Stunts Forum

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The essence of Stunts, the iconic racing game by Broderbund, lies in its blend of precision, strategy, and skill. It challenges players to master the art of driving, balancing speed with control, and navigating complex tracks with finesse. However, the integrity of this experience is undermined when pilots exploit the game's mechanics by spending excessive time off the track, transforming what should be a test of driving prowess into a loophole-driven shortcut to victory.

1. Preserving the Spirit of Competition
Stunts is, at its core, a racing game. The thrill of competition is rooted in the ability to outmaneuver opponents on the track, not in finding ways to bypass it. Allowing pilots to leave the track for more than 50% of the replay time distorts the game's intended challenge. It shifts the focus from skillful driving to exploiting glitches or unintended mechanics, eroding the fairness that defines competitive play. By limiting off-track time to 50%, we ensure that victory is earned through mastery of the game's design, not by circumventing it.

2. Encouraging Skill Development
When pilots are restricted to spending no more than half their time off the track, they are incentivized to hone their driving skills. Players must learn to navigate obstacles, optimize their racing lines, and make split-second decisions—skills that are central to the game's appeal. This rule fosters a community of players who value improvement and innovation within the boundaries of the game, rather than those who seek to exploit its limitations.

3. Enhancing Replay Value
Replays in Stunts are not just a record of a race; they are a testament to a player's ability to conquer the track. Excessive off-track driving turns replays into chaotic, unintended spectacles, detracting from the satisfaction of a well-executed race. By enforcing a 50% limit, replays become a true reflection of skill, strategy, and creativity, making them more enjoyable to watch and share.

4. Promoting Fair Play
Fairness is the cornerstone of any competitive environment. Unrestricted off-track driving creates an uneven playing field, where some players gain an unfair advantage by abusing mechanics that were never intended to be part of the core gameplay (PG? "it's a bug", said Kevin Pickell himself, Stunts lead programmer). A 50% limit levels the field, ensuring that all players compete under the same constraints and that success is determined by talent and practice, not by who can best exploit the game's quirks.

5. Respecting the Game's Legacy
Stunts is a classic, beloved for its innovative gameplay and challenging tracks. Allowing pilots to spend the majority of their time off the track undermines the legacy of the game, reducing it to a contest of who can break the rules most effectively. By upholding a 50% limit, we honor the game's original vision and maintain its status as a timeless test of driving skill.

6. Community Consensus
The Stunts community thrives on shared standards and mutual respect. Most players agree that excessive off-track driving detracts from the game's enjoyment and fairness. Implementing a 50% limit aligns with the values of the community, fostering a more positive and competitive environment for everyone.

Conclusion
To preserve the integrity, skill, and spirit of Stunts, it is essential to limit off-track driving to no more than 50% of the replay time. This rule upholds the game's intended challenge, promotes fair play, and ensures that Stunts remains a celebration of driving mastery. Let us commit to this standard, so that every race is a true test of skill—and every victory, a genuine achievement.

Thank you.

On a not-totally-unrelated note: It's rude to show AI output to people (https://distantprovince.by/posts/its-rude-to-show-ai-output-to-people/)

I'm serious: we only have a limited time to spend on this planet. Most of the ZakStunts participants are probably in or near the second half of their lives. Why submitting a page of machine-generated slop(e) to make a point that could have been made in 1/3 of the words and with much more persuasive force if it were written by a human?

(I also disagree on the merit of the proposal, but that's another discourse).

I advocate for 50% not by time but by length/distance traveled on the route. It can be based on the tile count, just like the game does: "you can skip two tiles, not three." Here it would mean a new rule like: "you can skip only 50% of the pavement tiles." or "Max off-road gap: no off-road segment longer than x consecutive tiles." "consider the beginning of off-road as soon as the last pixel of the car is not on/above the road"... Let's talk!

I hope our generation, with the gracious and divine help of AI, will use its precious time to think more and blow less hot air.

Winning with shortcuts and a PG car, it must feel like using an AI to write forum posts!

I'll be less rude to you, @HerrNove, by including TL;DR parts in bold characters (just read that in the future, don't dig please) empty of cheating persuasive force but full of thoughts!

Here's more revelations!

STUNTS ICEBERG: WHY CHEATERS HAVE THE RIGHT TO WIN
An investigative, dramatic look at how we got here — and how 2026 could be the year we turn it around.

======================================================================

TL;DR
Stunts competition has long rewarded "breaking the game" more than "driving the track." Replay handling, hidden shortcuts, and physics exploits created an elite oligarchy. Parallel OWOOT efforts proved fairer racing is possible. If ZakStunts wants to grow again in 2026, we need a clearer, more inclusive ruleset — or at least a parallel scoreboard — that values driving skill as much as glitch-craft. I repeat: advocate with us for 50% not by time but by length/distance traveled on the route. Make the meta great again, with OWOOT replays able to challenge shortcut replays like never before.

ICEBERG MAP
________ (Surface)

/ Common
 Knowledge

/ Veterans known only

/ Deep & Controversial

/ Philosophical \
  (Bottom)


SURFACE LEVEL (VISIBLE TO EVERYONE)

"Shortcutting is part of the meta."
Stunts doesn't fence you in. Off-road lines, barrier jumps, and giant skips are normal — and fast. The culture grew around that freedom.

"Replays are the gospel."
If your .RPL plays back and crosses the finish, it's valid. No invisible walls, no auto-DQ for creativity. Proof = replay, period.

JUST BELOW THE SURFACE (COMMON KNOWLEDGE)

"Creativity beats intended lines."
Unlike modern pipsqueaks that punish cuts, Stunts rewards the person who treats the track like a puzzle.

"Replay Handling (RH) rules the ladder."
Save, retry, splice perfect segments. RH is widely accepted, producing hyper-optimized laps few can do in one take.

MID-LEVEL (KNOWN BY VETERANS)

"The Shortcut Era."
Icons became legendary not for tidy apexes but for turning physics inside out. Huge winning gaps were engineered routes, not flukes.

"Team secrecy & quiet days."
Elite teams often hid discoveries until late in the month. Podiums sometimes went to drivers who executed a teammate's hidden route rather than discovered it.

"Meta-skills > pedal-skills."
The lasting champions mastered three things: (1) spotting abusable geometry, (2) chaining RH-perfect segments, (3) choosing cars/lines that trigger quirks (powergear, flighty landings, wall-clips).

DEEP (CONTROVERSIAL BUT ACCEPTED)

"No-track victories."
Some celebrated replays spend minimal time on the paved road. The stopwatch can't tell "clever exploit" from "clean lap," and the community mostly shrugged.

"Copy-paste crowns."
Hard truth: some podiums came from copying unrevealed routes found by others. The replay is yours — the idea wasn't. We rarely said that part out loud.

"The unwritten rule."
If the game doesn't stop you, it's legal. One sentence shaped two decades of winners.

BOTTOM OF THE ICEBERG (PHILOSOPHICAL / EXISTENTIAL)

"Stunts is a game about breaking games."
The engine's quirks aren't bugs to avoid — they're the canvas. Glitch-literacy, not race-craft, became the highest form of play.

"No patches, so it became canon."
With no fixes from the devs, norms filled the vacuum. "Anything goes" felt authentic... until it started shrinking the field.

"The emperor is naked."
Many victors weren't the best drivers; they were the best exploiters — or the best-connected. Some wore crowns stitched from teammates' hidden lines.

90s VS 2000s/2010s — AND THE RECENT ZAKSTUNTS REALITY

90s spirit: wild freedom, few rules, lots of wonder.

2000s/2010s: optimization arms race. RH standard; secret lines decide months. Huge gaps become "normal."

Recently: participation swings. Newcomers bounce off a meta where discovery networks matter more than seat time.

A quiet consensus: brilliant sandbox, brittle competition.

THE COUNTER-MOVEMENT: OWOOT AND FAIR PLAY

Credit where it's due: Pershing II, Mingva, Ruepel, and Juank23 pushed OWOOT ("One Wheel On the Track") and clearer rules to preserve racing as a skill.

OWOOT proved you can keep Stunts' spirit and still reward classic craft: lines, braking, car control.

Smaller fields, but more inclusive; fewer "magic" gaps, more battles on the road. A path forward: freedom without oligarchy with the same pipsqueaks winning everything, every time.

IF WE WANT STUNTS TO LIVE: A 2026 PROPOSAL FOR ZAKSTUNTS

Dual scoreboards (same track, two leaderboards)

Classic: anything goes (the historic meta lives on).

OWOOT: one-wheel-on-track, clearly defined.

Clear, short rules people can remember and unambiguously refer to

Define "on track," allowed surfaces, and forbidden geometry abuse in 10 lines max.

Publish a one-page "OWOOT Quick Guide" with simple examples.

Track design that resists trivial breakage

Use scenery/altitude wisely to discourage single-jump skips (@ShoegazingLeo's track was perfect).

Include optional "OWOOT bonus gates" so fair lines stay competitive.

Anti-oligarchy hygiene

Blind replays until deadline.

Mandatory post-race route notes from podium: short description of the winning line.

Optional "Solo Discovery" medal for unique routes disclosed after the race.

Onboarding & inclusiveness

Monthly Rookie Cup + Midfield Cup (same track, separate awards).

Transparency over mystique

Celebrate clean-lap brilliance alongside trick artistry (two "Driver of the Month" badges: Classic & OWOOT).

CONCLUSION: THE ICEBERG IS REVEALED
We built a throne for exploiters and called them kings. It was fun and made Stunts unique, but it also made the summit reachable mostly by the few with the right tricks or the right friends. If we want 2026 to be more inclusive, less oligarchic, and less discriminatory, we don't need to tear down the sandbox — we just need to add a lane where driving skill matters as much as glitch skill, and let both lanes shine.

The emperor is naked. Time to tailor a fair suit — together.

— Posted for discussion. Respect the people; critique the systems. Share counter-examples, design ideas, and preferred metagame definitions below.

Quote from: Alain il professore on August 24, 2025, 09:35:06 AMThe engine's quirks aren't bugs to avoid

Stunts doesn't have bugs. Some people say it haz bugs, like this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qQvx6LgiEg):

[edit] Picture attached but it wasn't displayed here, so the forum has some bugs. [/edit]

Beg pardon, like this:

Quote from: https://wiki.stunts.hu/wiki/Bugs#Collision_bugsTherefore, it happens that some bugs happen during collisions, like the car going up straight to the sky

That is not a bug:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFjuCGiHTVI

Quote from: 2:28Toto, we're flying, we're going up!

@Alain il professore, I also have to say that when I see a wall of generated text I feel disengaged, and don't apply myself to properly understand the point behind it.

To have a productive discussion about difficult topics, we need to write simple clear points. It would also help if it were a discussion between people, not some kind of manifesto or in-character speech.

I fully subscribe to the "wall of text" argument, but we have to remember that most of us aren't native speakers. Some of us are better at writing in English than others.

I think that it is good practice to write the text yourself and then ask the AI to improve the language (fix errors, make it more clear). That way, the quantity of text that everybody has to read stays manageable as well.

Quote from: Argammon on August 24, 2025, 11:27:07 AMI fully subscribe to the "wall of text" argument, but we have to remember that most of us aren't native speakers. Some of us are better at writing in English than others.

