| Autor |
Tópico: Different risks for dry and wet |
354 respostas
|
|
|
|
#1 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 09:13:25
|
Citar
|
As the topic says, I want to be able to tell my driver to take different risks when it's wet. This might not be an issue on full dry or full wet races, but any mixed race is a huge annoyance.
I know all the conservatives will immediately say there's no need for such an improvement, as the game has already reached perfection. I disagree. We all know our drivers' strengths and weaknesses and not being able to set our strategy according to them can be annoying in the best case and devastating in the worst. And it won't make the game "too easy", just less stupid.
Also, this is such a simple and easy to implement change, that I don't see a single reason why it shouldn't or can't be implemented. And it's definitely going to make the game much more enjoyable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 09:15:32
|
Citar
|
|
I'm trying to understand why you would need different risks for dry and wet conditions. Perhaps you can explain a bit?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 09:17:51
|
Citar
|
Quote ( Andrei Ciuchi @ May 21st 2014,09:15:32 ) I'm trying to understand why you would need different risks for dry and wet conditions. Perhaps you can explain a bit? If I understand right,he wants to switch some settings at live race when it rains or track become dry This suggested before and rejected,sorry
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 09:18:30
|
Citar
|
|
Actually, I think it's something about risks being set before the race.
|
|
|
|
reached perfection (99%) and more:
develop the "feeling" & "intuition" for mixed races (oh, yesterday, the best example ever) is PART, yes, of managing development.
not to mention that is also part of the pleasure of being here and not feel we always crack and control everything.
bring your annoyance to the study table.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Andrei Ciuchi @ May 21st 2014,09:18:30 ) Actually, I think it's something about risks being set before the race.
That is how I read it as well, two columns of risks, one for wet one for dry (ie ot, br, ct, mf could be set differently for wet and dry conditions).
Edit: blast this phone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 09:21:17
|
Citar
|
Quote ( Andrei Ciuchi @ May 21st 2014,09:15:32 ) I'm trying to understand why you would need different risks for dry and wet conditions. Perhaps you can explain a bit?
Lets say you know your driver is a wonderboy on dry but a complete disaster on wet. Would you tell him to drive the same way regardless of weather?
I hate RL comparisons but I assume most people here have a car. Do you drive the same way on dry and on wet road?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 09:27:17
|
Citar
|
Quote ( Krasimir Ivanov @ May 21st 2014,09:21:17 ) Lets say you know your driver is a wonderboy on dry but a complete disaster on wet. Would you tell him to drive the same way regardless of weather?
I hate RL comparisons but I assume most people here have a car. Do you drive the same way on dry and on wet road?
Yeah, that's what I thought you meant. And yes, you're right about the different driving styles in dry and in the wet.
But isn't this where the actual driver skills come into play?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 09:30:00
|
Citar
|
Quote ( Andrei Ciuchi @ May 21st 2014,09:27:17 ) But isn't this where the actual driver skills come into play? Indeed. You know your driver is good in some conditions and bad in others. Why would you want to not be able to tell him to take it easy when the unfavourable conditions are met?
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Krasimir Ivanov @ May 21st 2014,09:30:00 ) Indeed. You know your driver is good in some conditions and bad in others. Why would you want to not be able to tell him to take it easy when the unfavourable conditions are met?
develop intuition about race situations, or develop how you'll read the race for your driver, and develop the best balance of unique risks VS other strategy factors for a race, is a very important part in a management game. like andrei said, it's when the skills (driver's and yours) come into play (when you have a tight pallete to play with and a big scenario to decipher).
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 09:33:47
|
Citar
|
Some would argue that you should have thought about it when you recruited your driver.
(Not me, im all for it. We all know you have to make compromises when it comes to it on certain skills)
:)
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 09:41:21
|
Citar
|
Quote ( Claudio Szynkier @ May 21st 2014,09:33:00 ) develop intuition about race situations, or develop how you'll read the race for your driver, and develop the best balance of unique risks for a race, is a very important part in a management game. like andrei said, the skills (driver's and yours) come into play when you have a tight pattern to play with.
So if the change was implemented this would no longer be a management game?
Imagine if you're in the desert one day and on the north pole the next, but being told to bring only one set of clothes. Would you wear "balanced" clothes or take 2 sets?
|
|
|
|
krasimir,
management, here, involves choices.
read, first. choose then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 09:46:57
|
Citar
|
Quote ( Krasimir Ivanov @ May 21st 2014,09:13:25 ) I know all the conservatives will immediately say there's no need for such an improvement, as the game has already reached perfection.
Interesting way to get a discussion going; throw in some sarcasm to insult the community's intelligence. Really, Krasimir? :(
Quote ( Krasimir Ivanov @ May 21st 2014,09:13:25 ) I don't see a single reason why it shouldn't or can't be implemented
Then you are blinkered, and I know you're smarter than that.
