Hillclimb update?

[JZStudios 631]

This is more a question for the devs but I could have sworn that when PP was launched there was a planned update for at least a few more cars, and maybe a mystery track. I'm not sure of the additional track, but being a fan of hillclimb, one track and three cars gets a little... boring. Does anyone else remember or know of any planned hillclimb update?

[Job3k 7]

Full gravel Pikes Peak + V2 Handling on PP Cars + Current cars available on Pikes sometime in the future. But agree,we want more pure hillclimb cars

[RyuMakkuro 6]

Add to that a fix for the broken sequential shifting most likely coming as well in the Winter Wonderland update.

Though it would be nice if they would balance that class a bit more, since 405 and Quattro E2 should be basically as fast up that mountain. Their best times on Pikes Peak are within 0.7s of each other, on an over 10 minutes run. That should basically make them equal in this game, while that's more than obviously not the case *looks at Group B, F2 and RX*

[BrySkye 14]

G37L057 said:

Add to that a fix for the broken sequential shifting most likely coming as well in the Winter Wonderland update.

Though it would be nice if they would balance that class a bit more, since 405 and Quattro E2 should be basically as fast up that mountain. Their best times on Pikes Peak are within 0.7s of each other, on an over 10 minutes run. That should basically make them equal in this game, while that's more than obviously not the case *looks at Group B, F2 and RX*

An awful lot of factors involved though. Could point out the winning times between the 405 in 1988 and 89 was 1.1 seconds while there was over 21 seconds difference between the Quattro E2s times in 86 and 87.
Audi had spent quite a few years at Pikes Peak learning how to set up the Quattros. They had a lot more experience.
The 405 was certainly a more advanced car, with 4 wheel steering, etc. 

[JZStudios 631]

Job3k said:

Full gravel Pikes Peak + V2 Handling on PP Cars + Current cars available on Pikes sometime in the future. But agree,we want more pure hillclimb cars

I think I remember KickUp saying they most likely wont do full gravel, or all cars.

[JZStudios 631]

Job3k said:

Full gravel Pikes Peak + V2 Handling on PP Cars + Current cars available on Pikes sometime in the future. But agree,we want more pure hillclimb cars

I don't remember how to do the clever quote @KickUp but he said this on my Full gravel post:

   I want a full gravel version of Pikes Peak too as the cars we have in the game ran on the full gravel version. Hopefully I can talk more about this soon. 

Race to the Sky is more of a challenge as there are many landowners involved in getting the permissions to feature it and they are pretty  much always arguing about the real event let alone a virtual version of it

[BrySkye 14]

Depends when that was dated.

When it was revealed that SLRE would have all-gravel Pikes Peak, Paul dropped by to say we wouldn't have to buy SLRE in order to do that.

[enamel 0]

The #1 thing I would like to see is electric cars since that has basically become the premier PP class the past two years.

[JZStudios 631]

BrySkye said:

Depends when that was dated.

When it was revealed that SLRE would have all-gravel Pikes Peak, Paul dropped by to say we wouldn't have to buy SLRE in order to do that.

That was his reply about a week and a half ago? Not too long.

[JZStudios 631]

enamel said:

The #1 thing I would like to see is electric cars since that has basically become the premier PP class the past two years.

At least that's better than diseasel

[Rallycameraman 241]

I just want to drift my Mk2 around them hairpins  :'(

[BrySkye 14]

JZStudios said:

BrySkye said:

Depends when that was dated.

When it was revealed that SLRE would have all-gravel Pikes Peak, Paul dropped by to say we wouldn't have to buy SLRE in order to do that.

That was his reply about a week and a half ago? Not too long.

Well, if it wasn't happening, I don't really think he'd have a whole lot to be saying about it. Hopefully is hopeful.
As for the latter, we always knew that other cars on Pikes Peak would only come after the car physics were finalised.

Basically, I don't really see how what you're quoting suggests neither is likely to happen.

[KevM 44]

You'd need a Millington for the hill @Rallycameraman 

[RyuMakkuro 6]

BrySkye said:

G37L057 said:

Add to that a fix for the broken sequential shifting most likely coming as well in the Winter Wonderland update.

