Re: Sebring 12 Hours Race Day Thread

[CredibleWizard]

Not arguing with you Drake, but something came to me whilst I was reading your post about sponsors..

how the hell do Caterham get sponsorship in F1??

[Guest]

Well if everything in bold is pointless why are we even running endurance races, the point everyone is trying to make back to you seems to missed every post you return. It is not a sprint race, its is a 12 hour race not 14 and drop a stint. If Audi get a problem and decide it takes 2 hours to fix they cant say its ok we will run on until we complete 12 full hours. If they have a problem that is it race over, same goes for any other type of racing. If you crash, breakdown suffer a fault it is what it is. Teams dont ask for more hours or for a random number to be pulled out and maybe some teams think 12 hours is long enough then its time to go do something outside.

[F4H Drake]

Well if everything in bold is pointless why are we even running endurance races, the point everyone is trying to make back to you seems to missed every post you return. It is not a sprint race, its is a 12 hour race not 14 and drop a stint. If Audi get a problem and decide it takes 2 hours to fix they cant say its ok we will run on until we complete 12 full hours. If they have a problem that is it race over, same goes for any other type of racing. If you crash, breakdown suffer a fault it is what it is. Teams dont ask for more hours or for a random number to be pulled out and maybe some teams think 12 hours is long enough then its time to go do something outside.

The fact that you gave it a real world equivalent is the pointlessness about it, and it provided nothing towards your argument.

For instance I could have them be equivalent to say:

Controller Error - Ate too many burritos last night
Crash - Shouldn't have had my hand up my nose
Lag - My beer bottle fell under the brake pedal.

When I start winning prizes and getting paid, I'll worry about how realistic this race is because until such, all these real world comparisons are completely and utterly ILLOGICAL. This is a GAME, and we are bound to its FAULTY damage model. If I could maybe fix my aero in 30 seconds like in REAL LIFE, than I would not get so angry. Luckily I do not get LAG in REAL LIFE or else I might disappear randomly and have to wait to be invited back in.

Yes, there are things that are out of a teams control in real life just like lag, but rarely do they carry the severity that lag has. In sportscar racing, the biggest event I can remember in recent years common on by a random happening was Stephen Ortelli's blow out at Monza, back when Audi ran the R10, but this IS a part of racing. Lag is NOT a part of racing. It is byproduct of the internet. The equivalent in real life would be if fans ran into the paddock and stole all of the teams equipment. Random race ending chance that has NOTHING to do with racing, just the venue you're racing at, and in our case it happens to be over the internet.

But don't worry, you've won I'll concede. You need only look at my edit above, and then disregard is quickly as nonsensical garbage. Good morning, off to bed.

[Guest]

I havent won anything just putting across the point from the other side which is what is needed to improve how things work or if things are just implemented it can bring more problems.

The game is not at fault for peoples poor connections only the person racing who lags out is and this is why you cannot just implement something to benefit poor connections when people who raced in a lower lobby with perfect connections could lose places because of a re run stint.

[Adder 020]

For me there is a differance between Sprint racing and endurance events

Personally i would not like to add a extra stint.
No matter how I look at it an extra stint seems unfair imo. For me it takes away the Luck factor that is a big part of these kind of races. So maybe the outright fasted team doesn't win because of a lag out, or your wheel, battery, tv or xbox's dies during the race it is part of the endurance charm.
You may not like it but you have to accept it for what it is or not enter.

Seeing the events of last year and this year, we had teams winning or getting to the podium that on out right speed would not have won but 1) they stayed out of trouble on track and 2) had their stuff together on the hard ware side and that paid off for them.

In all these races we have seen that the fasted guys also make mistakes and can get damage and not always at their own fault. Then a team with less outright speed does not take to many risks and stay undamaged during their stint in the end should benefit from their chosen tactic.
Adding a extra stint just so the top teams have more change on winning is not fair to these other teams. This is their change to beat some of the best and for those teams it bring great joy and satisfaction.

Other event feed back is on incident in the A lobby that needs to be look at for next time:

In stint 3 there were 3 lmp1 placed at the back of the grid (Venom, Chrisupra and tsaFooT) giving big advantage to the LMP teams that where at the front of the pack. What i understood was that those car where more than 5000ft infront after those 3 cleared the pack of just started GT cars. This is dangerous to both classes and unfair to those 3 lmp teams in the back. In the lobby B that i was in we had the lmp's alway starting in front and it made the starts a little less demanding. Would like to see the same rules being used in all of the the lobbies.

