| Аутор |
Тема: Pit stop risk option |
73 одговора
|
|
|
Quote ( Jasper Coosemans @ February 5th 2017,00:01:52 ) P.S. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!
Why not ? They gave ample notice
When the Inquisition arrived in a city, the first step was the Edict of Grace. Following the Sunday mass, the Inquisitor would proceed to read the edict; it explained possible heresies and encouraged all the congregation to come to the tribunals of the Inquisition to "relieve their consciences".
They were called Edicts of Grace because all of the self-incriminated who presented themselves within a period of grace (usually ranging from thirty to forty days) were offered the possibility of reconciliation with the Church without severe punishment
Source: wikipedia amongst others
|
|
|
|
|
Love the idea, its very realistic too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What next? Get in car risk, pre-race toilet risk, travel from race to race risk?
Enough of risks already!
|
|
|
|
|
Hey Mason, sounds like a flash idea mate.
|
|
|
|
|
Good idea. Maybe some added chance of drive through penalties for speeding in pit lane when high pit risks are selected. Or even randoms of pit fires when refuelling cars too or wheels falling off following a wheel change???!!!
|
|
|
|
Bad idea IMO - we have loads of people already complaining about random elements in the game (randoms themselves, start crashes, blocking just to name a few disliked items that the player can't control fully), so you want to make another aspect of the game (which already has a degree of randomness) MORE random? Seriously?
That will be a good way to upset yet more players....
Plus such a suggestion is a big kick in the teeth to anyone who has bothered to invest in staff & facilities. (To clarify - no, I don't think you couldn't simply relate this additional risk to S&F otherwise you unbalance their effect)
Just for info, this change could potentially benefit someone like me far more than others - I currently have some of the worst pits in Elite, so a random chance to gain a few seconds each race would be very useful in the right weather conditions (by using the 'risky' option) - whereas those who have great pits (Ioannis, Christos etc) would have no real incentive to risk - so instead their investment is potentially compromised.
(That applies to all levels btw - the best prepared managers will lose out, the OBP / worse managers will be the potential winners from this)
So - if you want to reduce the effect of manager's skill and management and increase the luck aspect - go ahead with it. If you want the game to be based as much as possible on skill, then it is a bad idea.
|
|
|
|
With respect, I think every word you said is wrong.
1. A risk setting could be used to reduce randomness as well as increase it.
2. People with high S&F could run higher risk with less chance of a pit stop going wrong than people with bad S&F, just like a noob driver is more likely to screw up his qualifying when using high risks.
It all depends on probability distribution and it is perfectly possible to design that just in the way that gets you the desired effects.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Kevin Fortin @ February 4th 2017,15:51:57 ) This is a general comment and not targeted strictly at Mason-
In the forum am noticing more and more posts complaining about the game and I am also noticing a lot of posts about potential improvements/changes that people suggest be made to the game.....
In my opinion, everyone should stop looking at how to change this beautiful game and instead try to master the game....hence the group titled accordingly 'master'. Even better ELITE.
Most of the people making these comments aren't even able to get past amateur or pro.
My suggestion to all the people looking to change this game (for better or for worse).
Learn to master this game as it is currently intended to be played, win 3 titles in a row in ELITE then and only then will you be granted the privilege to make 1 game change or rule change SUGGESTION.
Until then, sit down, buckle up, bite your tongue and enjoy the ride.....the way it's creator intended for it to ride/be played. See you all in ELiTE some day "Mic drop"
Wow this is a new level here...
You don't realise that Vlad could suck at this game or any of the other game creators?
You don't realise that most developers creating games can suck at playing them?
You don't realise that creators are differently wired vs executors (which you prove so aptly to be)?
Mason can be a good creator which is why he sucks at executing.
If anything you should let people who know better (I don't) to make informed decisions of what is a good suggestion and what is not one.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Robin Goodey @ February 5th 2017,09:37:44 ) Bad idea IMO - we have loads of people already complaining about random elements in the game (randoms themselves, start crashes, blocking just to name a few disliked items that the player can't control fully), so you want to make another aspect of the game (which already has a degree of randomness) MORE random? Seriously?
That will be a good way to upset yet more players....
