◆ SNAIL [Spec] Racing - Currently Recruiting for GT7 - JOIN TODAY!!Open

[JLBowler]

Suggestion for prize distribution:

Take the points earned by each division winner and multiply it by the number of racers in that division for the week and use that total to order prize awards. Keep the restriction of any driver only being able to win the same prize once a month or however it is right now.

This would put more weight on winning with a larger field of drivers. Example of what this week would have looked like: D1 651, D2 790, D3 774, D4 728, D5 860.

We all know that the fewer drivers in the race, the more points everyone is going to score.

As for JoeW's suggestion. I agree that if it changed, you would have to drop three combos instead of six individual races. Being involved in someone elses mistake is part of racing and championships and races are won and lost all the time becasue of this factor.

I personally don't advocate a change in this respect. I look at the drop week as an out for real life getting in the way and someone not being able to show up at all or having connection issues on a given night. The fact that it functions as a mulligan to throw out a bad performance is a necessary evil to me.

 

[IceWarden]

Awesome!

wait...

Brilliant!

 

[DrKronin]

I see what you're saying, but I disagree. Knowing you can just throw out 1/4 of your races if you wreck allows one to take significantly more chances. I like the fact that our current system rewards consistency and careful driving. For example, twice last night I slowed considerably because someone lost control in front of me so that I would have the grip necessary to swerve around them when I caught up. If I'm running near the front and know I can just throw the race out and start on the pole for the next race if I do plow into him, why lift? I might as well charge into the smoke and hope for the best.

Edit: Excellent idea Bowler.

 

[jobyone]

I just hate being involved in incidents that are out of my control, finishing near dead last and then winning a few races on the same night only to get a mediocre points total for the night. I still got some wins or podiums but the night won't count due to unfortunate events. Even if I filed a complaint, I won't get counted for a win. The offending driver gets penalized but it doesn't help a driver who got punted.

It would also help big time with Disconnects like Oshawa experienced.

I see alot of upside for everyone. Even the loophole you mention would even out because people who consistently finish well will get even higher points totals. Tanking a race on purpose still doesn't guarantee a win.

I know how you feel. But in real racing this happens. Just look at how this F1 season might have looked if Alonso had not been taken out by flying Lotus.

That being said I have been wondering if when a driver gets a penalty it should go against his result for that race. So if I get a 4 pt penalty and finish 2nd. It would actually count as a 6th place finish in the stats. That could also benefit the driver effected by the penalty if he came 3rd. He would then be promoted to 2nd which would seem fitting.

Now logistically it might be a bit challenging but if we could automate the spreadsheet...

 

[IceWarden]

I see what you're saying, but I disagree. Knowing you can just throw out 1/4 of your races if you wreck allows one to take significantly more chances. I like the fact that our current system rewards consistency and careful driving. For example, twice last night I slowed considerably because someone lost control in front of me so that I would have the grip necessary to swerve around them when I caught up. If I'm running near the front and know I can just throw the race out and start on the pole for the next race if I do plow into him, why lift? I might as well charge into the smoke and hope for the best.

In the case you mention you would get seriously penalized btw.

I am going to strongly disagree with you. But in the event the people that run this league side with you, you could always compromise and say that you can't throw out any race that you had to qualify for. But it would still not be very cool. The complaint process is still in effect. You only get 6 out of 24. Everyone gets this. Consistent top finishers will finish even higher. I'm not saying to make it so you can choose which to throw out...the bottom 6 go, period.

I'm sure alot of people are getting tired of being shoved off, disconnected, or just plain made a dumb mistake. This usually happens once in a while. I'd rather my points totals to be based on the top finishes instead of the top full nights.

I'd be curious to see someone do some calculations based on past results to see if the month's champion would have been any different.

 

[IceWarden]

I know how you feel. But in real racing this happens. Just look at how this F1 season might have looked if Alonso had not been taken out by flying Lotus.

Real racing doesn't get any results thrown out. So we are already in fantasy land with the whole "top 3 nights count" thing.

