TORA TCF TASCAR Season 7 - General Discussion

We encountered it in the RORA V8SC race at Watkins Glen, and Cow, Zai and I noticed it in testing for this race.

It also happened in qualifying.

That totally explains some of the disappearing cars we had happen in B lobby at the Daytona 24.

This game, it kills me.

I have encounter the disappearing cars after pitting in some events with 2O4F and personally with a NASCAR series I've been running at SeasonedGamers. The organizer at 2O4F discovered, after much testing in Oct & Nov, that the Forced Build & Tune setting was causing the issue. He has since revised the way he runs that series to accommodate the issue.

While testing lobby setting for my series race at Daytona (I also run stock build & tune), I confirmed the issue and decided to make a shared tune which uses the default settings. All the drivers had to use that tune and there didn't seem to be any issues for both the races at that track. I limited the car selection to 1 car from each manufacturer to make the sharing easier.

Not sure if that solution helps, but at least you have a reason as to why it's happening.

hoptimizer wrote:I have encounter the disappearing cars after pitting in some events with 2O4F and personally with a NASCAR series I've been running at SeasonedGamers.  The organizer at 2O4F discovered, after much testing in Oct & Nov, that the Forced Build & Tune setting was causing the issue.  He has since revised the way he runs that series to accommodate the issue.

While testing lobby setting for my series race at Daytona (I also run stock build & tune), I confirmed the issue and decided to make a shared tune which uses the default settings.  All the drivers had to use that tune and there didn't seem to be any issues for both the races at that track.  I limited the car selection to 1 car from each manufacturer to make the sharing easier.  

Not sure if that solution helps, but at least you have a reason as to why it's happening.

Very interesting! Thanks a lot for your info, that's a big help man!

64 guys qualified in. That's 16 to a room? 4 lobbies....

xICEMANx41 wrote:64 guys qualified in.  That's 16 to a room?  4 lobbies....

There's also the remaining people who signed in as race only or those who signed in but missed qualifying

And those guys go into lobbies after the qualifiers

I can confirm I've only observed the invisible thing when stock was forced.

JGROVES1996 wrote:

hoptimizer wrote:I have encounter the disappearing cars after pitting in some events with 2O4F and personally with a NASCAR series I've been running at SeasonedGamers.  The organizer at 2O4F discovered, after much testing in Oct & Nov, that the Forced Build & Tune setting was causing the issue.  He has since revised the way he runs that series to accommodate the issue.

While testing lobby setting for my series race at Daytona (I also run stock build & tune), I confirmed the issue and decided to make a shared tune which uses the default settings.  All the drivers had to use that tune and there didn't seem to be any issues for both the races at that track.  I limited the car selection to 1 car from each manufacturer to make the sharing easier.  

Not sure if that solution helps, but at least you have a reason as to why it's happening.

Very interesting! Thanks a lot for your info, that's a big help man!

No problem, hope the 'fix' works for this series too.

Just want to address something Jordan brought up in the "Duel Format Change" lobby:

"As for advancing positions outside of your lobby, if people in higher lobbies lag out or quit, those who complete the full distance will be ranked above those non-finishers"

I have a possible suggestion. In a previous endurance series I partook in on another racing site, we used the following method in determining the finishing order in which multiple lobbies were involved. What we would do is take the total time of every driver from each lobby (we're a small group so we usually only had to take data from two lobbies). We then would input the data and it would help determine the overall winner.

For example: the "winner" from "Lobby A" could've finished the race in 1 hr.: 4 mins.: 33 secs., however the "winner" from "Lobby B" could've finished their race in 1 hr.: 4 mins.: 2 secs., and then even "2nd place" in "Lobby B" could've finished in 1 hr.: 4 mins.: 4 secs.. So technically, the "winner" of "Lobby A" would've finished 3rd overall behind 1st and 2nd place from "Lobby B". There could be many factors as to why the "winner" for "Lobby A" finished further behind than those two drivers from "Lobby B". Say for example, there could've been more cautions in "Lobby A" compared to "Lobby B".

I feel this would be a better way to determine the finishing order. It also might make drivers act more cautious to prevent their total time being extended due to multiple cautions. Just to be clear, we ran each race as a lap race, we did not make the races timed like we do for like the TORA 24 Hours of Le Mans for example.

I feel it's unfair for drivers in the lower lobbies (Lobby C/D) to rely on drivers in the higher lobbies (Lobby A/B) to either lag out or rage quit in order to advance positions. We also don't want people lagging out or quitting, we want everyone to run the full race and everything! However, some of us in the lower lobbies know we can contend with drivers in the higher lobbies, but some of us of course had issues with qualifying by either being a controller user or say in my case, having the game crash on you a couple minutes into qualifying. I myself are in "Lobby D" for the Daytona 300, but I really don't feel like racing 120 laps for "Lobby D" points, and I'm certain there are drivers who know they're fast but didn't make it to "Lobby A", feel the same way.

