Overtaking lapped cars ISSUE. Ghosts or No Ghosts?

  • Thread starter adstomko
  • 110 comments
  • 7,335 views
I don't want to lose any time by being over-cautious about what is in front of me at the last corner of the last lap. If I was in 14th with no place to fight for, then maybe, just maybe I would be more cautious.
Well that didn't pay off in this race, now did it?
 
Well that didn't pay off in this race, now did it?

To be honest, I wasn't exactly being 'uncautious.' The driver was that slow and made such a wheelspin, I had nowhere to go.
In a race full of the fastest of the driver in the world, such a slow backmarker should not be expected in a race. It's infact classed as dangerous driving.
The problem is of course the system which provokes this issue we're talking about. But I think differently to you (and some other racing drivers I know have agreed with me), that the backmarker is at fault if you had to choose one driver
 
To be honest, I wasn't exactly being 'uncautious.' The driver was that slow and made such a wheelspin, I had nowhere to go.
You did hit him twice, call it what you want but it's not being cautious. You couldn't go right, you couldn't go left: what about the brake?
There's always the brake.

In a race full of the fastest of the driver in the world, such a slow backmarker should not be expected in a race. It's infact classed as dangerous driving.
So he had a bad race, but still wanted to finish. He also didn't have anywhere to go. Notice how he slowed down, to let the P1 pass him, and notice the behavior of P1. He didn't go near the backmarker (despite ghosting). You did quite the opposite and forced the issue, causing contact twice. You could've caused the backmarker to spin out of track in those cases. That is dangerous driving right there.
 
@Skiddy

Just wondering, do you check your brakes before every corner at the expense of a couple of seconds a lap or are you dangerous drivers who just assume that the brakes will work when you get to the corner?

Which is it? More unlikely or very much possible?
Facepalm
 
Last edited:
So as usual, it's people on a crusade to prove it's all the OPs fault and there's nothing wrong at all making points that have already been shown to be factually incorrect and refusing to answer when the logical flaws are pointed out.
 
So as usual, it's people on a crusade to prove it's all the OPs fault and there's nothing wrong at all making points that have already been shown to be factually incorrect and refusing to answer when the logical flaws are pointed out.
Because it is OP's fault in this case, there is nothing as usual about it. It just is.
Your previous comment/question is considered irrelevant IMHO, or you have failed to show relevance to the present topic, therefore it has been ignored or/and ridiculed as such in my post.
 
Because it is OP's fault in this case, there is nothing as usual about it. It just is.
Your previous comment/question is considered irrelevant IMHO, or you have failed to show relevance to the present topic, therefore it has been ignored or/and ridiculed as such in my post.
No it is not the OPs fault the game did not work properly. I shouldn't need to show the relevance if you understood the logic behind your own points.
To much of ''He may have had.." "perhapses" and "maybes" to make aggressive moves like that. You made all those assumptions during that moment that would confirm your point of view, but you failed to make this assumtion: Maybe the car in front is not ghosted.
So what do you do? You give him a little nudge... Oh look it's still not ghosted. So let's try that again (?).. Nope, solid as a brick on wheels. Oh look, a penalty... How did that happen?

I don't see in the video that he is struggling with tyres, he might just make a driver error as the race comes to an end (what an assumption)..
Yeah, you could' have won that race, but that outcome was unlikely, because of all the "maybes" and "perhapses" involved.
Well that didn't pay off in this race, now did it?

Your logic: don't ever assume something with a 95% chance of success will succeed in a sporting situation, even in an e-sport environment where it should work 100% of the time, always take the safest option whatever the cost.
But when we apply the logic to other elements of sim racing (the brakes) you dismiss it.
 
Notice how he slowed down, to let the P1 pass him, and notice the behavior of P1. He didn't go near the backmarker (despite ghosting). You did quite the opposite and forced the issue.

No. Read post #37. He was already on the racing line and past the backmarker who was recovering from a spin - off the racing line.

Because it is OP's fault in this case, there is nothing as usual about it. It just is.

So it's not at all the system's fault?
 
So it's not at all the system's fault?
Who knows? Nobody here. It's been demonstrated clearly that the system is inconsistent which is why I'm still struggling with how you made the conclusion "this solid looking car is actually a ghost in disguise!" What information in front of you leads you to that? I don't know about anyone else but I race with my eyes, not theory.




Not directing at anyone in particular but I think this discussion is related; different sides of the same coin, as it were.
 
Who knows? Nobody here. It's been demonstrated clearly that the system is inconsistent which is why I'm still struggling with how you made the conclusion "this solid looking car is actually a ghost in disguise!" What information in front of you leads you to that? I don't know about anyone else but I race with my eyes, not theory.

Not directing at anyone in particular but I think this discussion is related; different sides of the same coin, as it were.

I mentioned to other users in this thread to watch the video on post #53.
The car is still solid but can still be driven through. That's what i thought would happen in the first place in my race!

You're right to link that forum to here for some reasons. Take a look of the responses regarding backmarkers. (This is mainly written for those who disagree with my theory)
 
I mentioned to other users in this thread to watch the video on post #53.
The car is still solid but can still be driven through. That's what i thought would happen in the first place in my race!
But you didn't have that video when you were in this race. You can't justify actions with information gained after the action. How often are you seeing this that it's now expected that solid objects could be ghosts? You said yourself you didn't expect to see backmarkers in a 13 lap race.
 
But you didn't have that video when you were in this race. You can't justify actions with information gained after the action. How often are you seeing this that it's now expected that solid objects could be ghosts? You said yourself you didn't expect to see backmarkers in a 13 lap race.