 

[OwensRacing]

Points based on turn out is not fair at all. Us dedicated drivers can't control who shows up and how many.

Honestly. If a driver wins a second time. He could be promoted or even implement a PP restriction on the dominant drivers.

However I really think it works well now. Coming from a guy that has little to no chance ever getting a chance to pick.

Or how about. If say NB wins two on his second win he can't pick a car. But he did earn the points and maybe he can choose anyone from D1 that hasn't picked or been a while since they have picked. This idea could be done in all division and this would open up the people getting to pick combos. Making it fun for mid packers like myself.

Also thinking an All star event at end of each month would be sweet. Basically take the top 3 from all 5 divisions for the month and they battle it out in the combos. This would strictly for fun and allow the divisions some action and this also could a good indication of promotional decisions.

 

[Apmaddock]

That being said I have been wondering if when a driver gets a penalty it should go against his result for that race. So if I get a 4 pt penalty and finish 2nd. It would actually count as a 6th place finish in the stats. That could also benefit the driver effected by the penalty if he came 3rd. He would then be promoted to 2nd which would seem fitting.

This is really quite unnecessary, I think. The final results are significantly more important than any individual race, and which race a penalty occurred in is largely just extraneous information.


I think that Bowler's suggestion makes a lot of sense, really. The racing is much more difficult with more people and the potential average score is significantly lower. This would bring them to an even plain. The question, though is what to do when there are drivers who only race a few of the races.
Multiply by how many started?
Multiply by how many finished?
Multiply by some average of how many people there were?
Multiply scores by a fraction? (i.e. 8 drivers race 6 races. 1 driver races 4 races. 1 driver races 3 races. Multiply by 9.167?) <--I like this one.


Throwing out individual races for the month instead of a night's worth doesn't make much sense to me. This league is geared more toward the night's results, not the races. Qualifying and reverse grid make that obvious.

 

[OwensRacing]

This is really quite unnecessary, I think. The final results are significantly more important than any individual race, and which race a penalty occurred in is largely just extraneous information.

I think that Bowler's suggestion makes a lot of sense, really. The racing is much more difficult with more people and the potential average score is significantly lower. This would bring them to an even plain. The question, though is what to do when there are drivers who only race a few of the races.
Multiply by how many started?
Multiply by how many finished?
Multiply by some average of how many people there were?
Multiply scores by a fraction? (i.e. 8 drivers race 6 races. 1 driver races 4 races. 1 driver races 3 races. Multiply by 9.167?)
<--I like this one.

Throwing out individual races for the month instead of a night's worth doesn't make much sense to me. This league is geared more toward the night's results, not the races. Qualifying and reverse grid make that obvious.

Then add factors like how close qualifying was and how close field was at end. Nah you guys are trying to use a factor that the drivers in said divisions have no control over. We was 7 last night.

If this idea is considered please consider combining smaller rooms to ensure its far amount participants for those involved.

Seriously the amount of available D1 drivers will always be less this idea totally isn't fair.

However as always. I go with majority.

 

[A_Higher_Place]

Alrighty, I'll try and make it the wednesday practise night. If you're still doing those of course?

Can't wait for the line up 👍

 

[Apmaddock]

Then add factors like how close qualifying was and how close field was at end. Nah you guys are trying to use a factor that the drivers in said divisions have no control over. We was 7 last night.

If this idea is considered please consider combining smaller rooms to ensure its far amount participants for those involved.

Seriously the amount of available D1 drivers will always be less this idea totally isn't fair.

However as always. I go with majority.

I don't think you get it.

This would level things across the rooms, not handicap one room for having less or more drivers.

 

[fzappa]

Alrighty, I'll try and make it the wednesday practise night. If you're still doing those of course?

Can't wait for the line up 👍

Yes we are still having practice on Wed's. Hope you can join in.