I think that it is good practice to write the text yourself and then ask the AI to improve the language (fix errors, make it more clear). That way, the quantity of text that everybody has to read stays manageable as well.

Alternatively, you write it in your native language and ask the AI to translate it. They tend to be very good at that.

Both methods respect the social pact that writing should take more effort than reading.

Quote from: HerrNove on August 24, 2025, 11:47:08 AMask the AI to translate it. They tend to be very good at that.

I never used AI, only translate.*****.com which doesn't translate well from Kazakh language (https://matei.one/invidious.php?v=owjcn76dAHU).

QuoteКөңіл бейне бала салған сайран-ай.
Өтер үнсіз ғана күндер қайран-ай жай байқалмай.

Can someone with AI translate this?...

I spent some time interpreting the above, and I'll try to summarise here:

Your point is that ZakStunts' freestyle rules create a steep learning curve, and are against the spirit of Stunts as a racing game. You advocate for a secondary scoreboard with stricter rules which reward driving skills over shortcut-finding and complex tricks.

Please correct me if I am mis-representing your original posts, @Alain!

Thanks for taking the time to read, reflect and react, @dreadnaut, this is fondly appreciated!

Here's the thing I don't want to miss:

50% replay distance traveled on the route.

I honestly feel for the guys losing behind the leader like they raced a different game on the free (no OWOOT) scoreboard. They send their personal best every month, pushing hard, but they're not using the same weapons. Denied a well deserved victory, month after month, after month. That's just unfair.

One way half year winning streaks should question the game meta. Yet everyone remain silent.

So why not change the rules, track design (water and building here and there should prevent too much 4 seconds gap shortcuts), challenge the shortcut finders a little more and equalize the game for skilled drivers a little more and make it a splendid, more balanced race? One where shortcut hunters (lawnmowing the grass is fun and should stay allowed) can shine, but also where skilled tarmac drivers (maximizing the apexes lap after lap) get the reward they deserve.

Thank you.

Quote from: Alain il professore on August 24, 2025, 02:48:22 PM(...) I honestly feel for the guys losing behind the leader like they raced a different game on the free (no OWOOT) scoreboard. They send their personal best every month, pushing hard, but they're not using the same weapons. Denied a well deserved victory, month after month, after month. That's just unfair.

One way half year winning streaks should question the game meta. Yet everyone remain silent. (...)

It's fine to suggest rule changes — everyone can share their view. But the above quote doesn't, in my opinion, help the discussion.

"(...) not using the same weapons (...)"

This is vague. The real issue is "power‑gear surprises." Out of nine tracks, I won two this way. For example, on ZCT285 several pipsqueaks used the GTO so this was not a pg surprise.

"Denied a well deserved victory, month after month"

This is overstated — it happened in two of nine months. And even then, it's impossible to know who would have won without power‑gear cars.

Quote from: Alain il professore on August 24, 2025, 02:48:22 PM(...) One where shortcut hunters (lawnmowing the grass is fun and should stay allowed) can shine, but also where skilled tarmac drivers (maximizing the apexes lap after lap) get the reward they deserve.

Thank you.

After over 20 years of racing I finally got the idea for a suitable Zakstunts avatar. Thank you! ;D

The plaidoyer (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/plaidoyer) in the opening post is questionable in various ways, several of them no doubt having to do with the one @HerrNove mentioned. Very briefly:

Firstly, creative exploration of the outer limits of the game mechanics is an integral part of the essence of competitive Stunts. Since we are in a ZakStunts subforum, it is worth underlining in particular that adding a restriction on shortcuts to the premier free rules RH competition would utterly change its character.

(Intermezzo: Another integral part of the essence of competitive Stunts -- the flip side of the coin, if you will -- is the freedom of the players to establish collectively agreed rules within the loose framework of the game mechanics as actually implemented by the software. If anyone feels like starting a new competition to explore this 50% rule as a possible compromise between free rules and OWOOT, more power to them. However, there's something else which would be wise to take into account...)

Secondly, enforcement of the 50% rule would be a hassle. Verification of non-obvious situations would require tabulating OWOOT and off-road intervals on each replay, or developing and deploying specialised tooling to automate that. Drivers with laps near the 50% threshold would also have to monitor compliance all along, which I can't imagine being much fun either.

Quote from: Alain il professore on August 24, 2025, 02:48:22 PMOne way half year winning streaks should question the game meta. Yet everyone remain silent.

None of this is novel or surprising in any way with respect to the meta. The one recent rule change (around the beginning of the current ZakStunts era) with relevant metagame consequences was the 2019 bonus system revision, which brought the coefficients closer to each other, leading as a side effect to PG cars getting wins somewhat more often than the 4/16 chance odds (that is a very well known issue that has been amply discussed -- for evidence, see the pre-season rule discussion threads of the last several years). Even that has precedents in earlier ZakStunts history, in particular the famous 2008 season.

Quote from: Alain il professore on August 24, 2025, 09:35:06 AMRespect the people; critique the systems.

A good start with respect to that would be not trying to frame pipsqueaks as cheaters for driving valid replays following the communally accepted rules.

Appreciate the input from everyone. Adding some thoughts here, but keen to hear more voices.

ZakStunts is a freestyle competition on purpose: it fills a niche, and leaves as much space as possible for other competitions to exist, evolve, and grow. OWOOT, GAR and NoRH are 'side scoreboards' without yearly trophies because that is not the focus of the competition. While we have tried all three style since 2016, they are not what ZakStunts is about.

You can race monthly OWOOT, GAR, NoRH competitions today: Race For Kicks (https://raceforkicks.com/), DOSReloaded (https://dosreloaded.de/forum/board/44-gamecontest/), DOS Game Club (https://www.dosgameclub.com/stunts-leaderboard/). Occasionally there's a Stunts CCC (http://ccc.mystunts.net/), Stunts NTT (http://ntt.mystunts.net/), or Live Race (https://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?board=103.0) event. Alain has just restarted France Stunts (//http://).

None of those are freestyle events, only ZakStunts. So a proposal to change or expand the ZakStunts rules into the space covered by other competitions seems, in my mind, to dilute what makes the competition itself.

ZakStunts, I dare say, is also as healthy as it has been (https://zak.stunts.hu/index.php?page=quarterly-stats) in the past 10 years. There's been plenty of new pipsqueaks at the top, new winners, and new champions. Old champions too, coming back strong and motivated by the vibrant community. And new cars, new exciting developments.

Reading about "cheaters", "kings", "oligarchy", "collusion" is very much against my experience as a mid-scoreboard pipsqueak in the past years, with so many people chipping in and building something cool as a community. And some of this proposal and other suggestions seem to lack the historical context of 10-15 years of ZakStunts. A few things I need to highlight:

QuoteBut a simple solution is to use more unjumpable waterwalls my friends. ❤️

That's common practice when designing and reviewing a competition track. The most common tweaks are more water, less accessible loops-to-PG, and fixing dual-way switching troubles. And yet it cannot prevent all PG routes.

QuoteThere is a simple fix to that collusion possibility: competition managers must -at least- change the first tiles of the map they receive. 🌞

We did that for a while, and might still in certain cases, but as Duplode explained on a different thread it ruins most tracks for the little value it brings.

Quotethere is a wonderful program Replay Analyser (RA) by Robert Riebisch it can be used to determine the presence of RH for each pipsqueak based on the statistics of the keys pressed

It has existed and not worked for that purpose for 27 years, longer than ZakStunts! As Argammon explained on a different thread, replay handling is not detectable, technically. You can suspect if a lap is "too good", but maybe you've never seen Marco or Seeker1982 driving.


Lastly, I am concerned with the use of generated text (or generated anything, to be honest) as part of important and complex discussions. In particular when it ends up using words that don't seem to fit, and of which the "prompter" might not understand the connotations. The "critical vulnerabilities" post was a load of nonsense (from a technical point of view, but still a useful discussion) and the opening post of this thread could have been two paragraphs of precise and not-offensive words.

So let's try being awesome to each other, communicate clearly, and think before posting a blurb like the one I've just written 😅

Do note that this is not a "dreadnaut is against X and has decided Y". I'm trying to add context to a discussion that's still in progress, so keep those comments coming!

Quote from: dreadnaut on August 24, 2025, 08:45:26 PMZakStunts is a freestyle competition on purpose: it fills a niche, and leaves as much space as possible for other competitions to exist, evolve, and grow. OWOOT, GAR and NoRH are 'side scoreboards' without yearly trophies because that is not the focus of the competition. While we have tried all three style since 2016, they are not what ZakStunts is about.

This is why I love ZakStunts. You really keep this competition's soul alive. Thank you @dreadnaut

I think whatever I could write would be just a copy-paste of the points that Duplode and Dreadnaut have made. I'll only add I appreciate a lot their (and Argammon's) calm responses. I hope shoutbox and forum continue to have the atmosphere of friendliness and collaboration I have witnessed in my few months here.

QuoteNone of this is novel or surprising in any way with respect to the meta. The one recent rule change (around the beginning of the current ZakStunts era) with relevant metagame consequences was the 2019 bonus system revision, which brought the coefficients closer to each other, leading as a side effect to PG cars getting wins somewhat more often than the 4/16 chance odds (that is a very well known issue that has been amply discussed -- for evidence, see the pre-season rule discussion threads of the last several years). Even that has precedents in earlier ZakStunts history, in particular the famous 2008 season.

I wonder why they brought the coefficients closer together? Wouldn't it be easier to return them to how they were before the rapprochement? Or is it boring without grass?

Hello again my friends,

Since the 2019 changes, the current meta hasn't worked as intended. The reduction of negative bonuses for PG cars was even admitted to benefit shortcut finders by @Duplode. It's time to revert to the pre-2019 coefficients and the 50% bonus rule, which were fairer and more balanced. Let's discuss this and push for a community vote to make it happen.

Thank you for your precious time reading me!

PG and off-road driving may look similar concepts but aren't synonyms.
Look this breath taking lap by Renato Biker. No PG at all still an off-road madness.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Y_0gaMOaTg


The community had excellent OWOOT Indy competitions and it was PG all the time without grass.
Look: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPHYQGddUCM

Quote from: Victor Narl on August 24, 2025, 10:19:04 PMI wonder why they brought the coefficients closer together? Wouldn't it be easier to return them to how they were before the rapprochement?

The motivation for the change was that far apart coefficients make it very difficult for multiple cars to be competitive in a single race. The end result was that you'd get the downsides of the multi-car system (not being able to set the car in advance and tailor the track to it) without the upsides (the strategic richness and fun afforded by having multiple competitive cars). This issue has come up in previous pre-season threads as well, and the consensus so far has been to keep the bonuses close and look for other ways of managing any side effects.

Quote from: alanrotoi on August 24, 2025, 10:36:13 PMPG and off-road driving may look similar concepts but aren't synonyms.
Look this breath taking lap by Renato Biker. No RH at all still an off-road madness.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Y_0gaMOaTg


The community had excellent OWOOT Indy competitions and it was PG all the time without grass.
Look: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPHYQGddUCM

ZCT 139 was a very good example of a fair and balanced meta, let's work on what did change in 2025 from this perfect race in 2013. (https://imgur.com/GPmE8X1.jpg)

(https://imgur.com/X9Md4zf.jpg)

Those charts are actually from ZCT139, the following race. ZCT138 was famously decided by two late plot twists, in which a quartet of Vettes demoted Renato's lap (perhaps the strongest Audi replay ever) and everyone else to 5th and below.

