pits for puncture
car crashes in first lap, a car behind has to pit for puncture
front wing failure
loose wheel
new steering wheel
DNF Randoms:
Engine failure
rear wing failure
suspension failure
brake failure
Performance randoms:
MGUK failure
blistering
floor damage
smokes..
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Gavin Mackenzie @ October 14th 2018,15:04:54 ) randoms should be more realistic, I stopped questioning all of this stuff, randoms, weather and on it goes. Nothing to do is just how the game is made. Im sure Vlad and the guys will come up with better ''excuses'' for you in future :)
Is just a game.
|
|
|
|
|
I know gpro is not f1! I said "reflection of real life racing"
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry to burst the bubble but GPRO is nothing close to real life racing. It's an arcade game with zero bearing on the physical world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It really doesn't bother me Samoeni, but I see people getting rather worked up over a DNF caused by a silly random. They might feel better is it were tweaked a bit.
|
|
|
|
|
lol yeah, in gpro though that would be a dnf random ;p
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Gavin Mackenzie @ October 14th 2018,15:18:28 ) It really doesn't bother me Samoeni, but I see people getting rather worked up over a DNF caused by a silly random. They might feel better is it were tweaked a bit. In my opinion a random that would finish my race it wont matter much. In the end of the day I still will be out of race.
But that's me and Im sure many would think differently for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
The main thing is, you don't want people feeling like they want to quit the game because they DNF from 1st because of something insanely silly. Had a team mate bouncing off the walls because of such a thing!
|
|
|
|
|
In Jaspers world, I'm waiting for the "abducted by aliens" dnf random ;p
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Gavin Mackenzie @ October 14th 2018,15:18:28 ) It really doesn't bother me Samoeni, but I see people getting rather worked up over a DNF caused by a silly random. They might feel better is it were tweaked a bit.
If this is all you're after then why is my above comment a stupid argument?
The admins won't reduce the number of DNF randoms because some people don't like the realism behind the labelling of it. If a majority were so worked up about it, they'd simply change the label to better equal the realism. Not change the frequency.
So an engine failure isn't such a bad replacement, no?
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'd take a random like ''Crashed at the crew members during the pitstop'' :D
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Gavin Mackenzie @ October 14th 2018,14:00:24 ) how often do you see a DNF due to a puncture in F1
Actually more than you think..
The tyre flawing around usually damages the floor pan if I remember correctly.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Josh Clark @ October 14th 2018,14:57:17 ) At the end of the day it's just a way of saying you didn't finish the race because of a random occurrence. What it says specifically is irrelevant.
Yes indeed...
https://youtu.be/4RK68XDd6B8
|
|
|
|
|
Usually they don't DNF unless the carcass breaks the rear wing, DNF is usually caused by losing control and hitting the wall. floor damage just leads to performance loss... though in some cases we have seen drivers happy with how a car handles after losing a load of parts, though i think mclaren would need to lose the whole car this season for anyone to be happier.
|
|
|
|
|
Its all psychological, you don't want the manager rage quitting over something he deems silly, it would be better if the reason given is something that he/she can accept is within reason.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Gavin Mackenzie @ October 14th 2018,14:49:57 ) how often do you see a DNF due to a puncture in F1
Quote ( Michael Jones @ October 14th 2018,15:34:33 )
Actually more than you think..
Indeed. Magnussen only last race. FW of another car shreds tyre is a pretty common scenario. It gets classified as a collision but Magnussen's mechanics surely see a puncture when they look at the car.
And then here's also Ocon's car after *two* race ending punctures (and some other stuff ;) ) only 3 races ago in Singapore: https://www.formulapassion.it/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Pho...
That's 3 in 3 races!
|
|
|
|
wow, getting told off for consecutive posting, sorry this place works different from other forums, normally you only edit a post to make a correction, not to further comment on other posts.
Anyway, sorry for joining the debate, maybe i need to check the game rules!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Who punctured your spirit Gavin? Don't let the man get you down
|
|
|
|
This would be regarded off topic now and against the rules.
Everywhere else, in a fast paced forum debate, you do not edit posts as others are replying to your post and get angry/suspicious if you have edited a post that others have replied to.
|
|
|
|
The GPRO logic can not be understood.
Then the new game engine solves everything!
Patience! :)
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Jukka Sireni @ October 14th 2018,13:11:07 ) Punctures are 74 race ending ones, and 47 extra pit ones.
Thanks, Jukka. This seems to imply tyre punctures are more often than not DNF ones. My personal data is closer to a 50% split, but my data is more limited. However, 121 samples is still a bit short, with a central confidence interval from 52% to 69% DNF at 95% confidence, which almost touches the 50% split in its lower limit.
Maybe this is too much to ask, but would you mind producing the tyre punctures data from a couple more races in order to reduce the interval?
Quote ( David Jones-Winkley @ October 14th 2018,10:42:38 ) Vlad any chance of seeing the data from race 1 of this season
Thanks for asking this. In practical terms, this excludes the wear related failures which contaminated the previous data provided by Vlad. Most helpful. :)
|
|
|
|
Dear Edvin!
I think - random data is misleading. :(
|
|
|
|
|
Always has to happen to annoy when you're doing good. "Tyre blowout" with 11 CT and 5 lap old tyres; might as well be car blown up by a missile that would not change the outcome either way.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Peter Warchol @ October 27th 2018,14:30:49 ) "Tyre blowout" with 11 CT might as well be car blown up by a missile that would not change the outcome either way.
Well, in that case, you would have to buy all the parts though for the next race... A new driver also. That's a pretty big outcome change if you ask me :P
|
|
|
|
So furious with my random
In the lead and propably going for the win with only 25CT risk and suddenly out of the race
|
|
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
Bahasa Melayu
Dansk
Pirate