 

[JLBowler]

There are enough D1 drivers on the roster right now. By my count, there have been 14 different drivers race in D1 this month. There were at least three no shows last night that normally race. Hill had a flight delayed, I had a test to take, and Dabneyd didn't show. That would have made 10 which would be in line with the other divisions.

To me at least, it's a lot more impressive to win a night with 13 guys that are all capable of winning than to win a night with 10 where half the field doesn't have a legitimate shot at winning on a regular basis.

@Apmaddock. If there were a different number of drivers in each race, you would take an average number of starters from each race. Example: 10, 10, 9, 8, 8, 7. Add them all up and divide by 6 to get, 8.67 as your multiplier.

 

[jobyone]

Also thinking an All star event at end of each month would be sweet. Basically take the top 3 from all 5 divisions for the month and they battle it out in the combos. This would strictly for fun and allow the divisions some action and this also could a good indication of promotional decisions.

I was thinking the same thing. You could make 3 teams of 5 drivers (one per division) and have a six race battle. The team with most points wins. I would say let the d5 guys pick the teams.

 

[OwensRacing]

Suggestion for prize distribution:

Take the points earned by each division winner and multiply it by the number of racers in that division for the week and use that total to order prize awards. Keep the restriction of any driver only being able to win the same prize once a month or however it is right now.

This would put more weight on winning with a larger field of drivers. Example of what this week would have looked like: D1 651, D2 790, D3 774, D4 728, D5 860.

I don't think you get it.

This would level things across the rooms, not handicap one room for having less or more drivers.

Sorry but I'm sure "I get it"

Please tell how that post doesn't reward divisional winners based on attendance.


Edit: I see the confusion. I should read throughly. Apologize for that.

I see your post changed his original idea. Your post is far cry more fair then the original idea. Which wasn't bad just didn't seem real fair in its original form. The hybrid you have worked out is indeed much better and fair.

 

[Handlebar]

JLBowler, How would that idea have looked for last night's results, for example?


I think I follow, but I want to see if what I think you mean means what you mean it to mean, know what I mean, Verne?

 

[zeromisfit999]

I was thinking the same thing. You could make 3 teams of 5 drivers (one per division) and have a six race battle. The team with most points wins. I would say let the d5 guys pick the teams.

I am 100% down for this.

 

[OwensRacing]

I was thinking the same thing. You could make 3 teams of 5 drivers (one per division) and have a six race battle. The team with most points wins. I would say let the d5 guys pick the teams.

Excellence!

 

[Apmaddock]

He already did, Handle.

Example of what this week would have looked like: D1 651, D2 790, D3 774, D4 728, D5 860.

 

[Mrjones]

Sorry for the no-show last night, i should be moved to assoc. list. I just cant bring myself to race until 12:30am and then get up @ 5am for work. So i just wanted to say i had a great time racing with all of you & continue the great work. If you ever decide to start racing earlier, let me know.


So long & thanks for all the fish....

[Youtube]bG6b3V2MNxQ[/Youtube]

 

[Apmaddock]

A revised answer, though:

The best example from this week is D3 versus D5. Each winner had the same score but there were fewer racers in D3.

D3: 86 points X 8.5 (average number of drivers) = 731
D5: 86 points X 9.667 = 831.333

D5 had to negotiate against more drivers so they score the win. Think of it like golf's slope and rating, though quite a bit less complicated.


Edit: I think that this idea has a lot of merit but I feel like more investigation needs to be done. It seems that maybe a bit too much is slanted to the number of drivers this way. Perhaps something like half of this multiplier would be more appropriate.

 

[KuulKrinne]

What we should change its the rule about disconnections.. For example what happened to me yesterday.. I Was 2nd on the last turn/last lap on Nurb.. the 3rd was faar away. so i got the points like if i would have finished on last place..

i will rather not score any points than score the points of a last place when i was 2nd and going for 1st :S

i think there should be a minor change on that rule, because is helpfull if i got disconnected on a early lap, but something like what happened to me is not fair =S

(im not complaining, its a suggestion) What do you guys think??

