Jump to content Jump to content

Safety rating system improvements


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

The Safety rating system - It’s OK but not great. I probably have way too much time on my hands, and I’ve no doubt missed the 2021 boat with my timing for CM to incorporate any of this, but I definitely think there’s scope for improvement in future releases, and so am getting this on the record.

I would love to hear your views on the below before making a proper suggestion post.

As a generally “safe” racer (with a S or A safety rating), my view is the higher safety grades should be much harder to achieve, and you should be offered more protection when you get there. Too many times you’re matched up against “S grade” racers who don’t race safely.

For example I had a 100% S rating, in a race I got hit, I hit someone else and I got a penalty. I lost a whopping 80% off my safety rating for that. The next race I got a few track limit warnings (3 I think but no penalty) and I’m back down to an A. It then took 6 races to get back up. That’s mad and better balance is needed.

I understand that any system like this is tricky to get 100% right in all situations because of the variables involved.

My main points suggested are;

1) First up, everyone should start from a F grade and have to really grind to get to a move up the scale to a S grade (this should be the “goal”), something like 75+ clean races to do so. Currently, it’s way too easy to gain and drop levels - often it takes only a handful of races. This way consistently bad drivers do not accidentally make it into the higher grades, as we know does happen. Also, chances are you’ve (hopefully) got much better car control/ race craft the more races you do (accidents do happen of course and kamikaze drivers don’t care about consistent safe racing…).

2) Then, to compliment this, there should be a sliding scale that works both ways; i.e. it takes fewer races to move up grades, the further up the grading you go. And vice versa - it takes fewer races to move down grades the lower down you go in the grading. If you need to spend ages to move through one level so be it - this would help weed out the consistently bad racers, and give some protection if you’re a generally safe driver that has “worked” to get into the better grades or are involved in those one-off bad situations like my experience above. The safety grading system will be more reliable.
 

Yes, some people will take advantage of the downward leniency when they’re in the upper grades, but my view is if you’ve had to really grind to get a decent rating, you’re less likely to take the mickey and just want to race cleanly, or by that time it would have just been “conditioned” out of you.

I have outlined my proposal in the attached picture. Using a base % for a clean or bad race (in my case 7%), you can then uplift the result of a clean or bad race at  varying rates based on the driver safety grade. Once factored in, for example, it would take someone approx 50 clean races to get to a 100% C from a 0% F, and take 36 races to go the other way (with per incident penalties on top, so it’ll be less than 36 in reality). It would take approx 25 clean races from a 100% C to a 100% S, and 39 races to go the other way (again with per incident penalties on top, so it would be less than 39 in practice). It provides a better balance - a couple of bad races with really major incidents would demote you from a 100% S grade, which at the upper range is more unlikely because you and everyone around you generally races safer.

The “per incident” penalty % stated (which also use the same negative uplift per grade) are up for debate and could use refining, but you get the gist. I’m not advocating that track limits be included in safety rating (although I’m not opposed to a small % drop for them as I suggest) - my main two points above are my major concern and the main point behind this post.

I also appreciate things do happen and some of these penalties may be handed out unfairly, but those who are incentivised by working toward a better grade and access to lobbies with cleaner racers will just suck it up and get on with it (and sit at the back if to avoid incidents if they have to).

I generally race 5 laps (and that’s what the above is based on), but the base could be tweaked for 25% race instances - say 14%, reducing the 0% F to 100% S to 38 races, with the per incident penalties remaining the same.

I think the above would encourage better general behaviour on track, help “condition” and incentivise drivers to race more safely (if they’re receptive to it), and sort the safe from the unsafe drivers more efficiently over time.

What do you think? I’m genuinely looking for viewpoints, and happy to explain my thinking in more detail if you have questions.

All the best,

Monzie 🖖🏽

 

E27EDB3D-A831-443B-A223-4D57CBAF99DB.png

Edited by Monzie83
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm very unsure if track limits should be included in the safety rating, though of course should still be punished in race. 

Generally, given the way track limits are handled in game, I don't think it connects with 'safe' racing. 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
59 minutes ago, KNT2011 said:

I'm very unsure if track limits should be included in the safety rating, though of course should still be punished in race. 

Generally, given the way track limits are handled in game, I don't think it connects with 'safe' racing. 

Must admit, I was in two minds about this myself. Which is why I included a small % drop for doing so and a limit of 3 before the % starts amping up - fully take your point though.

Also just realised one thing I missed was “rejoining the track in a unsafe manner”.

What do you think about the rest of it?

Edited by Monzie83
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Monzie83 said:

Must admit, I was in two minds about this myself. Which is why I included a small % drop for doing so and a limit of 3 before the % starts amping up - fully take your point though.

Also just realised one thing I missed was “rejoining the track in a unsafe manner”.

All that's needed is a balancing, it's been needed for years though so I don't imagine it's coming. 

Just give us 'relaxed' track limits but without it also meaning I can just skip most chicanes and we'll be looking at something much more enjoyable and realistic. 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly not sure why people expect clean racing in a 5 lap race with 20 cars. You are racing against people that don't have basic racing rule knowledge, attention span, time, skill, or interest for a 25% race. Its like dumping billions of dollars$$ from a helicopter over a large city, and trusting people to distribute the money fairly.

5 laps is a silly format to expect "clean sim racing" except for the small percentage of people that can drive against say 100 ai or higher, and even then its hard to drive clean when people are going three wide at narrow tracks like Austria because they can't waste a lap behind the slow car that is swerving left to right and holding everyone up. 

