Special cars in 2008

[zaqrack]

Simple and fair question.
All of them are a result of hard work and are well tuned cars. Should we use them?
Poll open for 7 days.

[CTG]

Only Melange but it wasn't a question, so my answer is NO.

[Chulk]

I say yes! Why not CTG? If you don't want to use them, just don't and that's it. If you're not even racing, then what's the problem?

[Mark L. Rivers]

Zak, let me say some considerations about this argument. Believe me, not for polemize, but just to express in a clear and fair way my thoughts.

I don't understand the reason of this poll. And this for at least four reasons.

1) I think it's reasonable that a Contest Manager polls the thoughts of the community to individuate if a certain modify sounds them good or not. But I don't think he has to let others to decide what has to be included or not in his contest, especially if the modify is not a rule that could twist the things. Even if ZakStunts is the most hystorical and prestigeous contest, it's your contest, and not the contest of the community. Even, I repeat, it can be good polls the thoughts of the comunity, you, as contest manager, have to decide what has to be in your contest or not. Exactly as you decided last year to introduce the special rules, and this year the simultaneous participation of all cars.

2) While Melange is quite known, GT3 and Speedgate are really unknown to the majority of the drivers (even if who tested it talk about them as very good cars). How can they evaluate if that cars are good or not, suitable for ZakStunts races? You are putting in improper hands the choice to evaluate if Speedgate or GT3 can be part of ZakStunts races.

3) If Speedgate and GT3 are really good cars as who tried them said, many drivers will be happy to drive them in ZakStunts or in other contests. But if that cars are bad or not suitable to race in official races, we can be sure that drivers will discard them, preferring usual cars. So, if you really want to polls the community if Speedgate or GT3 are cars suitable for official races, so you should give all the possibility to use them. I don't think GT3 or Speedgate can affect negatively or ruin a contest. As we know, in the unique race where Speedgate has been used, the comments (5-6 drivers, Chulk and Duplode included) were very good. And I think that the same thing could be for GT3.

4) The creation and the developing of a new car demends a lot of work, a lot of time and engagement. I think it's a good thing for the community. It brings a news wind, that is so important to perpetuate the interesting for Stunts races, to perpetuate the community life. Classic and Modern is a good formula to go on in many ambiences, Stunts included. But if the new cars, even the cars very similar to the original ones, even the cars that like to who tried them, are banned from ZakStunts, above all if the decision will come from many drivers that still have not tried them or from drivers (and related ghosts) that could have other personal reasons for not using them, maybe there's something wrong.

Sorry, but I can't be agree with this poll. I sure hope that the three cars object of this poll will be included in ZakStunts. But if it won't be so, I think it will be a big mistake.

[zaqrack]

Mark,

you were not here in 2002-2003 - there were several big arguments, because I modified rules without asking the community's opinion. I promised then - and not only promised but also relized the importance of it - that I'll always ask the community's opinion on most of the questions.

I also have a point of view, and if I would have to choose now, I'd include these cars - mainly for two reasons:

1. They don't have powergear.
2. I want to appreciate the HUGE amount of work used when creating these cars, and I think including them in ZakStunts is a reward these "car engineers " deserve. 

Yes, in january I had a different point of view, but ZCT80 and 81 convinced me, that it wouldn't overthrow the balance at all. A handful choice of cars is needed to balance the Indy's (and in some cases the PG cars) dominance.
But before I apply my choice, I wanted to ask everyone else. If I face a strong opposition - I reject the idea. To let these cars race, I don't need a majority of votes. I just need no strong feelings against it. 
I always believed ZakStunts was a place, where new ideas are born and accepted. And including these cars fit the pattern.

The only problem is, that I don't have my testing tracks and results anymore, so I'll have to reevaulate all the cars again. But playing Stunts is fun - so it'd be fun, and also a nice chance to further fine tune the coefficients.

[BonzaiJoe]

Hello! I voted "No" in this poll because I think it would be too difficult to find the right balance. We are now in the second of twelve races, having not found the balance at all. If three new cars, two of them practically unknown, were to be included by the third race, it would be another balance challenge, and what I fear is that we may be halfway through the season before the cars are balanced out, and the concept begins to work.
I don't understand point 1 of Mark's post. It is Zak's choice what to do with the competition, and he chose to ask the community. Whatever the community says, the formation of the rules is still his choice. The popular vote is just a factor in the decision like anything else. And if he had indeed received strong opposition (my opposition is not strong, I could easily be wrong about my fear of balance problems), it would indeed be a really bad idea to implement it.
I also don't agree that we should reward car designers by including their cars in the competition. If the cars are good, if they are fitting in the competition, if they won't create problems, they should be included. Not because someone spent a lot of time on them.
A third thing I don't agree with is that people will stop racing these cars if they don't like them. People will race whatever cars give the best results.

Where I agree with Mark: 1. the reviews of the cars seem to have been good, so they could give extra fun and diversity to the competition, which would be a good thing. 2. The creation of cars is a good thing for the community, so encouraging it by including them in a competition is a good thing (but Zakstunts is more important for the community, so it has to be in accordance with the well-being of Zakstunts).

Anyway, I don't mind if those cars are included, but my immediate thought was that it wouldn't work.

[Krys TOFF]

People will race whatever cars give the best results.

Not so sure. I could have had a better rank at Z80 with P962 or Jag, or indy. But I liked the Lancia feeling on this track so I kept this car.
But it's only my own way of racing. People focused on the podium won't agree with me.

