Jump to content Jump to content

Gonira

Members
  • Content Count

    39
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

21 Unleaded

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Poor excuse. Just because it's the same for everyone, it doesn't mean this couldn't be improved. Call it "banana option" then, whatever. It's just a name. You nailed it. Great post, totally agree.
  2. So no option is good. It's a problem then. Why not relax the strict option a bit? I'm not sure of what could be a perfect fix, but it's clear the current system for online is just bad. It shouldn't be kept like that.
  3. I was just watching the F1 Virtual GP with some of the best sim racers and some F1 drivers, top level, and guess what. From the 17 drivers completing the 50% race on Áustria, 16 had a time penalty because of cutting corners, with Nicolas Latifi getting more than 20 seconds on penalties alone. This is ridiculous, it's almost like track position doesn't matter anymore, just the sum of your penalties. I always found strict rules to be far too punishing, but I thought it was me, and the best drivers would be able to deal with it. Well, clearly not.
  4. I don't know. How does this compare to your results in other tracks? Maybe you're right. I've watched some career mode episodes from youtubers and most of them seem to get unusually great results in Singapore, even more so than in Austria. Elmo's chart and my first comparison against leaderboards also pointed to it being the most unbalanced track this year. I haven't raced there though to see how it would go to me.
  5. I agree with you. Small deviations on AI are to be expected, but I doubt they will be as significant as our own better pace on the tracks we love and poor pace on the tracks we hate. At least this was sort of my conclusion after my comparisons with the leaderboards. Now I'm making another experiment as I play my season. Just after the practice and qualifying sessions (so I'm well trained on the track already), I jump out of my career and run a short quali in grand prix mode as Norris, running six hot laps (two for each soft tyre set). Then I adjust difficulty on that track so that Sa
  6. 360 on my G29's profile. I don't change anything in the game.
  7. Ok, so I went for a different approach just out of curiosity, trying to eliminate as many variables as I could. Again, using the leaderboards, but totally disregarding the top 100 laps, to get rid of cheaters. From there, I searched the 3rd best time that would totally match my assists and setup situation (which is: TC on, ABS on, manual gears, no custom setup). 3rd best instead of 1st best just as a second layer of protection against cheaters. At Interlagos, this gave me a 1:07.524. My 85 AI baseline lap is 1:09.607, which is 3.0854% slower. I repeated this search in some
  8. So I just did that, but I only found one other youtuber apart from Tom97 who did this in all the tracks: Jaames. He is a bit faster than Tom in every track. Two guys = less variance at least. These are the average times between the two, fwiw. Australia 1:19.021 Bahrain 1:24.955 Vietnam 1:32.917 China 1:29.055 Netherlands: 1:08.330 Spain 1:13.987 Monaco 1:07.918 Azerbaijan: 1:37.342 Canada 1:07.649 France 1:27.043 Austria 1:02.602 Britain 1:24.003 Hungary 1:12.696 Belgium 1:40.978 Italy 1:17.812 Singapore 1:32.738 Russia 1:29.751 Japan 1:25.487 USA 1:29.
  9. I did the same in 2018, checking a hotlap series of some youtuber - TRL Limitless, I think (we seem to have the same ideas, heh). Yeah, definitely there's variance. We could have a clearer picture though if we get this information from many of them and average the times. Actually, it would be very indicative of real life performance, but unfortunately, the number of guys who post an entire series of personal bests in every track is not that big. And then again, the problem of all these laps being under strict cutting rules. Getting numbers like these for regular cutting doesn't look like it's
  10. About Austria in my list, I wouldn't see it as a +1. Maybe a +4 or +5, if you consider the average (not saying it's enough though, this I don't know). My baseline of 85 was taken in Brazil, but in theory Brazil has one of the slowest AI's, so it isn't really a baseline.
  11. For my list, the fact there's more people or less people time trialing is not relevant, because my cut is a percentage. A track that attracts a lot of newbies like Australia (since it's the first one) might shift the averages to the slower side though, but tbh I'm not sure. I think the only failproof method would be a very consistent dude setting personal bests on each track and allowing himself the same level of cutting we'd allow (so it would need to be outside of time trials). Almost everyone is not that consistent though, it would have to be a pro. Some people post lists of diffi
  12. Yes. The swings caused by regular corner cutting rules would be possibly bigger than those caused by AI pace itself, so our model alone probably won't make much sense for most. The game really needs an intermediate stringency level. Both the current options are too extreme in opposite directions, both are terrible.
  13. You're good. I'd probably go all the way to 110 if I was you. At least 105. And I'd start racing on leagues. Be a legend.
  14. Are you mad? Strict is unplayable haha, I'd be getting a time penalty every lap. I play on regular. BTW, you asked about Australia. I tried it and to me AI pace seems right, if not a few tenths slower than it should. I did some sessions just for difficulty checking. 20 or so time trial laps to relearn the track, then jumped into short quali + short race to get a feel of the AI. Brazil, Australia and China felt about right to me at around 85. I'd say probably australia at 79 would be too easy? But that's when corner cutting comes. I think there's quite some time to be gained ther
  15. To get the top 10% times, I scrolled. There's no other way. 3 to 5 minutes holding the down button for each track. A pain. I Ideally wanted to go with a leaderboard time that would match my AI, to avoid these +2.whatever% multiplications, which can cause distortions, but no way I'd be able to scroll that far down. These are them. Top 10% leaderboard cutoff times (dry weather), as in September 15: Australia: 1:21.240 Bahrain: 1:26.395 Vietnam: 1:35.349 China: 1:30.391 Netherlands: 1:09.886 Spain: 1:15.857 Monaco: 1:10.924 Azerbaijan: 1:39.595 Canada: 1:09.487 France: 1:2
×
×
  • Create New...