I think i read it in this threat already but i think there should be some catch up point during the race and with that I mean no double stinting at for example the halfway point so that the delays that occour can be taken away with a new lobby and drivers starting on time reducing the delay in the end. For stint 4 i got my invite around 30 min before the start, and then it took 1 hour to get the race started because we had to wait on double stinters. I have no problem with double or even triple stints but we need to look at reducing the delays that these are bringing.


Just sharing my personal view on this extra stint item. Don't shoot me....

I am fully agreeing this post.
Also a ( small) add to this. I said it a few days ago, about set up by the hosts. There were some different settings( stint 4 I started 6 due to qualifying and stint 5 I started 4th due to finish positions stint 3), and also there was 1 who didnt know about the feet measurement. Thats for me the only tip for the organisers, to communicate a bit better about the rules.
But I have to say, big applause for the organisers, they did a great job!

[TG Wormburner]

Drake, you want to know why you seem to be the only one proposing these new systems and everyone argues the same points against them? It's because that's what would happen and we all know it.

You used F4H as an example. I am friends with most of them so I don't think they'll mind or take offense.

F4H Bullet - unstable connection but a really fast driver. Generally speaking if someone is going to lag it will be him.

F4H Diablo - when in school has a great connection one second and has experienced a terrible one the next.

Mopar - used to have a bad connection but has drastically improved of late.

F4H Chrisupra - whether through rotten luck, a bad decision, or a mixture has crashed in every single endurance event over the past two years.

They shouldn't be bailed out through some manufactured rule the same reason I shouldn't because my wheel is an unreliable piece of crap. I know going in there is a 50/50 shot my wheel will screw up on me the same way Magictap's did. I don't want an extra stint or some credit rule. It isn't fair to other people that don't have problems and run the entire race.

You can argue until you are blue in the face but it won't change the fact that the people who deserve to win these damn things are the people who persevere through all the garbage that you experience in multi-player online racing. It is what makes an endurance event what it is.

[Ianmr]

Drake, you want to know why you seem to be the only one proposing these new systems and everyone argues the same points against them? It's because that's what would happen and we all know it.

You used F4H as an example. I am friends with most of them so I don't think they'll mind or take offense.

F4H Bullet - unstable connection but a really fast driver. Generally speaking if someone is going to lag it will be him.

F4H Diablo - when in school has a great connection one second and has experienced a terrible one the next.

Mopar - used to have a bad connection but has drastically improved of late.

F4H Chrisupra - whether through rotten luck, a bad decision, or a mixture has crashed in every single endurance event over the past two years.

They shouldn't be bailed out through some manufactured rule the same reason I shouldn't because my wheel is an unreliable piece of crap. I know going in there is a 50/50 shot my wheel will screw up on me the same way Magictap's did. I don't want an extra stint or some credit rule. It isn't fair to other people that don't have problems and run the entire race.

You can argue until you are blue in the face but it won't change the fact that the people who deserve to win these damn things are the people who persevere through all the garbage that you experience in multi-player online racing. It is what makes an endurance event what it is.

This thread has been an interesting read, but as mentioned the teams that win are not always the fastest on pace but the teams that just quietly hammer in the miles and stay out of trouble. You can see this in real life racing, it's not always the fastest car that wins an edurance race but the car the stays out of trouble etc. The only different rather than engine issue we have lag outs, rather than flat tyres we have lag crashes etc.

Personally they way I believe we run the events at the moment is great but feel free to shoot me down.

However personally I believe TORA have a few other things to work on, starting stints on time (on-going issue), also I think we need a fairer way of starting the stints, as a 1s role off can lose you alot of time throught the stint, unsure what people thoughts are on this point?

[Guest]

I think the 1 second roll off is a good idea as it can sometimes get messy into turn 1. For me a 1 second roll off is a better trade off then damaged aero. I think the way in which stints are ordered for the grid could be better as one stint was on race position second was in PI order. This instantly gave my aston a rear position for LMP which was unfair.

The double stinting is fine by me but we do need a catch up stint were al drivers are fresh to make up any time falling behind.

[TLR Scrublord]

I just think grid ordering should be done by finishing position from the last stint before & if somebody lags out they should start at the back of thier group so LMP cars don't have to go balling through GTE cars on the opening lap. Also I think I read somewhere that there should be a slot half way through the race where nobody is allowed to double stint, this would definitely cut down with the delays

[Richy59]

I would suggest a one lap parade lap with a single file rolling start. Grid order should be the order from the previous stint, but we made a mess of that this time around and didn't make everyone aware (my fault) but well sort it for Le Mans. Stevens idea of having no double stinging at the halfway mark is a really good one, we'll certainly be implementing that.