Though it would be nice if they would balance that class a bit more, since 405 and Quattro E2 should be basically as fast up that mountain. Their best times on Pikes Peak are within 0.7s of each other, on an over 10 minutes run. That should basically make them equal in this game, while that's more than obviously not the case *looks at Group B, F2 and RX*

An awful lot of factors involved though. Could point out the winning times between the 405 in 1988 and 89 was 1.1 seconds while there was over 21 seconds difference between the Quattro E2s times in 86 and 87.
Audi had spent quite a few years at Pikes Peak learning how to set up the Quattros. They had a lot more experience.
The 405 was certainly a more advanced car, with 4 wheel steering, etc. 

Well, setting up a car is part of rally ;) And it's not like they didn't had practice runs or that Peugeot engineers didn't knew how to setup. Quattro Sport had over 45 seconds of difference with the same driver, when you look at 84 and 85, when you look at how Toyota faired later on in PP, their fastest time was with their first entry.
Also, the 4 wheel steering... let's take it with a big grain of salt. If it would be indeed that more advanced, we would be seeing it everywhere by now, while it's obviously not the case, not even close.

Let's say that there's not enough info to determine which one was actually faster.

And a small thing, before the Quattro was nerfed in DR, it was basically on par with 405... when properly set up. Another thing, is the Pikes Peak in-game a 1:1 recreation? Cause if yes, then all PP cars should get a massive nerf. Barely going below 11 minutes IRL, easily below 9 minutes in-game.

[BrySkye 14]

G37L057 said:

And a small thing, before the Quattro was nerfed in DR, it was basically on par with 405... when properly set up. Another thing, is the Pikes Peak in-game a 1:1 recreation? Cause if yes, then all PP cars should get a massive nerf. Barely going below 11 minutes IRL, easily below 9 minutes in-game.

Yes it is, but that doesn't really mean very much.
You can't really compare games so directly to real life like that.
One big elephant in the room to get out straight away: these cars only set times on the all-gravel version of Pikes Peak.
Quite an important detail that's going to easily explain a minute of that time.
 
But going a bit further, it's not just raw performance, people playing a game are way way more willing to take risks or drive in ways that no one would in reality, so it's pretty normal that people set faster times, and yeah, significantly so.
In the case of Pikes Peak, a gamer isn't under the same levels of physical and mental strain as a real driver, nor the degradation in mental performance and reaction times as they climb and the air gets thinner (Loeb took oxygen bottles with him in 2013). 
Let's head on over to Top Gear for a feature on the subject

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vd0RlYjchc4

[function9 0]

Yes, in game times should be a bit lower than real world counter parts on the same course. But the last time I saw, people were beating Loeb's record on all tarmac and not far off it on mixed surface. That's just silly. A sub 9min time on PP doesn't require any kind of risks or abusing game mechanics. If you just have a clean run, it's not hard to get below 9min. Which in itself is crazy looking at real times over the past 4-5 years.

[RyuMakkuro 6]

BrySkye said:

Yes it is, but that doesn't really mean very much.
You can't really compare games so directly to real life like that.
One big elephant in the room to get out straight away: these cars only set times on the all-gravel version of Pikes Peak.
Quite an important detail that's going to easily explain a minute of that time.

Naturally, but over 2 minutes of difference... that's quite a bit out of the "possible" zone.

And all-gravel version? Really? Was dead certain it was the mixed version... should've cross checked that Wikipedia entry with something else than my memories. But even then, scoring 8:40 on mixed is possible, and that's not even half tarmac anyway. If all gravel will get in, I reckon that going below 9 minutes may still be possible. At the worst case, under 9:10.

I scored 8:57 with Quattro before it got nerfed on the mixed surface. With a broken sequential, so I could've been about 10 seconds faster. Well, once the all-gravel will be in-game, we can see what's what.

[BrySkye 14]

G37L057 said:

BrySkye said:

Yes it is, but that doesn't really mean very much.
You can't really compare games so directly to real life like that.
One big elephant in the room to get out straight away: these cars only set times on the all-gravel version of Pikes Peak.
Quite an important detail that's going to easily explain a minute of that time.