I'm not saying I'm against the idea, nor am I saying I am for it, but every suggestion has positives and negatives and to state that you can't think of a single reason against your suggestion is hard to believe, when there are a few obvious ones that have been covered before.
Everyone suggesting an idea should be open to both sides of the discussion. For it to be a worthwhile improvement, the negatives must be discussed along with the positives; pretending there are none is poppycock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 09:49:40
|
Citar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 09:49:48
|
Citar
|
Quote ( Claudio Szynkier @ May 21st 2014,09:44:53 ) krasimir,
management, here, involves choices.
read, first. choose then.
Less choices does not mean a better management game.
Read, think, answer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 09:50:13
|
Citar
|
Quote ( Claudio Szynkier @ May 21st 2014,09:44:53 ) krasimir,
management, here, involves choices.
read, first. choose then.
Claudio, if you don't want to write something clear about the suggestion, then feel free to not post. I have no doubt that Krasimir is well aware of how to currently manage in the game so does not need comments about how to deal with the current situation. He's suggested something he thinks will improve the current game and that is what should be debated here - the pros and cons - and not simply telling him what he should be doing now!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 09:50:26
|
Citar
|
|
Different wet / dry risks seems a good idea, set before the race, and on the face of it easy to programme.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Kevin Parkinson @ May 21st 2014,09:46:57 ) Interesting way to get a discussion going; throw in some sarcasm to insult the community's intelligence. Really, Krasimir? :(
i can be wrong, but i doubt anyone (and everyone here is intelligent) would feel insulted by being called a conservative or touted as someone who thinks that the game has reached perfection.
Quote ( Kevin Parkinson @ May 21st 2014,09:50:13 ) Claudio, if you don't want to write something clear about the suggestion
the lack of clarity of something that is clear and simple i leave, again, on account of your own interpretation, kevin :)
not to mention that my more extensive words were said before. wondering if you read them before post?
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Kevin Parkinson @ May 21st 2014,09:46:57 ) Interesting way to get a discussion going; throw in some sarcasm to insult the community's intelligence. Really, Krasimir? :( I'm sorry that you felt offended, Kevin. That was meant to pre-counter all "change is bad" answers.
Quote ( Kevin Parkinson @ May 21st 2014,09:46:57 ) I'm not saying I'm against the idea, nor am I saying I am for it, but every suggestion has positives and negatives and to state that you can't think of a single reason against your suggestion is hard to believe, when there are a few obvious ones that have been covered before. Please show me one negative that has been covered already. All I'm seeing is Claudio's "less choice" = "better management".
I thought I was clear on what I'm suggesting with my first post, but in case I was misunderstood, I want 2 sections for risk on the "Race setup and strategy" page - one for dry and one for wet.
What I definitely don't want is being able to have different car part settings for dry/wet. That indeed would take lots of challenge from the game and would diminish the management/skill part. But I find it perfectly reasonable to be able to tell my driver "Push to the limit when dry, but drive very carefully and try to avoid mistakes when wet".
|
|
|
|
i don't think a "do not change the whole essence of the game" is close to be an invalid con.
Quote ( Krasimir Ivanov @ May 21st 2014,09:54:42 ) "Push to the limit when dry, but drive very carefully and try to avoid mistakes when wet".
here the skills, like andrei said, come into play. it's here you choose. the game adventure has all to do with this kind of choice.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Claudio Szynkier @ May 21st 2014,09:50:36 ) but i doubt anyone (and everyone here is intelligent) would feel insulted by being called a conservative
I would.
Quote ( Claudio Szynkier @ May 21st 2014,09:50:36 ) r touted as someone who thinks that the game has reached perfection
I would say anyone who believes that is stupid and short-sighted, so being touted as that is being touted as stupid and short-sighted.
But we are veering away from the suggestion at hand.
Quote ( Claudio Szynkier @ May 21st 2014,10:01:16 ) i don't think a "do not change the whole essence of the game" is close to be an invalid con.
Are you for real? Over-dramatic much? Adding one additional risk option to cover weather may have pros and cons but to claim it "changes the whole essence of the game" is absolute nonsense.
---
Quote ( Krasimir Ivanov @ May 21st 2014,09:54:42 ) Please show me one negative that has been covered already. All I'm seeing is Claudio's "less choice" = "better management".
I didn't mean in this thread. Let me stress again, I'm not saying I'm against the suggestion, just that there are definite points against the suggestion that need to be taken in to account as part of the discussion. If they outweigh the positives is something that should be discussed.
Possible negatives that spring to mind:
- Makes things much more difficult to gather accurate data (I'm thinking wear, but it applied to fuel and tyre data too) during a race, especially for newer managers, as it's no longer a fixed risk throughout.