For example it would be frustrating as hell running a long race, winning "Lobby D", but with the current system, I'd actually be 49th overall. I win... but get 49th place points, just because of the lobby I'm in? This is why I'm suggesting a change to how the scoring is done/how the winner is determined. Do I expect these changes to be implemented? Not necessarily, but I'd at least like Jordan and everyone else running in this series to see where I'm going with this and see how it'd make even racing in the lower lobbies worth while in the standings.

That is all for now. I hope this post makes sense. Peace and chicken grease, and keep your stick on the ice!

I say leave it as it is since qualifying and race scoring has been the same since forever with no issues.

LMR Bandit wrote:I say leave it as it is since qualifying and race scoring has been the same since forever with no issues.

THANK YOU Bandit, I love you

Almost every other TORA series has it so that if you don't qualify in A Lobby, you can't beat A Lobby people. It's been this way in TASCAR for 6 seasons now and only this year are people complaining. Those people who have been picking apart this series over the last few days, I RESPECT those of you who have been bringing up concerns in a positive way, to those who have been dicks about it, I APPRECIATE your passion but at the same time if you don't like it, don't race. This core ways that this series runs will not change. The only things that will ever change from season-to-season will be things like assists, car builds, tracks etc.

Yeah, for sprint style series like this, ASCC, Indycar etc.. lobby by lobby scoring makes more sense and is a lot simpler to use than trying to work in overall scoring. Plus, it puts more emphasis on showing up to qualifying and putting in the practice to get a good lap in for a high lobby placement.

Springaahhh wrote:Just want to address something Jordan brought up in the "Duel Format Change" lobby:

"As for advancing positions outside of your lobby, if people in higher lobbies lag out or quit, those who complete the full distance will be ranked above those non-finishers"

I have a possible suggestion. In a previous endurance series I partook in on another racing site, we used the following method in determining the finishing order in which multiple lobbies were involved. What we would do is take the total time of every driver from each lobby (we're a small group so we usually only had to take data from two lobbies). We then would input the data and it would help determine the overall winner.

For example: the "winner" from "Lobby A" could've finished the race in 1 hr.: 4 mins.: 33 secs., however the "winner" from "Lobby B" could've finished their race in 1 hr.: 4 mins.: 2 secs., and then even "2nd place" in "Lobby B" could've finished in 1 hr.: 4 mins.: 4 secs.. So technically, the "winner" of "Lobby A" would've finished 3rd overall behind 1st and 2nd place from "Lobby B". There could be many factors as to why the "winner" for "Lobby A" finished further behind than those two drivers from "Lobby B". Say for example, there could've been more cautions in "Lobby A" compared to "Lobby B".

I feel this would be a better way to determine the finishing order. It also might make drivers act more cautious to prevent their total time being extended due to multiple cautions. Just to be clear, we ran each race as a lap race, we did not make the races timed like we do for like the TORA 24 Hours of Le Mans for example.

I feel it's unfair for drivers in the lower lobbies (Lobby C/D) to rely on drivers in the higher lobbies (Lobby A/B) to either lag out or rage quit in order to advance positions. We also don't want people lagging out or quitting, we want everyone to run the full race and everything! However, some of us in the lower lobbies know we can contend with drivers in the higher lobbies, but some of us of course had issues with qualifying by either being a controller user or say in my case, having the game crash on you a couple minutes into qualifying. I myself are in "Lobby D" for the Daytona 300, but I really don't feel like racing 120 laps for "Lobby D" points, and I'm certain there are drivers who know they're fast but didn't make it to "Lobby A", feel the same way.

For example it would be frustrating as hell running a long race, winning "Lobby D", but with the current system, I'd actually be 49th overall. I win... but get 49th place points, just because of the lobby I'm in? This is why I'm suggesting a change to how the scoring is done/how the winner is determined. Do I expect these changes to be implemented? Not necessarily, but I'd at least like Jordan and everyone else running in this series to see where I'm going with this and see how it'd make even racing in the lower lobbies worth while in the standings.

That is all for now. I hope this post makes sense. Peace and chicken grease, and keep your stick on the ice!

EXACTLY my point! Its a looooong race to get damn near no points just because some didn't want to drop a wad of cash on a wheel (again). My assumption is that the "faster" wheel drivers will be against this, as it keeps them up front and the Controller guys will be right behind this idea.

But I assume it wont be taken with a second thought and off to the lower lobbies we will stay! LMAO... Though I expect to be there anyway.

Again - I'm not arguing.  I know where I live regarding lobbies.  But I am translating back what I have already heard from other drivers.  As this gets bigger, you might want to think about forming two divisions, like NASCAR does.  Slower guys like myself and a few others could easily have a better chance at a title and fun in an "Xfinity" series and the elite "wheel"men can race against each other.  