Naturally, but over 2 minutes of difference... that's quite a bit out of the "possible" zone.

And all-gravel version? Really? Was dead certain it was the mixed version... should've cross checked that Wikipedia entry with something else than my memories. But even then, scoring 8:40 on mixed is possible, and that's not even half tarmac anyway. If all gravel will get in, I reckon that going below 9 minutes may still be possible. At the worst case, under 9:10.

I think I scored 8:46 with Quattro before it got nerfed on the mixed surface. With a broken sequential, so I could've been about 10 seconds faster. Well, once the all-gravel will be in-game, we can see what's what.

The hill climb getting paved only began after the turn of the century.

2002 First Mile 6%

2004 End of mile 1-Halfway 21%

2006 Glen Cove-Double Cut 35%

2007 Double Cut-Devil’s Playground 46%

2010 19-mile to summit 57%

2011 Devil’s Playground-19-mile 76%

2012 Halfway-Glen Cove 100%

Is it extreme, absolutely. Bear in mind the current cars still have all their extra downforce.
Like any racing game, it's possible to set up the cars to something that's not entirely reasonable, so even after v2 and if all the cars were perfect, people will be beating times over such a long course in the area of 60 seconds just from practice, etc.
Real drivers don't get to practice it again and again and again. Pikes Peak is still an event where a driver can spin and still set a course record.

Pikes Peak does have a lot of extra factors over other races though related to the environment and how it affects driver performance.
Not sure if DiRT Rally simulates how downforce decreases as the atmosphere gets thinner either.

[RyuMakkuro 6]

BrySkye said:
Pikes Peak does have a lot of extra factors over other races though related to the environment and how it affects driver performance. 

Not sure if DiRT Rally simulates how downforce decreases as the atmosphere gets thinner either.

In one of the road books that led to PP update, they mentioned that with altitude the engine power decreases along with aerodynamical grip. Not sure if it actually works though.

Also, I get your point about length and being careful. However those are trained professional drivers using state of the art vehicles, not a "no-lif'ing kid with a gamepad" who by being careful goes below 9 minutes while making mistakes still, aside from simply driving slower. Again, V2 and all gravel will show what's what.

[JZStudios 631]

BrySkye said:

JZStudios said:

BrySkye said:

Depends when that was dated.

When it was revealed that SLRE would have all-gravel Pikes Peak, Paul dropped by to say we wouldn't have to buy SLRE in order to do that.

That was his reply about a week and a half ago? Not too long.

Well, if it wasn't happening, I don't really think he'd have a whole lot to be saying about it. Hopefully is hopeful.
As for the latter, we always knew that other cars on Pikes Peak would only come after the car physics were finalised.

Basically, I don't really see how what you're quoting suggests neither is likely to happen.

He's just had a lot of discussions and statements that make it seem like other than a physics overhaul, not much is happening. They might do a classic PP, might not. but it definitely seems like they're not doing any additional content. I wouldn't call an all dirt PP a major content update.

[BrySkye 14]

G37L057 said:

BrySkye said:
Pikes Peak does have a lot of extra factors over other races though related to the environment and how it affects driver performance. 

Not sure if DiRT Rally simulates how downforce decreases as the atmosphere gets thinner either.

In one of the road books that led to PP update, they mentioned that with altitude the engine power decreases along with aerodynamical grip. Not sure if it actually works though.

Also, I get your point about length and being careful. However those are trained professional drivers using state of the art vehicles, not a "no-lif'ing kid with a gamepad" who by being careful goes below 9 minutes while making mistakes still, aside from simply driving slower. Again, V2 and all gravel will show what's what.

Professional drivers that don't undergo high altitude training, etc etc... 14,000ft is a very big deal.
You risk altitude sickness once you pass 8,000ft (the maximum altitude that pressurised aircraft cabins are allowed to maintain. Most current aim for 7,000ft with newer ones reducing cabin altitude to 6,000 or 5,000ft)
A lot of drivers now, like Loeb, take oxygen tanks but those racing these cars in the 80's didn't.
The Group B cars were absolutely brutal in how demanding they were to drive, and the Pikes Peak cars of that day turned it up even higher, with no co-driver assistance. 