In any case, to compare the pre-2019 and post-2019 systems you shouldn't look at isolated races, but rather at the bonus evolution and succession of car choices across the months.

QuoteThe motivation for the change was that far apart coefficients make it very difficult for multiple cars to be competitive in a single race. The end result was that you'd get the downsides of the multi-car system (not being able to set the car in advance and tailor the track to it) without the upsides (the strategic richness and fun afforded by having multiple competitive cars). This issue has came up in previous pre-season threads as well, and the consensus so far has been to keep the bonuses close and look for other ways of managing any side effects.

since there were no clear advantages, it makes sense to return to the previous system of coefficients that gave more of a sporting struggle, therefore I propose to put to a fair vote the return of the old coefficients

Quote from: Duplode on August 24, 2025, 11:02:48 PM

Quote from: Alain il professore on August 24, 2025, 10:48:32 PMZCT 138 was a very good example of a fair and balanced meta, let's work on what did change in 2025 from this perfect race in 2013.

Sorry for that my friend, I edited it later.

QuoteThose charts are actually from ZCT139, the following race. ZCT138 was famously decided by two late plot twists, in which a quartet of Vettes demoted Renato's lap (perhaps the strongest Audi replay ever) and everyone else to 5th and below.

In any case, to compare the pre-2019 and post-2019 systems you shouldn't look at isolated races, but rather at the bonus evolution and succession of car choices across the months.

Let's just do that!

Quote from: Victor Narl on August 24, 2025, 11:05:35 PM

QuoteThe motivation for the change was that far apart coefficients make it very difficult for multiple cars to be competitive in a single race. The end result was that you'd get the downsides of the multi-car system (not being able to set the car in advance and tailor the track to it) without the upsides (the strategic richness and fun afforded by having multiple competitive cars). This issue has came up in previous pre-season threads as well, and the consensus so far has been to keep the bonuses close and look for other ways of managing any side effects.

since there were no clear advantages, it makes sense to return to the previous system of coefficients that gave more of a sporting struggle, therefore I propose to put to a fair vote the return of the old coefficients

What Duplode said is that the system that gave "no clear advantages" was the previous one. If you want the sporting struggle (which, I take from Alain's screenshot, means no surprises at the end, no creative car choices, races decided by better micro-optimizations) the best way is to use a fixed car. And then you end up with yet another copy of Race For Kicks, DOSReloaded and now FranceStunts. No thanks: I greatly enjoyed downloading the latest replays in ZCT289 and discovering all the multiple approaches taken, and I have seen nothing similar in the other tournaments. I do not want changes, and I say this as someone who still cannot drive PG and has chosen to not join a team, so theoretically as one whom the rules you propose should benefit.

Aside: entering a tournament halfways and immediately requesting to change its long-standing rules which everybody else seems to be liking might be not the best way of making friends and influencing people, but this is just my opinion.

QuoteAside: entering a tournament halfways and immediately requesting to change its long-standing rules which everybody else seems to be liking might be not the best way of making friends and influencing people, but this is just my opinion.

It will be a surprise for you to hear that to be honest I didn't want to come here at all, never.. I don't like coefficients in general (any) and their introduction was the biggest mistake. I prefer a competition on a fixed by the organizer car with fair rules, it's just that I have been persistently agitated for half a year to register here. But I didn't come here to be slandered and mixed with shit! And I can leave at any time, it's not difficult for me. P.S. Also I will NEVER drive more than 50% on grass even if it's faster, I consider such a victory cheating, but I'm not a cheater and this is absolutely unacceptable to me! Good Luck

https://matei.one/invidious.php?v=DSGuRv3hINc

QuoteСил во мне так много,
я создаю сама себе свою дорогу.
Хватит с вас уроков,
и я бегу в даль сломав столбы упрёков.

I'm not interested in races, btw, as I already mentioned a few times.

We are now in 2025, in a biased race where:

Every two month in average, the PG cars has an unbeatable advantage. The rest of the year, the non PG car can win.

Of course non PG cars still can win, but it's not making up for all the months when non PG cars have no realistic chance to win!

The admins see that, the pipsqueaks see that, and let it go. I cannot remain silent noticing this pattern only a few pipsqueaks has understood yet.

That is biasing the race in favor of pipsqueaks better at using PG cars, which is unfair. All other competitions use OWOOT to prevent PG cars use from their disgraceful advantage. Disgraceful, and history will judge as a probabilistic impossibility the past and future unstoppable winning streaks by the same PG cars, happening too often, and say: "What have they done... Were they blind?"

I have many solutions. They are written for the records in the marble of those zakstunts forum topics I wrote in august 2025. I am waiting.

to ensure equal healthy competition I propose to discuss the following: for all 4 cars with PG (Indy, Acura, Corvette, Ferrari) use the corrected versions from Daniel3D (NoPG versions), this is a regular amateur patch that fixes a bug in the original cars, patches are used in almost all games

Dear racing friends,

The current rules clearly favor a tiny minority of pipsqueaks – basically an oligarchy of the same 1–2 winners each month. Only around 10–15% of participants even pick a power-gear car (Acura NSX, Corvette, Ferrari GTO, or Indy), yet those cars have won about half of the races in 2025. This shows how "balancing" bonuses still can't prevent PG cars from dominating. In the old single-car era (2001–2008), such exploit-driven winning streaks just didn't happen, and more people had a fair shot at victory. Since the multi-car bonus system began in 2008, we've increasingly seen that allowing PG cars – even with penalties – tips the competition towards whoever abuses them best, instead of rewarding pure driving skill.

Perhaps it's time to remove PG cars from the main competition and let them have their own separate league. That way the standard races would be truly even-handed (no one getting a secret speed boost), and those minority pipsqueaks in sheer numbers (only 10%-15% a few years ago... a tiny 3-6% percent at most in 2025) who really love the PG glitch could still compete in a dedicated scoreboard without spoiling the fun for everyone else. I suspect most of our 30+ active drivers would prefer the fair, non-PG races – and only the same few who currently exploit PG would bother with the "PG-only" contest. This solution would keep the main tournament about real racing skill and end the frustration of seeing one or two people consistently "break" the game to win.

Thank you for spending some precious time reading me!

Zapper's versions  look better.

https://wiki.stunts.hu/wiki/Zapper%27s_car_pack

I hear the "continuous powergear suprises are not a surprise" point.

Just so I understand, what's preventing folks from sending powergear replays?

- don't search for a powergear route?
- can't find a powergear route?
- don't enjoy driving powergear?
- feel less competitive with powergear cars?
- don't have time for powergear laps?
- powergear is wrong™

Quote from: Alain il professore on August 24, 2025, 10:48:32 PMZCT 139 was a very good example of a fair and balanced meta, let's work on what did change in 2025 from this perfect race in 2013

No-one on that ZCT139 scoreboard had less than 10 years of ZakStunts experience... except me! And I had the whole team helping me on that track. Fun race, but it was a single-car, month-long optimisation nightmare from my point of view as a recent start ;D

QuoteZapper's versions  look better.

https://wiki.stunts.hu/wiki/Zapper%27s_car_pack

Zapper versions are much more different from the original (and therefore not suitable) than Daniel3D versions, which only have a patch to directly fix the PG bug and a minimum of changes

Quote from: Victor Narl on August 25, 2025, 09:06:30 AMIt will be a surprise for you to hear that to be honest I didn't want to come here at all, never.. I don't like coefficients in general (any) and their introduction was the biggest mistake. I prefer a competition on a fixed by the organizer car with fair rules, it's just that I have been persistently agitated for half a year to register here. But I didn't come here to be slandered and mixed with shit! And I can leave at any time, it's not difficult for me.

Hey Victor, that sounds unpleasant and unhealthy, and I apologise if anyone in the community put pressure on you to join a competition you don't find enjoyable. While there were probably good intentions behind that, they were misguided in doing so. Please do the thing that is fun for you, and put us in our place if anyone pressures you otherwise.

Quote from: dreadnaut on August 25, 2025, 12:23:23 PMI hear the "continuous powergear suprises are not a surprise" point.

Just so I understand, what's preventing folks from sending powergear replays?

- don't search for a powergear route?
- can't find a powergear route?
- don't enjoy driving powergear?
- feel less competitive with powergear cars?
- don't have time for powergear laps?
- powergear is wrong™

Quote from: Alain il professore on August 24, 2025, 10:48:32 PMZCT 139 was a very good example of a fair and balanced meta, let's work on what did change in 2025 from this perfect race in 2013

No-one on that ZCT139 scoreboard had less than 10 years of ZakStunts experience... except me! And I had the whole team helping me on that track. Fun race, but it was a single-car, month-long optimisation nightmare from my point of view as a recent start ;D

Sorry for being rude bolding the sentence I wanted to underline, I do that for the sake of everyone understanding better where to look.

I have a clear, two words answer:

Inclusive leadership which emphasises on the value of equity and diversity.

The newcomer must be allowed to think: "If I don't want to play with a PG car, I can win any races."

Think again about that time when you were just a pipsqueak, not yet an admin and a pipsqueak. Now that you are an admin, provide the newcomers for the inclusive needs of the pipsqueak you were back then: fair play and equality of chances.

QuoteI hear the "continuous powergear suprises are not a surprise" point.

Just so I understand, what's preventing folks from sending powergear replays?

- don't search for a powergear route?
- can't find a powergear route?
- don't enjoy driving powergear?
- feel less competitive with powergear cars?
- don't have time for powergear laps?
- powergear is wrong™

it's not about the fact of PG presence, but that PG is unacceptable for racing because of the grass braking bug
I think it's acceptable to drive on grass in free, but in general, the grass shouldn't prevail over the track, otherwise the idea of the game originally conceived by the authors is lost. this is no longer Stunts where 80-90% of obstacles will be cut by a merciless grass bug, many newbies seeing such replays will not register and participate

Thanks Victor, I think I understand your view on powergear as a bug, one that deviates too far from the idea of Stunts as a racing-on-a-track game.

Alain, apologies if my questions was mis-worded. What I want to ask is, to each participant, why do you not attempt or send a powergear lap? I need more information beyond "most people would..."


A thought: powergear is a tricky skill. I had to drive a powergear lap in my second race, and could only do so because of the folks in the shoutbox and forum guiding me — no team yet! Took me a long time to learn before I could get near a PG podium. Fast-forward to today, I think we have some nice resources like Overdrjft's video (https://youtu.be/55ZIiKajswE), but nothing othewise little on powergear! Learning resources might be part of the steep obstacle 🤔


One point I should make clear now though: this is a useful discussion to drive the rules for next season, maybe coefficient changes (double bonus loss for PG podium positions?), anything to improve the balance, but powergear is a feature of ZakStunts, and it's here to stay.

(and I repeat, ZakStunts is not the whole Stunts world, there are other great competitions to enjoy without powergear)

Let's not forget that

Quote from: https://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?topic=4471.msg98299#msg98299Stunts shows very advanced technology

and the speeds of the cars are electronically limited.

https://www.rostra.com/how-to-add-speed-limiter-to-a-vehicle.php

QuoteRostra's speed-limiting systems work by blocking communication from the accelerator pedal being controlled by the driver's foot once the set speed limit has been reached.