[CQR Jono]

Drake, you want to know why you seem to be the only one proposing these new systems and everyone argues the same points against them? It's because that's what would happen and we all know it.

You used F4H as an example. I am friends with most of them so I don't think they'll mind or take offense.

F4H Bullet - unstable connection but a really fast driver. Generally speaking if someone is going to lag it will be him.

F4H Diablo - when in school has a great connection one second and has experienced a terrible one the next.

Mopar - used to have a bad connection but has drastically improved of late.

F4H Chrisupra - whether through rotten luck, a bad decision, or a mixture has crashed in every single endurance event over the past two years.

They shouldn't be bailed out through some manufactured rule the same reason I shouldn't because my wheel is an unreliable piece of crap. I know going in there is a 50/50 shot my wheel will screw up on me the same way Magictap's did. I don't want an extra stint or some credit rule. It isn't fair to other people that don't have problems and run the entire race.

You can argue until you are blue in the face but it won't change the fact that the people who deserve to win these damn things are the people who persevere through all the garbage that you experience in multi-player online racing. It is what makes an endurance event what it is.

Somebody grab this man a drink - post of the day

[Koenigsegg R]

Damn you Worm!!

Unfriend! Unfriend! Unfriend!

[Racert46]

I would suggest a one lap parade lap with a single file rolling start.

Will this not lead to a time differance between the lobby's. And with that i mean what if A lobby takes it easy during this lap and do a 2 min lap but the guys in B have a quicker lap and do it in 1.30min they now have 30 seconds more racing time then A Lobby. It not much but 12 x 30sec is in the end 6min of extra time (3 laps) this could be a factor. I made it a little bigger then it will be but it is to make the point. I know that lead car schould keep a certain speed in the parade lap but in every race i have driven this is has proven to difficult implement.

a 1 sec Roll off is a safer and accurate way to do it if you ask me. And it give you some advantage that you got from qualifying beter then the person behind you.

[Guest]

You could adjust the stint finishing time based on the outlap starting time, so if you start the race (i.e. cross the line) at 1h57m30, you end the stint at 12m30s, so you get 1h45m green flag time for each stint, in each lobby. The outlap would also help with live streaming of lobbies, giving the streamer more time to wait for paints to load before hitting Spectate, without missing the start of the race. And of course, everyone can be shuffled into the right positions on the formation lap, eliminating the starting order problems too.

[Racert46]

Agreed but it will make the work of the lobby host even more demanding. Having to calculate the stopping time while starting his own race this could lead to mistakes. But it could be done as you say.

[TG Wormburner]

You want things to start on time then shorten the stints. Telling someone they can't do double over time is a bad thing considering Mad Dog just won doing that. Just shorten the stints another 10 minutes and give people time.

This also lessens the stress on the live streaming and the stress on Chris to rush with results between stints.

[Guest]

Hi all, remember me!!

Personal opinions follow:

I feel adjustments to cater for lagging out aren't valid for an Endurance race - if you enter, and know Forza, you know the risks. I've lost Endurance races before due to lagging out, and whilst it's one of the most annoying and frustrating things that can happen in a Forza race, I have accepted that lagging out is 'viewed' as a mechanical failure, thus putting you out, even then, only for one stint. The reason for this is that lag outs happen, and there is no way to stop them, its technology, to repeat, these things unfortunately happen. I didn't lag out once this time, and I had swapped from wireless to Ethernet. Goes to show there is something in it. I even had to purchase a 20 meter cable, but its worth it as Ethernet, no matter how far, is quicker and more reliable than wireless every time.

If you entered and raced with a wireless connection, expect to lag out, simples. Endurance races used to be 3 hours long, now 2 hours, so not as much pain.

As for those who talk about Forza Servers, listen to the others that have stated its a P2P connection once racing. No servers involved.
Wikipedia P2P explanation

Also, just because you have a great connection, doesn't mean its good if other things are effecting it. Especially if on wireless, mobiles, microwaves, speakers, TV's, other people on the same connection in your house, etc etc etc....bandwidth and spikes also cause issues as other on the same network watch videos etc.

Additionally, the wireless router channel, if there are other wireless signals nearby using the same channel, that can have massive effects.