I don't know why you're so dead set against the middle-ground compromise I'm suggesting here.
It's a combination of flaws in the game (which I'm admitting) which can be exploited to make the cars behave beyond what the real ones were as well as there also being certain significant limitations in real life which can be ignored in a game, especially those that affected the drivers.
All I'm saying is that while there are always differences between real life and a game, there are extra factors with an event like Pikes Peak that can compound them even more.
I'd also refute that being careful and making mistakes will get very many people a sub-9 minute time.
Getting the 205 T16 up, clean, in 9:51 was pretty stressful.

[RyuMakkuro 6]

BrySkye said:

Professional drivers that don't undergo high altitude training, etc etc... 14,000ft is a very big deal.
You risk altitude sickness once you pass 8,000ft (the maximum altitude that pressurised aircraft cabins are allowed to maintain. Most current aim for 7,000ft with newer ones reducing cabin altitude to 6,000 or 5,000ft)
A lot of drivers now, like Loeb, take oxygen tanks but those racing these cars in the 80's didn't.
The Group B cars were absolutely brutal in how demanding they were to drive, and the Pikes Peak cars of that day turned it up even higher, with no co-driver assistance. 

I don't know why you're so dead set against the middle-ground compromise I'm suggesting here.
It's a combination of flaws in the game (which I'm admitting) which can be exploited to make the cars behave beyond what the real ones were as well as there also being certain significant limitations in real life which can be ignored in a game, especially those that affected the drivers.
All I'm saying is that while there are always differences between real life and a game, there are extra factors with an event like Pikes Peak that can compound them even more.
I'd also refute that being careful and making mistakes will get very many people a sub-9 minute time.
Getting the 205 T16 up, clean, in 9:51 was pretty stressful.

I'm not dead set against the middle-ground at all, it's just that you seem to exaggerate few things. Yes, the altitude is a big thing, so is controlling those Group B cars. Which is why there's so much respect towards Group B drivers in rally community, while you make it seem like they were some noobs that didn't prepare in any way, for a rather extreme event.
They obviously had to prepare, they were already familiar with the cars they've been racing in and the lack of the co-driver can prove to be actually an improvement, especially on the high-altitude. Why? Because they don't have to take away from their concentration in order to listen to the notes, which as you implied yourself, at that altitude is more important than how fast the car actually is. They had practice and I don't believe they didn't study the map of the Pikes Peak in any way.
I mean come on, those are rally drivers. They are meant to handle anything you throw at them. Sure, the Pikes Peak is incredibly difficult, but that doesn't mean they were gonna slow down to a turtle pace. They were careful, but they can be careful AND fast at the same time. They had way more feedback than any of us sitting in front of a monitor will ever have. That allowed to be faster while still keeping everything in check.

Let's not make one of probably the bravest rally drivers there ever were look like some sissies.

On the subject of game flaws, you can make a sub 9 minutes run with the Quattro or 405 on the tarmac while still falling out and getting the penalty... and not being stupendously fast. And I never noticed any flaws that you could abuse. Drifting around hairpins is a normal rally view after all. You can't corners with the on or off grip, and the mixed version while a lot harder to go sub with Quattro (1 hour long shifts are really annoying), is still quite easy to do with 405 while just being careful. Without ever abusing any flaws, aside from acceleration. Cutting corners? Don't have to. Still can go sub 9. With 205... well, that thing is just horrid to drive. Let's leave it at that.

So while I get your point, it's definitely partly due to how much we can push the cars in a game compared to how much they could without completely risking their lives. However, the second is not abuse of the flaws, it's as simple as the cars performance itself. They just accelerate a bit too damn well for a turbocharged cars running low on air. I would say that with V2 their cornering speeds should be about right, but then again I can be completely wrong and the acceleration may be ok and cornering speed being completely off the charts.
My point being, it's not about whether the PP cars are faster than they should be. It's about how much faster they are. I mean for crying out loud, Loeb with his 208 is slower with an oxygen tank in his car than someone with a 405 according to DR...

[MiatakiasGR 1]

ho;;c;imbing needs better optimization cause i get in rally 30-60 frames most time and in hilclimbing i get 15-22 frames with same settings..:(