In some cars, those speed-limiting systems don't always work properly and when that happens we can notice that there is actually no grass in the landscape. The green zones are just detected by the control software in the car, which adjusts the parameters accordingly. When we notice a bug in the software of the car controller we must stop the car and see what's wrong. We have 2 possibilities:

1. Update the software of the car controller;

2. Eliminate the car controller and just drive without it.

I never saw the second solution used. Anyway:

Quote from: Victor NarlZapper versions are much more different from the original (and therefore not suitable)

What does "not suitable" mean? Are you sure you're from Russia?

Quote from: dreadnaut on August 25, 2025, 01:50:25 PMFast-forward to today, I think we have some nice resources like Overdrjft's videos, but nothing on powergear! Learning resources might be part of the steep obstacle 🤔

Nitpick: Stunts Academy episode 3 (https://youtu.be/55ZIiKajswE) is mainly about powergear. In any case, the point remains that more resources will always be welcome!

Whops, thanks Duplode, I stand corrected! (And so does my previous message)

Quote from: dreadnaut on August 25, 2025, 01:50:25 PMThanks Victor, I think I understand your view on powergear as a bug, one that deviates too far from the idea of Stunts as a racing-on-a-track game.

Alain, apologies if my questions was mis-worded. What I want to ask is, to each participant, why do you not attempt or send a powergear lap? I need more information beyond "most people would..."


A thought: powergear is a tricky skill. I had to drive a powergear lap in my second race, and could only do so because of the folks in the shoutbox and forum guiding me — no team yet! Took me a long time to learn before I could get near a PG podium. Fast-forward to today, I think we have some nice resources like Overdrjft's videos, but nothing on powergear! Learning resources might be part of the steep obstacle 🤔


One point I should make clear now though: this is a useful discussion to drive the rules for next season, maybe coefficient changes (double bonus loss for PG podium positions?), anything to improve the balance, but powergear is a feature of ZakStunts, and it's here to stay.

(and I repeat, ZakStunts is not the whole Stunts world, there are other great competitions to enjoy without powergear)

I have a one word answer: "Ethos".

I quit competition in 2008 because of car bonuses. I didn't want to use PG, hiding my replays against the field, not taking part in the time attack battle because it would kill the spirit of our collaborative competition. I didn't want that format then, and will never use it in the future, defending high values, viewing competition as a collaborative exploration rather than a winner take all mindset. I want to be able to beat a PG car with a non PG car every month. And it's not, it will never be the case with this format.

For instance, https://imgur.com/ajg8k3L.png in 2003, I found all the PG shortcuts and shared them with my 5 team members. It was one of the few races with a power gear of the whole year and everyone in the scoreboard used it. It was fair competition. Now in 2025 it's 6 months on PG and 3% of pipsqueaks using it take all the wins.

The elephant in the room might not seem obvious for some, but I'm sure history will prove me right.

Quote from: Victor Narl on August 25, 2025, 12:52:22 PM

QuoteI hear the "continuous powergear suprises are not a surprise" point.

Just so I understand, what's preventing folks from sending powergear replays?

- don't search for a powergear route?
- can't find a powergear route?
- don't enjoy driving powergear?
- feel less competitive with powergear cars?
- don't have time for powergear laps?
- powergear is wrong™

it's not about the fact of PG presence, but that PG is unacceptable for racing because of the grass braking bug
I think it's acceptable to drive on grass in free, but in general, the grass shouldn't prevail over the track, otherwise the idea of the game originally conceived by the authors is lost. this is no longer Stunts where 80-90% of obstacles will be cut by a merciless grass bug, many newbies seeing such replays will not register and participate

It's not about the car it's about track building criteria. We had a season 2023 with many of us trying to prevent PG with flooded tracks. It was quiet boring and annoying and the objetive was failed. You can also check the ratings of the tracks and they were low.

If you want a non pg race sign for building a track and make it impossible for pg. Not an easy task even with flooded (boring most of them) tracks.

Quote from: Alain il professore on August 25, 2025, 02:43:46 PMNow in 2025 it's 6 months on PG and 3% of pipsqueaks using it take all the wins.

That is an understatement: those few are winning all races, with or without powergear! Maybe they are better drivers, or maybe they dedicate a lot of time optimising their ZakStunts laps. The two things often overlap.

Why are other folks not winning the non-powergear races? How does removing powergear from the equation solve that problem?

Quote from: alanrotoi on August 25, 2025, 02:45:33 PM

Quote from: Victor Narl on August 25, 2025, 12:52:22 PM

QuoteI hear the "continuous powergear suprises are not a surprise" point.

Just so I understand, what's preventing folks from sending powergear replays?

- don't search for a powergear route?
- can't find a powergear route?
- don't enjoy driving powergear?
- feel less competitive with powergear cars?
- don't have time for powergear laps?
- powergear is wrong™

it's not about the fact of PG presence, but that PG is unacceptable for racing because of the grass braking bug
I think it's acceptable to drive on grass in free, but in general, the grass shouldn't prevail over the track, otherwise the idea of the game originally conceived by the authors is lost. this is no longer Stunts where 80-90% of obstacles will be cut by a merciless grass bug, many newbies seeing such replays will not register and participate

It's not about the car it's about track building criteria. We had a season 2023 with many of us trying to prevent PG with flooded tracks. It was quiet boring and annoying and the objetive was failed. You can also check the ratings of the tracks and they were low.

If you want a non pg race sign for building a track and make it impossible for pg. Not an easy task even with flooded (boring most of them) tracks.

There might be a compromise beyond "impossible for PG". Ok, consensus is PG cars and non PG cars mix like vinegar and oil even if the track is meticuously prepared to impair PG dominance.

There's one idea to fit them all: separate PG competition and non PG competition by providing them in alternation. Let's respect historic PG/non PG car distribution: around 10-15% PG races every year.

Thank you for reading my post, I hope your day was perfect and you sent a lap at ZCT290.

Quote from: dreadnaut on August 25, 2025, 03:06:44 PM

Quote from: Alain il professore on August 25, 2025, 02:43:46 PMNow in 2025 it's 6 months on PG and 3% of pipsqueaks using it take all the wins.

That is an understatement: those few are winning all races, with or without powergear! Maybe they are better drivers, or maybe they dedicate a lot of time optimising their ZakStunts laps. The two things often overlap.

Why are other folks not winning the non-powergear races? How does removing powergear from the equation solve that problem?

I agree. The point is not only how many time they win, but how close or distorted are the results. With PG it's not even close, without PG it's close and fair. Unless there were more races to judge from, it could be more conclusive, but there were only three non PG races with a majority of close results in 2025. The six other tracks were PG with a unanimously distorted gap.

Have a nice day on the tracks!

1) It's entirely reasonable that @Victor Narl (and Alain) prefer cars to stay on the tarmac rather than spending excessive time on the grass. It's also perfectly valid to propose rule changes to address this concern.

What I find—speaking as neutrally as possible—unhelpful is blending the discussion of potential rule changes with accusations of cheating. As long as pipsqueaks comply with the current ZakStunts rules, they are not cheating. That may sound obvious, but it's worth stating clearly.

2) It's important to understand the majority view. Do we have a genuine consensus? We should be careful not to assume that the loudest voices automatically represent the majority. That may or may not be the case.

3) I agree that pipsqueaks skilled with PG cars currently have an advantage—myself included. For a balanced distribution of wins, PG cars should ideally win around 4 out of 16 tracks.

If the community agrees that PG wins should be limited, here's my proposal:

Once a car wins a race, it becomes unavailable for the rest of the season.

We can then discuss whether a pool of 16 cars remains sufficient under this rule.



PS:

QuoteFor instance, https://imgur.com/ajg8k3L.png in 2003, I found all the PG shortcuts and shared them with my 5 team members. It was one of the few races with a power gear of the whole year and everyone in the scoreboard used it. It was fair competition. Now in 2025 it's 6 months on PG and 3% of pipsqueaks using it take all the wins.

I remember that differently, but it is not important regarding the current discussion.

@Alain, if you agree with me then you misunderstood my message 😅 My point is that the same people win PG and non-PG races. Removing PG from the equation doesn't change the result: they win because, at that moment in time, they are the most dedicated pipsqueaks.

You could argue for "a distortion" only if there were two different sets of drivers: those who win/podium all the PG races, and those who win/podium only the "rare" non-PG races.

Look at the past five years: can you find significant evidence of these two groups?

If someone consistently ranks in the middle of the scoreboard (✋), claiming "oh, I would have won this race if it weren't for powergear" would be disingenous.

Quote from: dreadnaut on August 25, 2025, 03:49:34 PM@Alain, if you agree with me then you misunderstood my message 😅 My point is that the same people win PG and non-PG races. Removing PG from the equation doesn't change the result: they win because, at that moment in time, they are the most dedicated pipsqueaks.

You could argue for "a distortion" only if there were two different sets of drivers: those who win/podium all the PG races, and those who only win/podium the "rare" non-PG races.

Look at the past five years: can you find significant evidence of these two groups?

If someone always lands in the middle of the scoreboard (✋), claiming "oh, I would have won this race if it weren't for powergear" would be disingenous.

it's not about who can drive better with or without PG, it's about healthy competition. a gap like this race is outrageous and doesn't show a real advantage in skill https://zak.stunts.hu/tracks/ZCT284 - I think such races discredit the game itself and this championship

Quote from: dreadnaut on August 25, 2025, 03:49:34 PM@Alain, if you agree with me then you misunderstood my message 😅 My point is that the same people win PG and non-PG races. Removing PG from the equation doesn't change the result: they win because, at that moment in time, they are the most dedicated pipsqueaks.

You could argue for "a distortion" only if there were two different sets of drivers: those who win/podium all the PG races, and those who win/podium only the "rare" non-PG races.

Look at the past five years: can you find significant evidence of these two groups?

If someone consistently ranks in the middle of the scoreboard (✋), claiming "oh, I would have won this race if it weren't for powergear" would be disingenous.

A far less dedicated pipsqueak who ranks consistently in the middle of the scoreboard could redo the lap of this month winner with no dedication.

@KyLiE is the only pipsqueak that could help us with hints on what you want to know, he is the only one who saw how to do it, and drove for a ZCT289 podium.

I don't mean to be rude to any pilot in particular, that's not my point. I'm pointing the precise flaws in the meta. And this meta is so broken it can even favor the same entire team!

I'd love to know how much total time you invested @KyLiE once you had the informations needed to imitate the PG lap. Real question btw, it would help us grasp how much of a dedicated pipsqueak you are and if for real, the most invested pipsqueaks win the race at Zakstunts 25. Again, no value judgement, just investigation. "Non hypotheses fingo!" as would say Newton (the alchemist) I don't push my imagination, I don't work on baseless facts!

Thank you for your time reading me, I hope it was enjoyable and easy to read ❤️�🔥

Quote from: Alain il professore on August 26, 2025, 10:10:38 AM

Quote from: dreadnaut on August 25, 2025, 03:49:34 PM@Alain, if you agree with me then you misunderstood my message 😅 My point is that the same people win PG and non-PG races. Removing PG from the equation doesn't change the result: they win because, at that moment in time, they are the most dedicated pipsqueaks.