[Duplode]

Well, I feel adding non-powergear cars will probably not make balance worse than what it is now with Indy, so I vote yes for adding extra options to the pipsqueaks. But sort of like BJ, this is a "weak" yes, conditioned to what feeling Zak gets when balancing. Speedgate will be quite interesting, as it has potential to beat Indy on most non-powergear tracks... also, Melange's reported higher bug capabilities in comparison to its IMSA pals might be a factor too.

PS.: I fully agree with BJ on his comment about rewarding car designers... Even though I'd love to see GT3 being used here, health and balance of the competition comes first, no doubt about it.

[Argammon]

I'm against any new car. I have only seen 2 types of user made cars so far:

1)Totally unrealistic crazy behaviour like the Lada

2)Very IMSA like but faster cars like the Melange

IMO Carrera, Audi, Corvette differ a lot more than Jaguar,P962,Melange and possibly the other 2 cars?

About the "work" done. Is it really that much? Not sure... 

[Argammon]

Yeah, and I also agree with BJ that it will proly cause even more balance problems.

And then I ask why people always need to create something faster/stronger than what's included in the original.

Look at most NFS games for example. 90% of all user made cars are rediculessly overpowered or at leaster way faster than they should be in compared to the one's already in the game.
Seems to be the same problem in stunts.

I'm missing a bit of humility here.

Why don't you ceate some car with interesting stearing capabilities and speed between the IMSA cars and the slow cars instead of creating one super duper car after another? There's definatly a gap there.


Oh and another thought:

Will those new options attract new pipsqueaks who would not have raced without them? No

Will they reduce the number of pipsqueaks? Potentially yes. For me it would ,at least, be a minus sign on the list if I consider pro and contra arguments whether to race or not.

[Mark L. Rivers]

Zak, BJ, I understand perfectly your points of view. Let me say only some words to make more clear my thought.

When I asked Zak to insert the new three cars in ZakStunts, he answers me with this words:

Well, I think the choice is yours: http://forum.stunts.hu/index.php?topic=2105.0

So I understood that he delegated the choice to oother drivers, as: "If drivers say 'no', than it wil be 'no'". But last Zak's comment is more clear for me, and now I understand something different. If the things are effectively as BJ wrote

Whatever the community says, the formation of the rules is still his choice. The popular vote is just a factor in the decision like anything else.

then it's OK for me.

About rewarding car designers, I'm sorry if this is what you understood reading my words. I simply want to say that not to considerate the three new cars without trying them, would have mean rejecting a good news wind that could bring new sap in the community. Sure it wouldn't have been encouraging for who spent a lot of work with the desire to make something good for all. I thought and I think that to be ready to try and evaluate (not including, but just trying and evaluating and eventual after rejecting if it's not suitable) what's new has been proposed to the community (obviously if it's not evidently aberrant) can make a good spirit, renovating the Stunts spirit, operating for a long life of the community.
The big mistake I mentioned is all this, starting from the exclusion of the new three cars without trying them. Above all if (as I had understood) the exclusion was determined ONLY by the thoughts of drivers (who never try that cars) by a crude poll.

I conclude saying that whatever Zak will choose about the new three cars, I'll consider his choice as the choice of a wise Stunts contest manager as he shows to be.

[Argammon]

I don't see your point Mark. You speak about exclusion of the cars. That sounds like they are part of the original game which they are not.

Hence, the status quo should be not to add them unless there are very good arguments to do so.

Or I could just create 10 different crazy cars and demand them to be taken into the game whith the argument that anyone voting against them did not try all of them thoroughly?

And IMO it's not much work to create new cars...

[Mark L. Rivers]

Or I could just create 10 different crazy cars and demand them to be taken into the game whith the argument that anyone voting against them did not try all of them thoroughly?

I have already explain my thoughts twice. I think that maybe my english doesn't permit me to explain my view in a better way. Anyway, I like to think that you has perfectly understood that I meant something different from this...

And IMO it's not much work to create new cars...

If you want to create a whatever car, or a crazy car (even 10 crazy cars!), then I'm agree with you.
If you want to create a well balanced and very fast car, so to realize it without bugs, without anormal controls, without Powergear, a car that can permit you "to drive some known tracts (small and large curves, fast chicane, up/down corkscrew) with an unconventional speed, higher than normal, but not too much so to appear unreal", a car really different from all other existent cars, well, this demands much work, above all a lot of test and subsequently tuning about torque, gear-ratios, grip, brakes and global effect. Sure, not months, but much work...

[Argammon]

Well I see your point, Mark. It's a matter of taste. As everyone knows I prefer the slow cars and don't get to excited over more fast one's...

[Duplode]

And then I ask why people always need to create something faster/stronger than what's included in the original.

Look at most NFS games for example. 90% of all user made cars are rediculessly overpowered or at leaster way faster than they should be in compared to the one's already in the game.
Seems to be the same problem in stunts.

I'm missing a bit of humility here.

Why don't you ceate some car with interesting stearing capabilities and speed between the IMSA cars and the slow cars instead of creating one super duper car after another? There's definatly a gap there.

Well, people try to make cars they find interesting, even if  merely to have a kick on instant power gear. Melange may be mostly an IMSA derivative, but the graphical touches still look cool nevertheless. As for the other cars, they do occupy a "gap": Speedgate is between Skoda (and the other true cheat cars) and Indy, while GT3 is a cross between IMSA and GTO... aren't those valid as well?