 

[JLBowler]

What we should change its the rule about disconnections.. For example what happened to me yesterday.. I Was 2nd on the last turn/last lap on Nurb.. the 3rd was faar away. so i got the points like if i would have finished on last place..

i will rather not score any points than score the points of a last place when i was 2nd and going for 1st :S

i think there should be a minor change on that rule, because is helpfull if i got disconnected on a early lap, but something like what happened to me is not fair =S

(im not complaining, its a suggestion) What do you guys think??

It's racing. It's the same as a mechanical failure on the last lap. You could cut a tire and slam a wall and go from 2nd to last just like that. You could blow and engine and as you're coasting around, the entire field goes by you.

I will crunch some numbers and see if I can improve on my suggestion.

 

[spooble]

A revised answer, though:

The best example from this week is D3 versus D5. Each winner had the same score but there were fewer racers in D3.

D3: 86 points X 8.5 (average number of drivers) = 731
D5: 86 points X 9.667 = 831.333

D5 had to negotiate against more drivers so they score the win. Think of it like golf's slope and rating, though quite a bit less complicated.


Edit: I think that this idea has a lot of merit but I feel like more investigation needs to be done. It seems that maybe a bit too much is slanted to the number of drivers this way. Perhaps something like half of this multiplier would be more appropriate.

Indeed. In your example, the D5 driver would still "win" Prize A even if he only scored 76 points. And that's with only roughly 1 extra driver.

Perfect 100 points x 10 drivers = 1000
Sucky 67 points x 15 drivers = 1005


I still think the prizes should be given to the lowest scoring division winners. Those are the guys that battled it out, wheel to wheel, for the win. As opposed to the guy who sandbagged his time trial and should really be 1 (or more) divisions higher than he is.

 

[KuulKrinne]

It's racing. It's the same as a mechanical failure on the last lap. You could cut a tire and slam a wall and go from 2nd to last just like that. You could blow and engine and as you're coasting around, the entire field goes by you.

I will crunch some numbers and see if I can improve on my suggestion.

well i didnt see it that way.. it makes sense i guess

 

[Apmaddock]

And you could have pushed too hard to chase down first place and put it into the grass. It's all that can be done for disconnections. Scoring the points for last place is better than no points at all when it comes to the night's totals. We can't assume anything from the place you're in when you are dropped.

I still think the prizes should be given to the lowest scoring division winners. Those are the guys that battled it out, wheel to wheel, for the win. As opposed to the guy who sandbagged his time trial and should really be 1 (or more) divisions higher than he is.

That idea has intrigued me in the past. It actually slightly rewards those in a division with more drivers, but not directly. The only problem is when dude gets up by 15 points after four races and putters around in the back doing just well enough in the last couple.

 

[IceWarden]

Some people have more suspect connections than others. So are they the privateer teams that break more often?

Let's stop comparing this to real racing. There are no mechanical dnfs, no engine failures, road shrapnel etc.

I still like the idea of dropping the lowest individual race finishes.

 

[Nicktune]

well i didnt see it that way.. it makes sense i guess

Also, if you are just cruising the first race(finishing last) and starting first on the 2nd race...If you shut down your ps3 when you still have the 1st place, you would still beat half the field (in points) by not racing at all.

 

[hillracing]

We could always just go with a similar points system to karting. It used to be a base points system that you added the number of drivers in the race to. Also there was a bigger reward for a win. If I remember correctly it was: 200 1st 180 2nd 165 3rd 155 4th then 10 points less for each lower spot. If you had 16 drivers you'd get 216 1st 196 2nd 181 3rd 171 4th etc. This gave you the reward for having won a bigger race. I like the bigger reward for winning personally.

 

[Oshawa-Joe]

The problem with that is that a system where you allow people to drop one of the 2 races for a given combo on a given night introduces the potential that, near the end of the month, for example, a driver might gain an advantage by throwing a race he knows will be dropped to start on the front row for the following race..

I'm not that smart.