You could argue for "a distortion" only if there were two different sets of drivers: those who win/podium all the PG races, and those who win/podium only the "rare" non-PG races.

Look at the past five years: can you find significant evidence of these two groups?

If someone consistently ranks in the middle of the scoreboard (✋), claiming "oh, I would have won this race if it weren't for powergear" would be disingenous.

A far less dedicated pipsqueak who ranks consistently in the middle of the scoreboard could redo the lap of this month winner with no dedication.

@KyLiE is the only pipsqueak that could help us with hints on what you want to know, he is the only one who saw how to do it, and drove for a ZCT289 podium.

I don't mean to be rude to any pilot in particular, that's not my point. I'm pointing the precise flaws in the meta. And this meta is so broken it can even favor the same entire team!

I'd love to know how much total time you invested @KyLiE once you had the informations needed to imitate the PG lap. Real question btw, it would help us grasp how much of a dedicated pipsqueak you are and if for real, the most invested pipsqueaks win the race at Zakstunts 25. Again, no value judgement, just investigation. "Non hypotheses fingo!" as would say Newton (the alchemist) I don't push my imagination, I don't work on baseless facts!

Thank you for your time reading me, I hope it was enjoyable and easy to read ❤️�🔥

I'm surprised that people keeps replying without noticing it's all about trolling. Starting with Victor that he fell so deep in the net so he might take this message as offensive or something like that. I hope he won't.

Races (they're actually called speedruns, not races) with cars controlled by people are outdated. Again Stunts with its "replay handling" feature was ahead of its time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzqq8I3JFz4

"Trackmania Tool Assisted Speedruns are BEYOND Incredible..."

Quote from: 11:19because in Trackmania the p***ics are completely deterministic, so that exact sequence of inputs will always give you the same result.

Like in Stunts, but not in my game. Anyway, Trackmania is junk and if a car moves like this, a lot worse than in Stunts, in a game made in 2006, then the programmers were incompetent. People seem to appreciate this, as I wrote before:

Quote from: https://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?topic=4243.msg92817#msg92817I think it's because people who play driving games don't want realistic physics. I mean look at the driving games made after 1995 and until now. How many of them have [...] physics models?

Quote from: alanrotoi on August 26, 2025, 11:05:45 AMI'm surprised that people keeps replying without noticing it's all about trolling.

I prefer to assume good intentions, but a different frame of mind. On the other hand, I do need an answer to this, @Alain, because for me it's a fundamental point:

QuoteYou could argue for "a distortion" only if there were two different sets of drivers: those who win/podium all the PG races, and those who win/podium only the "rare" non-PG races.

Look at the past five years: can you find significant evidence of these two groups?

I also propose to discuss increasing the designer coefficient points from +/-10 to +/-20, this will give the track designer more freedom and will allow him to better evaluate the capabilities of the cars

Quote from: dreadnaut on August 26, 2025, 12:48:24 PM

Quote from: alanrotoi on August 26, 2025, 11:05:45 AMI'm surprised that people keeps replying without noticing it's all about trolling.

I prefer to assume good intentions, but a different frame of mind. On the other hand, I do need an answer to this, @Alain, because for me it's a fundamental point:

QuoteYou could argue for "a distortion" only if there were two different sets of drivers: those who win/podium all the PG races, and those who win/podium only the "rare" non-PG races.

Look at the past five years: can you find significant evidence of these two groups?

Track	Winner	Car	PG?
ZCT126	Duplode	Lamborghini (Lambo)	No
ZCT127	Duplode	Ferrari F40	No
ZCT128	Duplode	Ferrari (288 GTO)	Yes
ZCT129	Gutix	Jaguar XJR-9 (Jaguar)	No
ZCT130	Gutix	Lotus Esprit (Lotus)	No
ZCT131	Renato Biker	Kart	No
ZCT132	Renato Biker	Porsche Carrera 4 (Carrera)	No
ZCT133	Renato Biker	Lancia	No
ZCT134	Renato Biker	Porsche 962 IMSA (P962)	No
ZCT135	Duplode	Porsche March Indy (Indy)	Yes
ZCT136	SuperBrian / Duplode (tie)	Acura (Acura NSX)	Yes
ZCT137	Friker	Nissan Skyline (Skyline)	No

2012 recap

Total winners (counting the tie at ZCT136 for both pilots): Duplode 5; Renato Biker 4; Gutix 2; SuperBrian 1; Friker 1.

Longest streaks: Duplode 3 in a row (ZCT126–ZCT128); Renato Biker 4 in a row (ZCT131–ZCT134); Gutix 2 in a row (ZCT129–ZCT130).

PG vs non-PG (by race): 3 / 12 races were won with a PG car (25.0%) — ZCT128 (Ferrari), ZCT135 (Indy), ZCT136 (Acura).

Track	Winner	Car	PG?
ZCT138	CTG	Corvette ZR-1 (Vette)	Yes
ZCT139	Renato Biker	Audi Quattro (Audi)	No
ZCT140	Renato Biker	Lamborghini LM002 (LM002)	No
ZCT141	Renato Biker	McLaren	No
ZCT142	CTG	Lotus	No
ZCT143	Renato Biker	Ferrari F40 (F40)	No
ZCT144	Duplode	Ferrari 288 GTO	Yes
ZCT145	CTG	ZR1-GT3	No
ZCT146	CTG	Porsche Carrera 4 (Carrera)	No
ZCT147	CTG	Melange	No
ZCT148	Renato Biker	Jaguar XJR-9 (Jaguar)	No
ZCT149	Renato Biker	Porsche 962 IMSA (P962)	No

2013 recap
• Wins: Renato Biker 6; CTG 5; Duplode 1.
• Streaks: Renato Biker three in a row (ZCT139–141); CTG three in a row (ZCT145–147); Renato Biker two in a row (ZCT148–149).
• PG vs non-PG (winners): 2/12 PG wins (16.7%) — ZCT138 (Vette), ZCT144 (Ferrari 288 GTO). All other wins were in non-PG cars.

Track	Winner	Car	PG?
ZCT150	Renato Biker	Lancia Delta Integrale	No
ZCT151	Renato Biker	Porsche March Indy	Yes
ZCT152	Duplode	Lamborghini Countach (Lambo)	No
ZCT153	Renato Biker	Acura NSX	Yes
ZCT154	Akoss Poo	Lamborghini LM002	No
ZCT155	Akoss Poo	Audi Quattro	No
ZCT156	Duplode	Chevrolet Corvette ZR-1 (Vette)	Yes
ZCT157	Duplode	Lotus Esprit	No
ZCT158	Duplode	Ferrari 288 GTO (Ferrari)	Yes
ZCT159	Akoss Poo	Ferrari F40 (F40)	No
ZCT160	Akoss Poo	Melange XGT-88 (Melange)	No
ZCT161	Akoss Poo	Jaguar XJR-9 (Jaguar)	No

2014 recap
• Total wins: Akoss Poo 5; Duplode 4; Renato Biker 3.

• Streaks: Duplode 3 in a row (ZCT156–158); Akoss Poo 3 in a row to close the year (ZCT159–161) and a 2-race streak earlier (ZCT154–155).

• PG vs non-PG among winners: 4 / 12 PG wins (33.3%) — ZCT151 (Indy), ZCT153 (NSX), ZCT156 (Vette), ZCT158 (Ferrari) — 8 / 12 non-PG (66.7%).

Track	Winner	Car	PG?
ZCT162	Duplode	Porsche Carrera 4 (Carrera)	No
ZCT163	Akoss Poo	Porsche 962 IMSA (P962)	No
ZCT164	Akoss Poo	Acura NSX	Yes
ZCT165	Akoss Poo	Gate (custom)	No
ZCT166	Duplode	Porsche March Indy	Yes
ZCT167	Duplode	Lancia Delta Integrale	No
ZCT168	Duplode & Akoss Poo (tie)	Lamborghini Countach (Lambo)	No
ZCT169	Akoss Poo	Lamborghini LM002	No
ZCT170	Duplode	Jaguar XJR-9 (Jaguar)	No
ZCT171	Duplode	Ferrari 288 GTO	Yes
ZCT172	Duplode	Melange XGT-88 (Melange)	No
ZCT173	Duplode	Audi Quattro (Audi)	No

2015 recap
• Total wins (counting the ZCT168 tie for both): Duplode 8; Akoss Poo 5.
• Streaks: Duplode's longest streak = 4 (ZCT170–ZCT173). Akoss Poo's longest streak = 3 (ZCT163–ZCT165). The ZCT168 tie counts as a win for both.
• PG vs non-PG (by races won): 3/12 PG (25.0%) — ZCT164 (NSX), ZCT166 (Indy), ZCT171 (Ferrari GTO); 9/12 non-PG (75.0%).
• Per driver, PG share: Duplode 2/8 = 25.0%; Akoss Poo 1/5 = 20.0%.

Track	Winner	Car	PG?
ZCT174	Renato Biker	Ferrari F40 (F40)	No
ZCT175	Renato Biker	Porsche 911 Turbo	No
ZCT176	Renato Biker	Porsche March Indy	Yes
ZCT177	Renato Biker	Chevrolet Corvette ZR-1 (Vette)	Yes
ZCT178	Duplode	Acura NSX	Yes
ZCT179	Renato Biker	Porsche Carrera 4 (Carrera)	No
ZCT180	Renato Biker	Porsche 962 IMSA (P962)	No
ZCT181	Duplode	Lamborghini LM002	No
ZCT182	Marco	Lotus Esprit (Lotus)	No
ZCT183	Marco	Lancia Delta Integrale	No
ZCT184	Marco	Jaguar XJR-9 (Jaguar)	No
ZCT185	Marco	Nissan Skyline (Skyline)	No

2016 recap

Total wins: Renato Biker 6; Marco 4; Duplode 2.


Streaks: Renato Biker opened with four straight (ZCT174–ZCT177) and later added two (ZCT179–ZCT180); Marco closed with four straight (ZCT182–ZCT185).


PG vs. non-PG among winners: 3 / 12 PG wins (25.0%) — ZCT176 (Porsche March Indy), ZCT177 (Corvette ZR-1), ZCT178 (Acura NSX); 9 / 12 non-PG wins (75.0%).

Track	Winner	Car	PG?
ZCT186	FinRok	Melange	No
ZCT187	Marco	Lamborghini Countach (Lambo)	No
ZCT188	FinRok	Ferrari 288 GTO	Yes
ZCT189	FinRok	Porsche 962 IMSA (P962)	No
ZCT190	Duplode	Audi Quattro	No
ZCT191	Duplode	Porsche 911 Turbo	No
ZCT192	Marco	Ferrari F40	No
ZCT193	FinRok	Porsche Carrera 4	No
ZCT194	dreadnaut	Porsche March Indy	Yes
ZCT195	FinRok	Acura NSX	Yes
ZCT196	FinRok	Lamborghini LM002	No
ZCT197	Duplode	Jaguar XJR-9	No

2017 recap

Wins: FinRok 6; Duplode 3; Marco 2; dreadnaut 1.

Streaks: FinRok twice with 2-in-a-row (ZCT188–189, ZCT195–196); Duplode 2-in-a-row (ZCT190–191).