SUGGESTIONS / CONSIDERATIONS:

Go Ethernet

Maybe worth considering reducing the stint lengths to cater for not only lag outs but reply lengths, maybe 1 hour each.

Don't enter if your not prepared to accept how lag outs are perceived.

Maybe consider changing the damage. Either off to avoid the aero problem especially if damaged by another, or, Full damage to make people more careful.

Personally, I like it the way it is. I'd prefer full damage and 3 hours stints but I work with whats there.

The issue I have with gifting a percentage or adding stints to cater for lagging out is it doesn't fix lagging out, or the feeling you get from lagging out. I've lagged out before, lots, and it hurts, but would refuse if someone said we will bump you up so you are on par or in with a chance of winning. It wouldn't feel like racing at all. If the others lagged out or gained damage I could make a podium from racing hard to catch up, that's rewarding and what keeps me going.

While I appreciate the efforts and suggestions surrounding lag outs, I feel personally adjustments undermine the race itself and the spirit of an endurance race with all the pitfalls that entails. Endurance races at TORA should also be about the event, taking part, and the challenge, not just the win.

All the best all. See you at Le Mans!!!!

[Guest]

Couldn't agree more Mr Magictap +1

[CQR Jono]

+2

Excellent post Sir Magictap

[Duke of Bruno]

- Do not like the idea of a dropped stint, with or without an additional stint being run. It is akin to playing the FM4 single player seasons and hitting the rewind button if you damage your car or miss a corner. And, I cannot think of any professional sport that lets you redo something because you have done poorly the first time around.

- Do not like the idea of any calculation to add distance if you lag out of a stint. Any kind of calculation feels very contrived. The guarantee of "repairs" taking less than 2 hours and being able to pick up the pieces in the following stints seems more than generous.



+ Like the idea of having one (or more) spots where people cannot double stint between stints. After last years Le Mans race I suggested this along with lobby hosts not hosting any subsequently run stints.

+ Like the 1 second roll off delay standing starts. The tight time frame is the major issue with sorting the grid according to the finishing order of the previous stint and/or according to the overall running order. If it can be done, do it; otherwise, random grid sorting with LMPs starting ahead of GTs.

+ In my opinion, the recent idea of rolling starts for each stint would only work if the time it takes to do the pace lap is subtracted from the time that every one is to stop on track. eg: if the pace lap takes 2:45 then everyone stops where they are on the track with 12:15 remaining instead of 15:00 remaining.

[HCR Karma]

Hi all, remember me!!

Nope....




Nah,,only kidding. Could not agree more with your post. Well said.+3

Roll on the next round.

G

[Ax4x Mikey J]

I feel personally adjustments undermine the race itself and the spirit of an endurance race with all the pitfalls that entails. Endurance races at TORA should also be about the event, taking part, and the challenge, not just the win.

All the best all. See you at Le Mans!!!!

This I agree with.

[LMR DarthMario]

some of us who ran in the 2011 TORA Le Mans Challenge remembers the stints were set to 3hrs in length. with six cars total in the race back then, we ran til 2hr55 and stopped to collect distance(s), seeing how FM3 still had the xx.xx milage readings to accurately record gaps and such.

If we move from 2hr stints to 3hr stints again (stop at 2hr45), i personally think there'd be less hassle to deal with lobby organization, as there would then be 8 stints to organize over 24hrs rather than 12-2hr stints over the same 24hr period. Last year i believe the final stint ended up being about 1hr behind. and i would guess it could help Deter drivers wanting to Double Stint (my own personal opinion), because as it stands, a 2hr stint and stop at 1hr45 is no different than the GT Endurance Series races, outside finishing procedures. Longer stints could HOPEFULLY keep drivers from thinking each stint is their own Sprint race and race more cautiously when trying to pass/lap slower vehicles.

[Duke of Bruno]

...
If we move from 2hr stints to 3hr stints again (stop at 2hr45),
...

Yes please.

I do not think any of the cars would be able to run the entire stint without pitting for fuel.

[Guest]

...
If we move from 2hr stints to 3hr stints again (stop at 2hr45),
...

Yes please.

If this was considered i would recommend TORA staff find out if there is anyone who currently runs who have reasons medically that they can only just sit and run the current 1:45. Pushing it up could cause them to not be able to run, which would be shame, and i know it has been done in the past but there has been a huge rise in entrys in past 12months for TORA. Just a thought to consider, personally i dont mind but it is something some of us take for granted.

[Sponsored content]