Messages

I don't have much to add but that this is an excellent mod @HerrNove!

One thing I am wondering about is if there is a way to make the game render illusion elements earlier. If so, that would greatly increase the track-building possibilities without the (for some pipsqueaks) annoying side effect. Perhaps your next project? 

As mentioned in the shoutbox I am really happy about this active start to the season with 22 pipsqueaks and about (?) 169 replays. Brilliant work pipsqueaks! 

Some trivia observations:

1) Twenty years ago in 2005, Alanrotoi also won the first race of the season with a power-gear car in front of Argammon.
2) By placing second in the current race, I still did not win any of my own Zakstunts tracks. So that streak continues.   

Duplode's post makes me wonder if he just found a super useful shortcut. I guess I should have another look at the map! 

Considering that,

1. Duplode
2. Alanrotoi
3. Argammon (I've never won my own Zaktunts track)
4. Frieshansen
5. KyLiE
6. Spoonboy
7. Chulk
8. Usrin
9. Mortimer McMire
10. Zapper
11. Dreadnaut
12. Overdrijf
...

Thanks.

92% and summa cum laude.

Great Job! Congrats Dr. Poo! 

I think the value for the Oxia is too high. Yes, it has a little less grip than the Mercedes but has faster acceleration and a higher top speed. I wouldn't be surprised if the Oxia beats the Mercedes on most tracks if they have equal bonuses. Given the other numbers, I would suggest +2 as a starting bonus for the Oxia. 

The grip advantage of the Mercedes is very significant. I have done the "standard" test on Default with both cars, and the Oxia is slightly slower, with the difference in the order of one second. That being so, a difference of 1-2% in favour of the Oxia is reasonable as a starting value.

I see your point, but I am not sure on two issues. First, how representative is "default" for a Zakstunts track? Second, could it be that low grip cars benefit more from replay handling than high grip cars?

In any case, if I am allowed to apply custom bonuses for my track, please give the Indy -8 and -2 to the Oxia, essentially bringing it down to the bonus of the Mercedes.  In other words, I take the challenge!


Edit: What is the exact grip value of the Oxia? Does it have much worse brakes? If so, that factor should also be taken into account.

These are the coefficients I'd suggest for my second list:



The approach was the same from last year: start from the bonuses after ZCT281, guess neutral to slightly favourable bonuses for the new and returning cars, then tweak the values to keep the total sum at 176. The spreadsheet is attached for trying it with different cars or adjustments.

I wouldn't mind leaving the rules as they are with respect to the cars. Were we to follow your proposal, I would suggest giving the 11% penalty to cars that won 2 or more races in the previous season. This would hit the Jaguar and the Indy in the current situation.

I don't mind sticking with 11 + 5 for 2025 either; that was mostly brainstorming about things we might do in a future season. Targeting cars that win multiple races could lead to a vicious circle, in which split podiums and surprise wins bounce away the same car repeatedly. A rigid cycle seems less risky in this aspect, and the results shouldn't be too different, at least for the first several seasons, if cars with weak bonuses are the first to be targeted. (For instance, going by my criteria Indy and Jaguar would be the current picks as well.)

I think the value for the Oxia is too high. Yes, it has a little less grip than the Mercedes but has faster acceleration and a higher top speed. I wouldn't be surprised if the Oxia beats the Mercedes on most tracks if they have equal bonuses. Given the other numbers, I would suggest +2 as a starting bonus for the Oxia. 

Ok, I will send it to you and Duplode.

Edit: Sent!

As I told @Duplode my track is already ready, and I can offer it as an "emergency" solution. Otherwise, you may want to start the year with a retro track. 

Interesting proposal. Leaving original cars out was not something I was going to suggest, but I'm also not against it. It could lead to a more balanced field of cars. And this distinction between PG cars and others does make sense.

An alternative to outright leaving out a pair of original cars each season would be giving them a -11% penalty, effectively pushing them back one year in the rotation. That way, while they would most likely be uncompetitive for the season, people would still be able to race them for fun and have it show on the scoreboard. The 22 subtracted points could be redistributed by adding +1% to the other sixteen cars (assuming two additional custom cars would be included) and spreading the remaining six points across newly introduced or reintroduced custom cars (whose initial percentages have a fudge factor anyway). The selection of the cars to be penalised could be done as in my earlier suggestion (one PG and one non-PG, going through all original cars on a strict rotation with periods of four years and seven years respectively, prioritising cars with weak bonuses whenever feasible).

I wouldn't mind leaving the rules as they are with respect to the cars. Were we to follow your proposal, I would suggest giving the 11% penalty to cars that won 2 or more races in the previous season. This would hit the Jaguar and the Indy in the current situation.

It'd be better to be able to vote for a track during the race and change your vote any time you want until the race is over or something like that.

I agree, this would be a good adjustment to make.

I also think this is a good idea. Voting after the race has finished yields the risk that my race result influences my vote for the track which it should not.

If we were to remove a couple of original cars for a year, which one would you pick?

The Jaguar and the P962. 

As I mentioned in another thread, I would like a double-blind voting process. If that isn't feasible, I would like to get February or March.

It's fair to point out that the worst ranked tracks were the most flooded tracks. We have used water for everything to the detriment of fun. Please let's change this a bit. For example instead of big flooded areas we could use crossing rivers if the main objetive is to avoid PG.

I do understand that some of us, including me, prefer open tracks with a lot of shortcuts, However, I do not understand how it is possible to like OWOOT rules (R4K) but not like flooded tracks. In my experience, the driving experience is quite similar with the difference that with flooded tracks you do not have to keep checking whether you violated the OWOOT rule, which is an advantage in my books.

First of all I would like to congratulate @Akoss Poo a.k.a. Zorromeister. Well-deserved track of the year! 

[...]

Any feedback on the voting system itself is welcome! (see also: 2023)

I do not know if it is feasible, but I would like a double-blind system in which the voters do not know the author of the track. Otherwise, some voters may not only vote on the track but (subconsciously) also on the author.

Chromosome disorder