PG vs non-PG (winners): 3/12 PG wins (25.0%) — ZCT188 (Ferrari 288 GTO), ZCT194 (Indy), ZCT195 (Acura NSX); 9/12 non-PG wins (75.0%).

Track	Winner	Car	PG?
ZCT198	Duplode	McLaren	No
ZCT199	Duplode	Lancia Delta Integrale	No
ZCT200	CTG	Melange	No
ZCT201	FinRok	Nissan Skyline (R32)	No
ZCT202	Alan Rotoi	Lamborghini Countach (Lambo)	No
ZCT203	Duplode	Acura NSX	Yes
ZCT204	Duplode	Porsche 962 IMSA (P962)	No
ZCT205	CTG	Audi Quattro (Audi)	No
ZCT206	Duplode	Ferrari 288 GTO	Yes
ZCT207	CTG	Ferrari F40 (F40)	No
ZCT208	CTG	Lamborghini LM002 (LM002)	No
ZCT209	FinRok	Jaguar XJR-9 (Jaguar)	No

2018 recap
• Wins: Duplode 5; CTG 4; FinRok 2; Alan Rotoi 1.
• Longest streaks: 2 in a row (Duplode twice: ZCT198–199 and ZCT203–204; CTG once: ZCT207–208).
• PG vs non-PG (winners): 2/12 PG wins (16.7%) — ZCT203 (Acura NSX) and ZCT206 (Ferrari 288 GTO); 10/12 non-PG wins (83.3%).
• Per-driver PG share (2018): Duplode 2/5 (40%); CTG 0/4; FinRok 0/2; Alan Rotoi 0/1.

Track	Winner	Car	PG?
ZCT210	dreadnaut	Porsche March Indy	Yes
ZCT211	Marco	Ranger	No
ZCT212	FinRok	Porsche Carrera 4	No
ZCT213	FinRok	Kart	No
ZCT214	FinRok	Chevrolet Corvette ZR-1	Yes
ZCT215	Overdrijf	Audi DTM	No
ZCT216	Marco	Porsche 962 IMSA (P962)	No
ZCT217	Duplode	Audi Quattro	No
ZCT218	Marco	Acura NSX	Yes
ZCT219	Alan Rotoi	Porsche March Indy	Yes
ZCT220	CTG	Kart	No
ZCT221	FinRok	Ranger	No

2019 recap
• Wins: FinRok 4; Marco 3; Duplode 1; Overdrijf 1; Alan Rotoi 1; CTG 1; dreadnaut 1.
• Streaks: FinRok won three in a row (ZCT212–ZCT214).
• PG vs non-PG (winners): 4/12 PG (33.3%) — ZCT210 (Indy), ZCT214 (ZR-1), ZCT218 (NSX), ZCT219 (Indy); 8/12 non-PG (66.7%).

Track	Winner	Car	PG?
ZCT222	Duplode	Lamborghini (Lambo)	No
ZCT223	Duplode	Porsche March Indy	Yes
ZCT224	Duplode	Audi DTM	No
ZCT225	Seeker1982	Lamborghini LM002	No
ZCT226	Duplode	Ferrari F40	No
ZCT227	CTG	Acura NSX	Yes
ZCT228	Duplode	Toyota Trueno	No
ZCT229	FinRok	Lancia Delta Integrale	No
ZCT230	Duplode	Chevrolet Corvette ZR-1	Yes
ZCT231	CTG	Porsche 962 IMSA (P962)	No
ZCT232	CTG	Porsche March Indy	Yes
ZCT233	Duplode	Porsche Carrera 4	No

2020 recap

Total wins: Duplode 7; CTG 3; Seeker1982 1; FinRok 1.

Streaks: Duplode 3 in a row (ZCT222–ZCT224); CTG 2 in a row (ZCT231–ZCT232).

PG vs non-PG (race winners): 4/12 PG (33.3%); 8/12 non-PG (66.7%).

Track	Winner	Car	PG?
ZCT234	Duplode	Jaguar	No
ZCT235	CTG	Lotus	No
ZCT236	CTG	Melange	No
ZCT237	Duplode	Vette (Corvette ZR-1)	Yes
ZCT238	Alan Rotoi	Lambo	No
ZCT239	Alan Rotoi	BMW DTM	No
ZCT240	Alan Rotoi	Ferrari (GTO)	Yes
ZCT241	Alan Rotoi	Indy (Porsche March Indy)	Yes
ZCT242	Alan Rotoi	Acura (NSX)	Yes
ZCT243	Duplode	Audi	No
ZCT244	Duplode	Vette (Corvette ZR-1)	Yes
ZCT245	Alan Rotoi	LM002	No

2021 recap

Total wins: Alan Rotoi 6; Duplode 4; CTG 2.

Streaks: Alan Rotoi five in a row (ZCT238–ZCT242). CTG two in a row (ZCT235–ZCT236). Duplode two in a row (ZCT243–ZCT244).

PG vs non-PG (winners): 5/12 PG (41.7%); 7/12 non-PG (58.3%).

Track	Winner	Car	PG?
ZCT246	Alan Rotoi	Lancia Delta Integrale	No
ZCT247	Alan Rotoi	Porsche Carrera 4 (Carrera)	No
ZCT248	Alan Rotoi	Caterham	No
ZCT249	Duplode	Porsche 962 IMSA (P962)	No
ZCT250	Alan Rotoi	CERV III	No
ZCT251	dreadnaut	Ferrari 288 GTO	Yes
ZCT252	Duplode	Acura NSX	Yes
ZCT253	Alan Rotoi	Chevrolet Corvette ZR-1 (Vette)	Yes
ZCT254	Alan Rotoi	Jaguar XJR-9 (Jaguar)	No
ZCT255	Duplode	Audi Quattro (Audi)	No
ZCT256	Alan Rotoi	Porsche March Indy	Yes
ZCT257	Duplode	Lamborghini Countach (Lambo)	No

2022 recap

Wins: Alan Rotoi 7; Duplode 4; dreadnaut 1.

Streaks: Alan Rotoi 3 in a row (ZCT246–ZCT248) and 2 in a row (ZCT253–ZCT254).

PG vs non-PG (winners): 4/12 PG (33.3%) — ZCT251 (Ferrari GTO), ZCT252 (Acura NSX), ZCT253 (Corvette ZR-1), ZCT256 (Porsche March Indy) — 8/12 non-PG (66.7%).

end of first part... follow on the next posts my friends!

Track	Winner	Car	PG?
ZCT258	Duplode	Lancia Delta Integrale	No
ZCT259	Duplode	CERV III	No
ZCT260	Argammon	Ferrari 288 GTO	Yes
ZCT261	Argammon	Corvette ZR-1 (Vette)	Yes
ZCT262	Argammon	McLaren	No
ZCT263	Argammon	Audi	No
ZCT264	Argammon	Ferrari 288 GTO	Yes
ZCT265	Duplode	Porsche March Indy	Yes
ZCT266	Duplode	Acura NSX	Yes
ZCT267	Argammon	Porsche March Indy	Yes
ZCT268	Argammon	Pantera	No
ZCT269	Argammon	Challenger	No

2023 recap

Wins: Argammon 8; Duplode 4.

Streaks: Argammon 5 in a row (ZCT260→ZCT264), then 3 in a row (ZCT267→ZCT269).

PG vs non-PG (winners): 6/12 PG (50%); 6/12 non-PG (50%).

Per driver (PG wins): Argammon 4/8; Duplode 2/4.

Track	Winner	Car	PG?
ZCT270	Alan Rotoi	Jaguar XJR-9	No
ZCT271	Duplode	Porsche 962 IMSA (P962)	No
ZCT272	Duplode	Lancia Stratos	No
ZCT273	Argammon	Lamborghini LM002	No
ZCT274	Duplode	Ferrari F40	No
ZCT275	Duplode	ZR1-GT3	No
ZCT276	Duplode	Porsche Carrera 4 (Carrera)	No
ZCT277	Alan Rotoi	Porsche March Indy	Yes
ZCT278	Duplode	Lola	No
ZCT279	Duplode	Lancia Delta Integrale	No
ZCT280	Argammon	Porsche March Indy	Yes
ZCT281	Duplode	Jaguar XJR-9	No

2024 recap

Wins: Duplode 8; Alan Rotoi 2; Argammon 2.

Streaks: Duplode max streak 3 (ZCT274–ZCT276).

PG vs non-PG (winners): 2/12 PG (16.7%) — ZCT277 (Indy), ZCT280 (Indy); 10/12 non-PG (83.3%).

Per driver (PG wins): Duplode 0/8; Alan Rotoi 1/2; Argammon 1/2.

Track	Winner	Car	PG?
ZCT282	Alan Rotoi	Acura NSX	Yes
ZCT283	Argammon	Lamborghini Diablo VT	No
ZCT284	Argammon	Corvette ZR-1 (Vette)	Yes
ZCT285	Argammon	Ferrari 288 GTO	Yes
ZCT286	Argammon	Chevrolet Camaro	No
ZCT287	Argammon	Acura NSX	Yes
ZCT288	Argammon	Peugeot Oxia	No
ZCT289	Argammon	Corvette ZR-1 (Vette)	Yes

2025 recap

Wins: Argammon 7; Alan Rotoi 1.

Streaks: Argammon 7 in a row (ZCT283→ZCT289).

PG vs non-PG (winners, this year): 5/8 PG (62.5%) — ZCT282, 284, 285, 287, 289.

Driver	Total wins	PG wins	PG win %
Duplode	27	7	25.9%
Argammon	17	9	52.9%
Alan Rotoi	16	7	43.8%
CTG	5	2	40.0%
dreadnaut	1	1	100.0%
Seeker1982	1	0	0.0%
FinRok	1	0	0.0%
Overall (all winners)	68	26	38.2%

Conclusion (2012–2025)

Key aggregate result.
Across 2012–2025 (all ZCT races we compiled for those seasons), winners used a PowerGear (PG) car — defined here as Acura NSX, Ferrari 288 GTO, Porsche March Indy, Chevrolet Corvette ZR-1 — in 50 of 164 races, i.e. ≈ 30.5% of wins. The remainder (≈ 69.5%) were won with non-PG cars.

Year-to-year variability.
The PG share fluctuates substantially by season (PG wins / races that year):

2012: 25.0%

2013: 16.7%

2014: 33.3%

2015: 25.0%

2016: 25.0%

2017: 25.0%

2018: 16.7%

2019: 33.3%

2020: 33.3%

2021: 41.7%

2022: 33.3%

2023: 50.0%

2024: 16.7%

2025: 62.5% (note: shorter season sample in 2025)

These swings show that calendar composition and track selection (which tracks appear in which season) strongly affect the PG / non-PG balance.

Interpretation with respect to the "two groups" hypothesis.
The data do not support a strict partition of drivers into two non-overlapping groups (PG-dominant vs non-PG-dominant). Instead, the evidence is best described as:

A stable top tier of drivers who adapt their car choices to tracks and can win in both categories; and

A track-driven effect such that some seasons or clusters of races favor PG cars (higher PG percentage) while others favor non-PG cars.