Not sure why you want an S or A rating either, its impossible to find a lobby on 25%.  Losing a S rating for 6 races doesn't seem like a big deal.  Think of "S" as absolutely perfect and A a "excellent" and then your first 2 points don't really matter. The rating doesn't drop so fast in 25% IIRC so it is already scaled like you are suggesting. 

I gave up trying to find a lobby in 25% ranked with more than 2 people, but I still like to check it when I turn the game on and its always empty, and if I do find a couple of guys, they are voting to race at Austria, Italy, Belgium or one of the dumb short tracks over and over, so it gets repetitive. 

Incorporating a safety ranking into a unranked lobby would be better for online racing. There are plenty of clean drivers in unranked. (But they are usually too fast to race against!) 

A ranked system with An 18 minute quali session that uses F1s current quali rules would prevent people that are 10 seconds off the pace from competing in the race. (Williams was almost DQ from a race a few years ago).  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/1/2021 at 9:07 AM, KNT2011 said:

I'm very unsure if track limits should be included in the safety rating, though of course should still be punished in race. 

Generally, given the way track limits are handled in game, I don't think it connects with 'safe' racing. 

Agreed. The game already differentiates between 'exceeded track limits' and 'corner cutting'. Only the latter should have an effect on safety rating imo.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/1/2021 at 8:39 PM, ChicagoSeminole said:

Honestly not sure why people expect clean racing in a 5 lap race with 20 cars. You are racing against people that don't have basic racing rule knowledge, attention span, time, skill, or interest for a 25% race. Its like dumping billions of dollars$$ from a helicopter over a large city, and trusting people to distribute the money fairly.

5 laps is a silly format to expect "clean sim racing" except for the small percentage of people that can drive against say 100 ai or higher, and even then its hard to drive clean when people are going three wide at narrow tracks like Austria because they can't waste a lap behind the slow car that is swerving left to right and holding everyone up. 

Not sure why you want an S or A rating either, its impossible to find a lobby on 25%.  Losing a S rating for 6 races doesn't seem like a big deal.  Think of "S" as absolutely perfect and A a "excellent" and then your first 2 points don't really matter. The rating doesn't drop so fast in 25% IIRC so it is already scaled like you are suggesting. 

I gave up trying to find a lobby in 25% ranked with more than 2 people, but I still like to check it when I turn the game on and its always empty, and if I do find a couple of guys, they are voting to race at Austria, Italy, Belgium or one of the dumb short tracks over and over, so it gets repetitive. 

Incorporating a safety ranking into a unranked lobby would be better for online racing. There are plenty of clean drivers in unranked. (But they are usually too fast to race against!) 

A ranked system with An 18 minute quali session that uses F1s current quali rules would prevent people that are 10 seconds off the pace from competing in the race. (Williams was almost DQ from a race a few years ago).  

I understand where you’re coming from, but I also feel some of your thoughts are likely governed by the existing deficient system, rather than what it could/ should be, and in some cases, actually prove my point. Allow me to explain;

- I don’t think it’s too much to expect safe 5 lap races if you are a safe racer and you have confidence you’ll be matched up with similarly safe racers. If the safety rating doesn’t assess your proficiency properly, then you are certain to matched up incorrectly - even if you both have S safety ratings for example. This is where the current system falls down.
- I do agree with your sentiment (that a S grade should indicate a very high safety proficiency and A a high safety proficiency and so on), but it in practice it’s not working because of the volatility, the grade itself is not a good indicator of your actual 
safety proficiency, given how easy it is to move between grades.
- Currently, it is possible to get fairly safe 5 lap races (even with 15 or so racers), but these, imo, are only found in majority grade S lobbies. But even then because it is so easy to get to an S or A grade there are invariably a large number of drivers with those grades that race unsafely - I have seen too many stupid incidents/ blatant ramming/ not pulling out of unachievable moves etc. For me, those kind of incidents should be really minimal in the majority S grade lobbies but it’s not - my own personal feeling is those lobbies are really operating at more of a A/B safety level given the amount and nature of incidents.
- if the reliability of the grade can be improved I think the experience will be more tuned to the level you’re at, which is why posed my two main suggestions. I think by doing this the safety grading system does become more reliable over time, and then when the session allocation algorithm does it’s thing you’ll have more confidence you are racing against those with similar safety ability to your own - what you then do with where you are, is of course, up to you. 

- Your comment about “3 wide in Austria” is valid, I fully agree with you about drivers making too many defending moves, especially in the braking zone - it’s not punished at all and needs to be addressed somehow. 

- I agree with you on the 25% races -  I’m on PS and have given up trying to find 25% races. Having a S or A grade (as I normally have) is a definite disadvantage because you will naturally get fewer people wanting to do a 25% race as it is (probably as it takes more time). By having an A or S grade, you’re taking a narrower slice of an already narrow pool of racers and I’m not sure what can be done about that. Perhaps improving the reliability of the grading system will also increase the numbers of drivers wanting to participate in 25% races because you have more confidence you’ll be matched up with similarly safe drivers rather than risk investing a lot of time into a race only to be bumped off by a kamikaze driver on the last lap?

- Regarding unranked lobbies, that’s not my experience, but may well be true as I haven’t played them in a while. For me they were like the wild-west when I tried them out, and I didn’t like the idea of collisions being off which most lobbies seem to be. I do like your idea of incorporating a safety rating into unranked lobbies somehow  but not sure how it could work in practice. I also guess that is part of the draw for those people in them - there’s no repercussions, and that’s probably why they have more participants?

🖖🏽

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...