- Picking your current driver knowing that you can't alter risks for dry and wet does give you something to consider when picking your driver. Allowing any driver to be optimised in their preferred weather conditions would impact on the true value of all drivers on the market, I assume you see how it could make some drivers "better" than they currently are?
- Part of the current decision you must make in a mixed race with regards to risk is knowing that you might be fast in the dry but make DMs in the rain if you use risk too high for your driver. Allowing that strategy to be optimized, although admittedly more realistic, gives an advantage to one type of driver and can be seen to removing a management "choice" from the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 10:08:40
|
Citar
|
We have malfunction risks to allow us to instruct the driver to drive differently when his car is outside of normal conditions, so why not have wet risks when the track is outside of normal conditions?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#24 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 10:09:47
|
Citar
|
Quote ( Claudio Szynkier @ May 21st 2014,10:01:16 ) i don't think a "do not change the whole essence of the game" is close to be an invalid con. How is my suggestion "changing the whole essence of the game"? If anything, it opens much more strategic options.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 10:11:40
|
Citar
|
Quote ( Kevin Parkinson @ May 21st 2014,10:08:02 ) Are you for real? Over-dramatic much? Adding one additional risk option to cover weather may have pros and cons but to claim it "changes the whole essence of the game" is absolute nonsense.
Quote ( Claudio Szynkier @ May 21st 2014,10:01:16 ) here the skills, like andrei said, come into play. it's here you choose. the game adventure has all to do with this kind of choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#26 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 10:13:58
|
Citar
|
|
Claudio, if there had always been an option to use different risks in wet then you would be saying the exact same thing about a suggestion to remove that choice. It certainly doesn't "change the essence of the game" and speaking in generalisations and not discussing the detail of the actual idea is no discussion at all. It adds nothing for or against the suggestion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#27 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 10:17:09
|
Citar
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Kevin Parkinson @ May 21st 2014,10:08:02 ) - Makes things much more difficult to gather accurate data (I'm thinking wear, but it applied to fuel and tyre data too) during a race, especially for newer managers, as it's no longer a fixed risk throughout.
If anyone wants to gather data he can drive with the same risk on dry and wet.
Quote ( Kevin Parkinson @ May 21st 2014,10:08:02 ) - Picking your current driver knowing that you can't alter risks for dry and wet does give you something to consider when picking your driver. Allowing any driver to be optimised in their preferred weather conditions would impact on the true value of all drivers on the market, I assume you see how it could make some drivers "better" than they currently are?
The reverse is also true. Not being able to alter risks for dry/wet makes some drivers better than others. The system currently forces everyone to pick such drivers since it severely punishes anyone who doesn't. Removing that limitation will make many more drivers a viable option.
Quote ( Kevin Parkinson @ May 21st 2014,10:17:09 ) Also, suggestion has been suggested before, so didn't really need a new thread - /gb/forum/ViewTopic.asp?TopicId=2600 ( /gb/forum/ViewTopic.asp?TopicId=13636 )
Sorry, didn't find that one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#29 colocada 21 Mai 2014, 10:18:37
|
Citar
|
I haven't checked, but I can imagine that the majority if races which involve wet conditions, change weather at least once during the race.
Having the ability to change risks based on wet or dry would make some drivers more acceptable choices, as they would not have to choose between lots of dm in wet or low risks/slow times in dry.
This could actually open more strategy decisions, especially in races like the last one (weather likely to change close to the start, unlikely to change again). It would give more power to the "running wrong tires in wet" strategies.
On the downside, I could see where this would be a pain to implement. The entire game engine would need to be gone through and all instances of risks being switched from a simple "use this risk" to a "if wet then x else y" set of code.
Of course on second thought that could be gotten around fairly easily (leave code as is, modify risk variable before each lap based on weather and udder defined risk). It all really depends on how it is coded as to how difficult it would be to implement.
Another downside I see is that it would make things twice as confusing for new players in regards to risks. Remember that new players have to figure out the risk system at some point, this would give them twice as much to think about (yes, I know it is the same system and in reality it wouldn't add that much to think about, but to a new player it could add a lot of unnecessary confusion.
The system for determing wear, depending on how it is written, could also be greatly impacted (and needing a complete rewrite if coded in a couple of specific ways)if different risks are involved throughout the race.
|
|
|
|
|
kevin, the details you showed don't make me feel anything in terms of perceive the game worse or better within the change. so far i don't feel, in this matter, the need to dissect the detail, but to understand the bigger, broad phenomenon related to the matter. which would be: hurt of the real and (essential) adventure deeply connected to the game - choice in tricky situations.
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Română
Italiano
Português
Français
Polski
Русский
Български
Македонски
Српски
Nederlands
Vlaams
Suomi
Lietuvių
Čeština
Magyar
Eesti keel
Slovenčina
Türkçe
Shqip
Ελληνικά
Hrvatski
Bahasa Melayu
Dansk
Pirate