Its constructive to think about how to keep the lower guys driving other than "you don't have to race".  THAT is as Ahole-ish a statement as some of the others ones that you have been seeing from others these past few days.  Not all of us are trying to change the series that a few of you will dominate anyway (better equipment to play with, better tuners, more time to sit around and practice than a guy who works a lot).  But its still early, and we just qualified.  Pretty easy to give the lower half of the qualifying field the "option" of running a secondary series.  I'm sure some would say hell no, but I bet you would find a number that would say Hell Yes!

JGROVES1996 wrote:

LMR Bandit wrote:I say leave it as it is since qualifying and race scoring has been the same since forever with no issues.

THANK YOU Bandit, I love you

Almost every other TORA series has it so that if you don't qualify in A Lobby, you can't beat A Lobby people. It's been this way in TASCAR for 6 seasons now and only this year are people complaining. Those people who have been picking apart this series over the last few days, I RESPECT those of you who have been bringing up concerns in a positive way, to those who have been dicks about it, I APPRECIATE your passion but at the same time if you don't like it, don't race. This core ways that this series runs will not change. The only things that will ever change from season-to-season will be things like assists, car builds, tracks etc.

Jordan, I would agree for any other race. However (and nothing you can do about this season), I feel like relying on party chat as the reason for the cancellation of duels should hopefully never happen again (hopefully they'll fix this p.o.s. game, and we won't have to deal with it.) as it proved to be just as unreliable as game chat. I feel like I could win A lobby if I had the chance to be there, but unfortunately I did not. Just my $.02. Obviously the situation as a whole was less than ideal, but it is what it is.

xICEMANx41 wrote:Again - I'm not arguing.  I know where I live regarding lobbies.  But I am translating back what I have already heard from other drivers.  As this gets bigger, you might want to think about forming two divisions, like NASCAR does.  Slower guys like myself and a few others could easily have a better chance at a title and fun in an "Xfinity" series and the elite "wheel"men can race against each other.  

Its constructive to think about how to keep the lower guys driving other than "you don't have to race".  THAT is as Ahole-ish a statement as some of the others ones that you have been seeing from others these past few days.  Not all of us are trying to change the series that a few of you will dominate anyway (better equipment to play with, better tuners, more time to sit around and practice than a guy who works a lot).  But its still early, and we just qualified.  Pretty easy to give the lower half of the qualifying field the "option" of running a secondary series.  I'm sure some would say hell no, but I bet you would find a number that would say Hell Yes!

Can you stop with the insinuation that I’m manipulating this series to benefit wheel users please. Thanks.

And for the record, I do consider every idea that is proposed, it’s just nothing can be changed for this race at such a short notice. The duels were a forced change because of system issues, a change that was really annoying to have had to make, but not every thing can be changed at the eleventh hour.

I apologise if my comments about “if you don’t like it, leave” sounded brash, as I said they were directed at the people who have been very un constructive in their complaints and I have been dealing with many of these people by myself for the last few days non-stop. You have been constructive, iceman, so i thank you.

There should've been a 32 car limit as far as for duels. The top 32 qualifiers should've advanced to the duels where the evens would be in 1 lobby and the odds in another. Like the TORA Indy 500 those who didn't make the top 32 they would have no shot and would make a C lobby with the rest not racing. Like real NASCAR some go home and some don't. Just a suggestion of how it should be done and hopefully will in the future.

DiscoverOsiris wrote:There should've been a 32 car limit as far as for duels. The top 32 qualifiers should've advanced to the duels where the evens would be in 1 lobby and the odds in another. Like the TORA Indy 500 those who didn't make the top 32 they would have no shot and would make a C lobby with the rest not racing. Like real NASCAR some go home and some don't. Just a suggestion of how it should be done and hopefully will in the future.

You do this and the exact thing that was being argued would come to fruition... The guys that have wheels would race and the others would not... because it is faster on Daytona with a wheel.

You can't do aggregate time scoring in races like this simply because of cautions. Lobby A has a yellow while Lobby B runs clean, Lobby B just jumped A.

I got in A, but would love if it was feasible for B to "compete". It just... Isn't.

(FWIW, I think I'm the quickest controller user. In 15th.)

Hailfire97x wrote:You can't do aggregate time scoring in races like this simply because of cautions. Lobby A has a yellow while Lobby B runs clean, Lobby B just jumped A.

I got in A, but would love if it was feasible for B to "compete". It just... Isn't.

(FWIW, I think I'm the quickest controller user. In 15th.)

I was literally about to post that.

We can all make suggestions on how to make the series more like real life but the thing everyone has to remember that this is a game and that Jordan is doing the best that he can. Its hard to make it like it is in real life because there are 80+ entries compared to 40 in real life.

So only 1 track has a slight advantage in qualifying only for wheel users. Big deal. It will balance out over the season.

I would put forth that a controller is easy to race on this track in a pack, since you can correct a slide much faster when the inevitable contact happens.

Point being, just enjoy the racing, this will likely be one of the closest races of the year.

Jordan, good luck, I know you can't please everyone but you're obviously trying.

Guys quick question
Can someone i know sign in to race? They havnt qualified but are willing to start at the back.