Afterword from "Il Professore", my insight for the community:

First and foremost, there is nothing to compare in 2023 and 2025 with the famous titles of Ayrton in 2005 or Renato biker titles in 2006, 2010 and 2013, they didn't benefit of so many PG tracks while honing their wins on mostly skilled driving on non PG cars.

Second, this season, there should not be a single other PG track. We already got too much!

Third, if in effect the season winner takes all the last non PG tracks, so be it my friends, the wrong can't be righted this year, its far too late, the winner of 2023 (50% PG tracks) has been favored also in 25 (62.5% PG tracks), with an improbably high set of PG designed tracks that suited best his talent. In the future, with an enlightened supervision and inclusive leadership, the number of PG tracks should be monitored closely a year ahead aiming to historical average of 30% PG tracks, to prevent another PG track discrepancy season.


Bonus tables from the golden generation of Stunts in 2005, a perfectly balanced competition, with a different winner almost every month, which is long gone but never forgotten!

Track	Winner	Car	PG?
ZCT047	Alan Rotoi	Ferrari	Yes
ZCT048	CTG	Jaguar	No
ZCT049	CTG	Porsche Carrera (Carrera)	No
ZCT050	Alain	Melange	No
ZCT051	Gutix	Audi	No
ZCT052	Ayrton	Lamborghini (Lambo)	No
ZCT053	Akoss Poo	Porsche March Indy (Indy)	Yes
ZCT054	Ayrton	Lamborghini LM002 (LM002)	No
ZCT055	Bonzai Joe	Acura NSX (Acura)	Yes
ZCT056	Ayrton	Porsche 962 IMSA (P962)	No
ZCT057	Chulk	Chevrolet Corvette ZR-1 (Vette)	Yes
ZCT058	Ayrton	Lancia	No

Recap for 2005 (numbers & brief observations)

Total races: 12 (ZCT047–ZCT058).

Wins by driver: Ayrton 4; CTG 2; Alan Rotoi 1; Alain 1; Gutix 1; Akoss Poo 1; Bonzai Joe 1; Chulk 1.

PG (the four PG car types: Acura NSX, Ferrari GTO/288 GTO, Porsche March Indy, Chevrolet Corvette ZR-1) — wins: 4 / 12 = 33.3%.

PG-winning races: ZCT047 (Ferrari), ZCT053 (Indy), ZCT055 (Acura), ZCT057 (Vette).

Per-driver PG-win rates (2005):

Ayrton: 0 / 4 = 0% PG wins.

CTG: 0 / 2 = 0% PG wins.

Alan Rotoi: 1 / 1 = 100% (Ferrari).

Akoss Poo: 1 / 1 = 100% (Indy).

Bonzai Joe: 1 / 1 = 100% (Acura).

Chulk: 1 / 1 = 100% (Vette).

Alain, Gutix: 0% (their single wins were non-PG).

Thank you for taking some time reading, reflecting and, finally, creating a better Zakstunts competition!

Oh, one more thing.

I found the bottom of the PG iceberg: the definitive proof that excessive PG cars can break the meta.

The introduction of balanced bonuses for cars? 2008! Ok it was a testing year but look...

It was the worst season ever regarding the meta, period.

But I respect Ayrton as much as any other Zakstunts title winners in history!

Look at the carnage!

Track	Winner	Car	PG?
ZCT080	Ayrton	Porsche March Indy	Yes
ZCT081	Ayrton	Acura NSX	Yes
ZCT082	Ayrton	Ferrari 288 GTO	Yes
ZCT083	Ayrton	Chevrolet Corvette ZR-1 (Vette)	Yes
ZCT084	Ayrton	Porsche March Indy	Yes
ZCT085	Ayrton	Lancia Delta Integrale	No
ZCT086	Ayrton	Acura NSX	Yes
ZCT087	Ayrton	Ferrari 288 GTO	Yes
ZCT088	Ayrton	Lamborghini Countach (Lambo)	No
ZCT089	Ayrton	Chevrolet Corvette ZR-1 (Vette)	Yes
ZCT090	Ayrton	Ferrari 288 GTO	Yes

2008 recap

Wins: Ayrton 11/11 (clean sweep).

PG vs non-PG among winners: 9/11 PG (81.8%), 2/11 non-PG (18.2%).

Longest season streak: Ayrton 11 in a row (ZCT080→ZCT090). 1 more win in 2007 for a 12 in a row guinness book record.

Quote from: Alain il professore on August 27, 2025, 01:28:44 AMInterpretation with respect to the "two groups" hypothesis.
The data do not support a strict partition of drivers into two non-overlapping groups (PG-dominant vs non-PG-dominant). Instead, the evidence is best described as:
- A stable top tier of drivers who adapt their car choices to tracks and can win in both categories; and
- A track-driven effect such that some seasons or clusters of races favor PG cars (higher PG percentage) while others favor non-PG cars.

Thank you Alain, happy to see you agree with my understanding of the situation.

A good example of a strong pipsqueak who can drive PG and non-PG is indeed @Argammon, since you mention him, who after his return has reached the podium in all races, 12 times with a powergear car, and 13 with other cars. He's as strong a driver as I've seen.

But you seem bent on some kind of vendetta here, which you cannot hide behind extra-wordy, automatically generated copy. It's shameful and childish that you have not acknowledged his apology (https://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?topic=4479.msg98244;topicseen#new), and that you bring the bitterness out on the forum.

I have overseen a decade of this community working together and supporting each other, and if your approach is to dissimulate and divide and attack, you are not welcome — on the forum, the shoutbox, and other community groups.

If you enjoy racing with us, the competitions are here. Other amateur agreeing, I am happy to move you to the Amateur League in ZakStunts, where you will be able to race with different goals.


Regarding the original matter of this thread. Let me summarise the situation:

- ZakStunts is the freestyle competition, and includes shortcuts and powergear
- It does its thing, it tries not to overlap nor compete with other competitions
- The Amateur League exists for those who prefer a less technical challenge
- We will discuss rule tweaks in the regular thread that will appear in the next week
- Nothing's on fire, the world's not ending, the gods died long ago


And finally, the continuous rambling and complaining and attacking in every possible thread must stop. You can "disagree and commit", and work to really help the community (e.g., organising awesome events!), or find something else to do with your life, elsewhere.

@dreadnaut, Please respond regarding my proposal Yesterday at 02:11:20 PM

Quote from: dreadnaut on August 27, 2025, 03:29:14 AM

Quote from: Alain il professore on August 27, 2025, 01:28:44 AMInterpretation with respect to the "two groups" hypothesis.
The data do not support a strict partition of drivers into two non-overlapping groups (PG-dominant vs non-PG-dominant). Instead, the evidence is best described as:
- A stable top tier of drivers who adapt their car choices to tracks and can win in both categories; and
- A track-driven effect such that some seasons or clusters of races favor PG cars (higher PG percentage) while others favor non-PG cars.

Thank you Alain, happy to see you agree with my understanding of the situation.

A good example of a strong pipsqueak who can drive PG and non-PG is indeed @Argammon, since you mention him, who after his return has reached the podium in all races, 12 times with a powergear car, and 13 with other cars. He's as strong a driver as I've seen.

But you seem bent on some kind of vendetta here, which you cannot hide behind extra-wordy, automatically generated copy. It's shameful and childish that you have not acknowledged his apology (https://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?topic=4479.msg98244;topicseen#new), and that you bring the bitterness out on the forum.

I have overseen a decade of this community working together and supporting each other, and if your approach is to dissimulate and divide and attack, you are not welcome — on the forum, the shoutbox, and other community groups.

If you enjoy racing with us, the competitions are here. Other amateur agreeing, I am happy to move you to the Amateur League in ZakStunts, where you will be able to race with different goals.


Regarding the original matter of this thread. Let me summarise the situation:

- ZakStunts is the freestyle competition, and includes shortcuts and powergear
- It does its thing, it tries not to overlap nor compete with other competitions
- The Amateur League exists for those who prefer a less technical challenge
- We will discuss rule tweaks in the regular thread that will appear in the next week
- Nothing's on fire, the world's not ending, the gods died long ago


And finally, the continuous rambling and complaining and attacking in every possible thread must stop. You can "disagree and commit", and work to really help the community (e.g., organising awesome events!), or find something else to do with your life, elsewhere.

Happy you got your answer!

I'm just spotting patterns and drinking detox bio tea. I know Stunts history will take account of the higher than normal irregular number of PG tracks in 2008, 2023 and 2025. Hopefully I'm not writing for your eyes only, that I hope I respecfully aknowledged with some lights, but also for the records.

@Alain il professore:

This thread contains quite a lot of text for what is essentially a single, straightforward line of reasoning:

• Observation: Argammon wins a higher share of PG races than most other top pipsqueaks.
• Fact: Alain does not like Argammon.
• (2+3) --> Develop arguments suggesting: Winning PG races does not demonstrate skill --> Therefore, Argammon's championship has little value.
• (2+3) --> Develop arguments suggesting: Winning with a PG car is detrimental to the community (e.g., creates perceived unfairness, may discourage newcomers).

If framed this way, the discussion would be more concise and transparent.

I'd also note that "spotting patterns" is only useful if those patterns are interpreted correctly. In this case, the percentage of PG wins in a season depends not only on tracks, but also on the car coefficients and the mix of participating drivers.

• Example – ZCT 288: @KyLiE showed that a Corvette PG lap was possible, but its coefficient was too low compared to the Oxia. --> Had the Corvette's coefficient been slightly higher, we might have seen another PG win.

Quote from: dreadnaut on August 25, 2025, 01:50:25 PMThanks Victor, I think I understand your view on powergear as a bug, one that deviates too far from the idea of Stunts as a racing-on-a-track game.

Alain, apologies if my questions was mis-worded. What I want to ask is, to each participant, why do you not attempt or send a powergear lap? I need more information beyond "most people would..."


A thought: powergear is a tricky skill. I had to drive a powergear lap in my second race, and could only do so because of the folks in the shoutbox and forum guiding me — no team yet! Took me a long time to learn before I could get near a PG podium. Fast-forward to today, I think we have some nice resources like Overdrjft's video (https://youtu.be/55ZIiKajswE), but nothing othewise little on powergear! Learning resources might be part of the steep obstacle 🤔


One point I should make clear now though: this is a useful discussion to drive the rules for next season, maybe coefficient changes (double bonus loss for PG podium positions?), anything to improve the balance, but powergear is a feature of ZakStunts, and it's here to stay.

(and I repeat, ZakStunts is not the whole Stunts world, there are other great competitions to enjoy without powergear)

let's go back to 1990 when the game was created and think about what was the author's idea? and what meaning did Kevin Pickell put into it? the grass bug was clearly not conceived by the authors, and was never part of the idea of ��the game, Kevin Pickell said this in his late interview with two simple words: "it's a bug!". when there are errors in all games, patches are used to fix errors. hence the question: if Kevin Pickell himself had released the original patch with a fixed grass bug, would you continue to use the old version or the fixed version? unfortunately, Kevin Pickell did not have time to release the patch due to insurmountable reasons, but there is an amateur patch from Daniel3d. why don't you want to use the fixed versions in the spirit of the game's author's ideas?

Quote from: Argammon on August 25, 2025, 03:47:05 PMIf the community agrees that PG wins should be limited, here's my proposal:

Once a car wins a race, it becomes unavailable for the rest of the season.