Plus such a suggestion is a big kick in the teeth to anyone who has bothered to invest in staff & facilities. (To clarify - no, I don't think you couldn't simply relate this additional risk to S&F otherwise you unbalance their effect)
Just for info, this change could potentially benefit someone like me far more than others - I currently have some of the worst pits in Elite, so a random chance to gain a few seconds each race would be very useful in the right weather conditions (by using the 'risky' option) - whereas those who have great pits (Ioannis, Christos etc) would have no real incentive to risk - so instead their investment is potentially compromised.
(That applies to all levels btw - the best prepared managers will lose out, the OBP / worse managers will be the potential winners from this)
So - if you want to reduce the effect of manager's skill and management and increase the luck aspect - go ahead with it. If you want the game to be based as much as possible on skill, then it is a bad idea.
Robin - I do see your point... In retrospect the way you explained it, I can definitely see how it could add an element of randomness to the game that might fluster people, but this is a choice managers are making to wager of you will on their staff's ability to execute faster pits consistently.
Unlike with SLC's, etc, which are truly random events, this would be the manager's choice to apply a risk in the pits, in as much as DE's are caused by risk levels chosen by the manager (from everything I've read).
And yes, blocking is frustrating... But it's part of the fabric of the game. While sure, someone could stand to gain a lot in the right weather conditions, but they could lose just as much, if not more.
Edit - not sure why you think that trainables would not impact the likelihood of success in such a scenario? Especially day experience, concentration and stress handling? I would say it would be a classic case of all three being applicable...
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Mason Somoza @ February 6th 2017,15:53:10 ) Edit - not sure why you think that trainables would not impact the likelihood of success in such a scenario? Especially day experience, concentration and stress handling? I would say it would be a classic case of all three being applicable...
As you have just said yourself - trainables already DO impact pit times / consistency etc - if you then increase their effect, you potentially unbalance them.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
What I don't like about this idea is that in reality it doesn't offer too much of strategic choices. Let's say, for the sake of simplification, there are 3 possible risk options: safe, in which your pitstop times aren't great, but rarely bad; normal, in which your average pitstop time is, well, normal, but sometimes a bit good or a bit bad; and risky, in which sometimes you gain a couple of seconds but sometimes you lose 3 or more, so, in average, your times are worse than normal (it wouldn't make sense if your average would be equal to normal, because risky would be a no brainer).
Now, if you know you'll be blocked in the first stint (you're using high CT risks and your grid position wasn't top), risky pitstop is straightforward, because it's your chance to get rid of blockers, and if you already got rid of them, having a bad pitstop won't harm you (unless you got rid of them right before pitting).
Conversely, if you know you'll block (again, easy to know according with your CT), going safer is a no brainer there. A couple of guys here and there could overtake you during pitstops if they used risky options, but most of them won't if they actually lost time there.
I think the main inconvenience of this idea is that it dismisses why some drivers/teams decide to go for risky quick pitstops in real racing: they do that according with circumstances. Either because an earlier, undercutter driver, had a very good pitstop, or because it's the only possibility to get rid of a blocker, or very specific similar situations. This doesn't happen in GPRO, so basically ordering your pit crew to go risky regardless the race situation doesn't make any sense.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Mason Somoza @ February 6th 2017,15:53:10 ) And yes, blocking is frustrating... But it's part of the fabric of the game. While sure, someone could stand to gain a lot in the right weather conditions, but they could lose just as much, if not more.
Pit times are part of the fabric as well ;)
If you want to improve your pit times you should know what to improve. I'd hate to think that people who do invest in their S&F could get overtaken in the pits by those who don't throw money at it and simply select a higher risk.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Edwin Silva @ February 6th 2017,19:25:41 ) risky pitstop is straightforward, because it's your chance to get rid of blockers ,
Anything that lets people get around blockers I'm against.
|
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Română
Italiano
Português
Português
Français
Polski
Русский
Български
Македонски
Nederlands
Vlaams
Suomi
Lietuvių
Čeština
Magyar
Eesti keel
Slovenčina
Türkçe
Shqip
Ελληνικά
Hrvatski
Bahasa Melayu
Dansk
Pirate