I witnessed a solid car but could be passed through in another race on the same day, I just don't have any footage of it. So I'm not using it to justify my actions after the action without unknown knowledge before-hand. I was just totally confused by what the system does to 'unsolid' ghosts, which was my question right from the beginning.
 
It seems PD has much work to do on ghosting issues during races. Last night at the Blue Moon daily I was racing in the infield, the car in front went wide in a turn, scrapped along the wall while driving in the grass (this was after the corner on the straight), I knew he was going to come back on track and probably spin so I gave him a wide berth while passing, I moved to the far opposite side of the track. I got hit in the drivers doors door while he was crossing the track perpendicular to the racing traffic and was rewarded with a 2 second penalty for my efforts. I feel his car should have been ghosted, it was beyond out of control and bouncing off of objects like it was the ball in a pinball machine. Maybe I will try hitting the wall myself next time a situation like this arises, maybe my car will ghost to avoid penalties.
 
52rUP4I9drI


I still think this one is the funniest. who drives like that? I love this squiggling stop as the car screeches to a halt. Maybe PD should use this in a trailer.
 
I think the issue is solved by back markers being ghosted to cars about to lap them (if you can see the back marker, ahead OR behind, he should be ghosted to you) but not ghosted to other back markers. He should be able to continue his race with those around him on the same lap without change.

The car about to lap the back markers should appear ghosted to them (so they don't change line for him) and he simply drives through them. And he doesn't appear ghosted to those close behind him on the same lap

In a perfect world, no, all cars would remain solid all the time! But games are not played by perfect people. The ONLY reason back markers are ghosted is, there are those that play for the sake of mayhem. The few have, of course, spoiled it for the many. But what would you prefer? That they be allowed to, or that the game acknowledge the problem and easily mitigate it?

I would hesitate a guess that no-one that has been deliberately taken out by a back marker would suggest that ghosting shouldn't be comprehensive on cars about to be lapped. And only those that never had would still complain about ghosting..!

It seems PD has much work to do on ghosting issues during races. Last night at the Blue Moon daily I was racing in the infield, the car in front went wide in a turn, scrapped along the wall while driving in the grass (this was after the corner on the straight), I knew he was going to come back on track and probably spin so I gave him a wide berth while passing, I moved to the far opposite side of the track. I got hit in the drivers doors door while he was crossing the track perpendicular to the racing traffic and was rewarded with a 2 second penalty for my efforts. I feel his car should have been ghosted, it was beyond out of control and bouncing off of objects like it was the ball in a pinball machine. Maybe I will try hitting the wall myself next time a situation like this arises, maybe my car will ghost to avoid penalties.

TBH, this is a rather different issue than lapped cars ghosting. In fairness, I'm not a big fan of cars losing control ghosting to those around them on the same lap. As everyone can see, detection and judging when and how to go into ghost and back out of ghost seems utterly beyond either PD's ability, or the console's ability to do it well on a large grid (that's a lot of computation!). And sorry, but being collected by cars losing it around you actually IS pretty much part of real racing. It sucks, but it's real at least!

Back markers you are lapping taking you out deliberately, though, is NOT.

Ghosting should be used to deal with issues that real racing doesn't face, IMHO. But not those issues that really exist...
 
Last edited:
I began to gently use the throttle because that is the normal racing line for myself and many other drivers who are S/S. I didn't deliberately accelerate to try and punt him off.
Thanks for bumping my thread.

And @ivann 's video really supports my/the game's problem! Before that race, I have passed backmarkers which didn't appear as ghosts but I could still drive through them like a ghost! So, why doesn't it work here?
I don't think I should take responsibility for my actions in the accident. I can tell you that 99.9% of drivers in my situation would've done exactly the same thing as myself.
Yes, I know you didn't deliberately try to punt the lapped driver. 👍

As for the way this supposed "ghosting" works, all I can say is that after watching @ivann's video it isn't close to what I had pictured.
I don't even understand why they would set the system up to work like that.
And if that was what you were anticipating, then I can understand why the situation played out as it did.

I second guessed what was deemed as "ghosting" and how the system works, and I was wrong.
My apologies.
 
Yes, I know you didn't deliberately try to punt the lapped driver. 👍

As for the way this supposed "ghosting" works, all I can say is that after watching @ivann's video it isn't close to what I had pictured.
I don't even understand why they would set the system up to work like that.
And if that was what you were anticipating, then I can understand why the situation played out as it did.

I second guessed what was deemed as "ghosting" and how the system works, and I was wrong.
My apologies.


No problem, but this was my argument from the start. Perhaps I should've made my point more clear in OP.m, as this thread went slightly off-topic.

I'm glad PD have responded. Such a system definitely requires blue flags
 
No problem, but this was my argument from the start. Perhaps I should've made my point more clear in OP.m, as this thread went slightly off-topic.

I'm glad PD have responded. Such a system definitely requires blue flags
Yes, it became a little confusing trying to interpret the rule and relate that to what was actually happening.

It's great that PD are responding to issues like this.
I note that one of the devs has essentially confirmed the patch(/update) for Monday.
Issues such as the FFB Torque re-setting have been mentioned.

I guess you never know, but I wouldn't hold my breath for this ghosting situation to be solved by then.
His wording suggested to me that it may take a little while before they can correct this issue.
 
Lapped drivers shouldve remained ghosted at all time. It worked flawlesly.
Then came the crowd that said, its unrealistic, in real racing you have lapped drivers and cant just go through them.
So I ask you, is it "realistic" to have lapped cars in 10-15 laps race?
If we take Suzuka for example, it means lapped driver is around +10sec per lap off the pace of the race leaders.
Do you have that in real racing?
No.
Now it will just get more and more complicated, while the simple solution, as always, was the best.
 
Back