We can then discuss whether a pool of 16 cars remains sufficient under this rule.

your proposal looks fresh as a compromise measure, in general I support it. but it is even better to use patched versions from Daniel3D, then you won't have to change anything at all

I agree with Victor. Those proposals are common sense, but more than that the words of wisdom of a veteran player that knows all the tricks in the game better than us. He's not reached the maximum ELO of Stunts by mistake.

Again, Stunts doesn't have bugs.

https://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?topic=4482.msg98390#msg98390

https://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?topic=4482.msg98328#msg98328

Forget about what Kevin Pickell said (https://zak.stunts.hu/articles/interview-with-kevin-pickell-lead-programmer-of-stunts):

QuoteFifa International Soccer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_International_Soccer) was my favorite after that, [...]. Technically speaking the code I am most proud of is in a game called Skitchin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skitchin') on the Sega Genesis. Up until Skitchin, the music on the Genesis was very plain and boring, I figured out a way to make music with multiple digital samples play at the same time.

Skitchin was a junk game with junk music but we can appreciate its code, which we don't have access to anyway.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9O-vxPD-Ek

Since I'm the only genuine newbie here, allow me to say that I'm against any change of rules that reduces car or strategy choices. The "drop winning cars" rule would also penalize track and car creators. Imagine Frieshansen building "Lord of the Rings" and finding out the Audi is not available. Or Ryoma seeing the Diablo out of the compo after just two months.

Also, the recent streak of victories of PG cars seems mostly to be the result of them being underrepresented in 2024, which led their combined bonus to reach +15% at the start of the year. At present it is at -17%, so the trend will settle down by itself, without needing external assists.

Other points:
* I'm also against extending the discretionary bonus range to ±20%. This would be the equivalent of the track designer being able to mandate a car. With ±10% we instead just had a very interesting month where the suggested car (Quattro) was subverted by the Lambo, and then by the Corvette. I found it excellent.
* More rules are usually bad for newbies, as the recent disqualification of StanceboyCZ's lap from R4K shows. I am also not super happy of having wasted time to find a rules-sanctioned way to negotiate the slalom, just to see said rule changed two days after. I like to put the most work in the very first days of the compo, so this would have been a big turn-off for me if I had taken the race as seriously as I do in ZakStunts.

Quote from: Victor Narl on August 27, 2025, 05:42:31 PM

Quote from: Argammon on August 25, 2025, 03:47:05 PMIf the community agrees that PG wins should be limited, here's my proposal:

Once a car wins a race, it becomes unavailable for the rest of the season.

We can then discuss whether a pool of 16 cars remains sufficient under this rule.

your proposal looks fresh as a compromise measure, in general I support it. but it is even better to use patched versions from Daniel3D, then you won't have to change anything at all

Thank you for bringing the discussion back to a mature level — I truly appreciate it. 🙂

Please allow me to share how I see the situation. I openly acknowledge that the combination of PG cars and the car coefficient system gives me an advantage. My strongest skill in stunts is, without question, the ability to manage a PG lap where others cannot — which explains the high number of unexpected PG surprises.

Now, let's address the question of whether we should introduce rules to limit or even ban PG cars. From my perspective, pipsqueaks have different preferences:

• Some enjoy driving PG laps — I'm one of them. I'm fascinated by the strategic side of stunts: a great stunts map is full of inventive tricks, and I love discovering them and finding the best car–track combination.
  
• Others simply enjoy watching PG laps because they're spectacular — my ZCT 284 Corvette lap is a good example.
  
• Many casual competitors are indifferent to PG cars.
  
• And finally, there are pipsqueaks who actively dislike their presence — you and Alain fall into this group.
  

I respect all of these viewpoints. As humans, we all have different preferences. What matters less to me is Kevin Pickell's original intention over 35 years ago. If what began as a bug now provides enjoyment to several of us, its technical origin doesn't necessarily mean it should be removed. What matters most is what the community thinks — and that's difficult to gauge, given the limited participation in this discussion.

We also shouldn't overlook an important point raised by @dreadnaut: Zakstunts is currently the only active competition that features both free rules and power-gear laps. Those who prefer OWOOT driving already have several other competitions available. This is a key consideration.

Putting aside the fact that I personally benefit from the current format, I believe that in an ideal scenario, all cars should have an equal chance of winning. If we agree that's a worthwhile goal, the next challenge is figuring out how to get there. @HerrNove mentioned some justified concerns regarding my proposal so we should keep the brainstorming going.

Quote from: Alain il professore on August 27, 2025, 09:43:29 AMI'm just spotting patterns and drinking detox bio tea.

What is this, @Alain? You change topic, make another aggressive joke on a different channel, post two messages on topic, and assume it all goes away?

It's 2025, and I expect an adult to be responsible for their behaviour, not squirrel away for a moment. So I need you to use your adult powers and think about why your behaviour is a problem, and ask questions if you don't understand. If you can't do that (pride, shame, I'm-in-the-right-here), you are out.

If there are other difficulties that we don't know about, bring them out. There's been others who said "sorry, I've got baggage and I've been shit", to then deal with their issues without unleashing them on the community.

Hint: while you keep saying you are doing things for weaker pipsqueaks, this is plainly for yourself. If you cared about others, you'd be elevating their voices, opening up the stage, instead of drowning it with noise by being the loudest voice and shutting off everyone else, to the point that I have folks telling me "I just try to be nice and not say a lot when he's in the middle".

So you either solve this in the next hours, or the ban is coming.

Quote from: Alain il professore on August 26, 2025, 10:10:38 AM@KyLiE (https://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?action=profile;u=1268) is the only pipsqueak that could help us with hints on what you want to know, he is the only one who saw how to do it, and drove for a ZCT289 podium.

As far as I'm aware, I was the first person in our team to attempt a power gear lap with the Corvette.

Quote from: Alain il professore on August 26, 2025, 10:10:38 AMI'd love to know how much total time you invested @KyLiE (https://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?action=profile;u=1268) once you had the informations needed to imitate the PG lap.

It was a team effort.  If you really must know, I spent 6.5 hours trying to pull off a power gear lap with the Corvette.  That doesn't include the time I spent driving other cars.  You seem to be insinuating that I blatantly copied @Argammon with little to no effort, but if you compare our replays, you'll realise that we both have quite different approaches to reaching power gear.

Quote from: HerrNove on August 27, 2025, 06:20:11 PMI am also not super happy of having wasted time to find a rules-sanctioned way to negotiate the slalom, just to see said rule changed two days after.

The slalom was a ticking time bomb at Race For Kicks that unfortunately went off during that race.  The rules were changed to make sure that it didn't happen again and to make it fair for the majority of the race.  We did the best that we could in that situation.  We like to make the competition as inviting as possible for newcomers, so rest assured, the rules won't be changing again anytime soon. :)

Quote from: KyLiE on August 28, 2025, 05:22:33 AM

Quote from: HerrNove on August 27, 2025, 06:20:11 PMI am also not super happy of having wasted time to find a rules-sanctioned way to negotiate the slalom, just to see said rule changed two days after.

The slalom was a ticking time bomb at Race For Kicks that unfortunately went off during that race.  The rules were changed to make sure that it didn't happen again and to make it fair for the majority of the race.  We did the best that we could in that situation.  We like to make the competition as inviting as possible for newcomers, so rest assured, the rules won't be changing again anytime soon. :)

Sorry for that part: when I have complaints I use to raise them directly and not complain behind the back. I just wanted to use this as example of how having more rules tends to generate more of these situations. I understand ZakStunts had similar cases with dual-way switching and track splits neat the endline, so no tournament is safe in this respect.

Ok. First off.
I half read the first few posts, way to much text for me at the moment..
Scrolled through the first two pages..
What a chaotic mess this topic is..

But anyway..

I personally don't like the main ZakStunts competition because it is very difficult.
But that is also the reason it still exists.
Changing the competition to much could break it for ever..

I always voted for diversity.
That's why I opted for and launched two alternative competitions.

I don't have the strength or peace of mind to keep them going unfortunately.
But they are there and available.
Easy to reboot..

Both are in-between freestyle and OWOOT.
Both are preferably without PG cars..

About fairness in the game..
It starts with oneself.. be fair and kind to others before you demand it in return..

I haven't read nearly everyone's posts yet. But I would like to offer my perspective here:

There are multiple running Stunts competitions. All but one have some sort of limitation on going off-track and a way to prevent PG surprises in the form of limited car choice. The exception is Zakstunts, which focusus on freestyle driving, allowing crazy improvized stunts and powergear and offroad driving and car picking. That competition is the most popular one. Presumably the people racing there race there because they like this style.

So I guess my question is: if people want a competition with the rules proposed in this thread, and they clearly do given the length of this thread, is Zakstunts really the place to make that happen?

Quote from: Overdrijf on August 29, 2025, 12:15:57 PMI haven't read nearly everyone's posts yet. But I would like to offer my perspective here:

There are multiple running Stunts competitions. All but one have some sort of limitation on going off-track and a way to prevent PG surprises in the form of limited car choice. The exception is Zakstunts, which focusus on freestyle driving, allowing crazy improvized stunts and powergear and offroad driving and car picking. That competition is the most popular one. Presumably the people racing there race there because they like this style.

So I guess my question is: if people want a competition with the rules proposed in this thread, and they clearly do given the length of this thread, is Zakstunts really the place to make that happen?

I think the reason is that even those who do not like the rules understand that Zakstunts is by far the most prestigious Stunts competition. Winning a Zakstunts race (the main scoreboard not GAR) cannot be compared to anything else in that regards.

I'd also like to share some of my ideas with the community.

There are some who don't like PG racing because it has been confirmed as a bug - but I think they would also not like it if it had been confirmed as a feature, or let's say, an easter egg.  ::)
And yeah, I really see it as an "unintended easter egg". There are ways to restrict PG usage on a track by flooding certain sections, by placing blocking elements outside the track, or by specifying a high negative coefficient for PG cars.

In addition, there are also so many other bugs we are all used to. For example, the grass bug in chicanes, and I would never say that is unfair to use it when racing, because it allows some clever track design with diagonal paths.
Also the speedup jumps that can happen on start/end segments of banked roads, corkscrews, split roads, and so on, are clearly bugs, but I would never think that it is unfair to use them.

While I really like driving skillfully "as intended by the creators of Stunts", I also like unlimited freestyle driving and finding tricks and shortcuts on a specific track - as (in most cases) also intended by the creator of the track. Since my return to the Stunts racing world in January 2023, I have seen so many tracks with skillfully crafted shortcut sections, and it was fun discovering them during the racing attempts (and learning from public replays and team mates).  8)

If I were asked about my personal opinion for some additional restriction rules in this contest I'd just vote for this:
- Exploiting the collision bug is forbidden when driving directly through solid objects (except scenery objects), like road blocks, the ride side of loops, bridge railings.
But the main reason for this opinion might just be that I'm still very bad at these specific tricks.  ;D

I feel generally supportive of PG races and I really don't know very well why. I mean, I am not a skilled pipsqueak in any way, but I'm specially bad at PG races. I don't stand a chance. What I could guess is that the most spectacular replays are PG and probably I'm worst at PG races precisely because they demand the greatest skills and it turns out I appreciate other pipsqueaks' skills, so maybe that's it