Performance points must go!
- Thread starter magburner
- 142 comments
- 14,873 views
- 10,373
- Manchester
- Ardius_
I like the PP system, with the odd car here and there, it generally works and allows somewhat general classes to race together. Its as good as a class system will ever get anyway, they will never be perfect, there's always going to be that one car that benefits more than others, just have to heavily restrict or ban the car in private races, not a big deal.
I'm yet to see a better suggestion for a general guideline to balancing the competition anyway. PD could band cars together according to their average laptimes or something like that, but then its gets a little complicated. Performance Points seem to be the simplest way of achieving a decent balance so I'm perfectly happy with them, once private rooms come along we can tweak it a bit ourselves by penalising cars until they achieve similar laptimes, the PP system makes it easier to do this.
I'm yet to see a better suggestion for a general guideline to balancing the competition anyway. PD could band cars together according to their average laptimes or something like that, but then its gets a little complicated. Performance Points seem to be the simplest way of achieving a decent balance so I'm perfectly happy with them, once private rooms come along we can tweak it a bit ourselves by penalising cars until they achieve similar laptimes, the PP system makes it easier to do this.
- 316
- Darkpitiless
Yeah **** performance points !!
- 239
- zepheadGT3
I like the pp system... sure, you will see a tuned clio up against a ferrari, but its still a close match, thanks to the pp system. anyways, the pp system will keep someone from putting a stage 4 or 5 turbo on a Mercedes CLK-GTR or some already fast prototype and going off and owing everyone and their dogs in a prototype race.... this type of system worked very well in Forza Mortorsport 1 and 2, and i am eager to see how PD will incorporate the pp system in GT5...
- 751
- Red Deer, AB
- ForgetfuI
The pp system works. It does what it's intended to do, and that's expand the range of useable cars in any given event. It doesn't do as well as it should at keeping dominant cars in check, but with private rooms, people can agree on handicaps for certain cars if need be.
I do think that the full game will use PP for an online Arcade Mode, and a more traditional structure will be used for the more serious online gamers in an Online Sim Mode, where your car has a life, collects mileage and so on, and the race rules are based on min weight, engine displacement, Wing sizes, car types and states of tune. Tires should regulate themselves with tire wear.
I do think that the full game will use PP for an online Arcade Mode, and a more traditional structure will be used for the more serious online gamers in an Online Sim Mode, where your car has a life, collects mileage and so on, and the race rules are based on min weight, engine displacement, Wing sizes, car types and states of tune. Tires should regulate themselves with tire wear.
For single player has no use for PP, especially since the A.I. cars will most likley not be modified, but stock or GT Tuners. If your never going online racing your right there is no point in the PP system. But I've been racing online since FM1 and can tell you even with a system like this there will always be cheater cars. The developers can do a better job of classing them so this is less of a problem, also not PD has the ability to dl a patch to fix gross errors in the PP system.
I am curious though what are your thopughts on a classing system if not PP like PD has done?
- 22
Ok, the performance points system isn't perfect. You usually end up with one car dominating, and sometimes not for the right reasons.
BUT there has always been one car that dominated each area. If you were playng the 'Lightweight Cup' on GT4 I seem to remember that an original Mini or Lotus Elan were the dominating cars. In the American Trucks races there was one that dominated (Ford Lightning? - I can't remember).
The most important thing for an entertaining race is to have an even field and the PP system is a good way of achieving this. Obviously there are mistakes, which leads to there being cars dominating despite having similar PPs to their rivals. Polyphony will have the opportunity to amend the PP levels and amendments via DLC (free DLC I hope) so that any problems can be ironed out.
The PP system does allow a variety in the field though, and can be used to compliment your own driving style. When GT5 comes out the advantage between different cars will be watered-down because there will be so many more different options.
To help the problem that people have found with people tuning-up their cars and dropping the tyres it could be an option to set on multi-player games that you can set PP level, tyre type, drive layout (FR/FF etc), untuned/tuned/race cars and any number of other choices. I would also want to see the option to set a single type of car to totally level the field.
PP shouldn't be dropped, it should be improved!
BUT there has always been one car that dominated each area. If you were playng the 'Lightweight Cup' on GT4 I seem to remember that an original Mini or Lotus Elan were the dominating cars. In the American Trucks races there was one that dominated (Ford Lightning? - I can't remember).
The most important thing for an entertaining race is to have an even field and the PP system is a good way of achieving this. Obviously there are mistakes, which leads to there being cars dominating despite having similar PPs to their rivals. Polyphony will have the opportunity to amend the PP levels and amendments via DLC (free DLC I hope) so that any problems can be ironed out.
The PP system does allow a variety in the field though, and can be used to compliment your own driving style. When GT5 comes out the advantage between different cars will be watered-down because there will be so many more different options.
To help the problem that people have found with people tuning-up their cars and dropping the tyres it could be an option to set on multi-player games that you can set PP level, tyre type, drive layout (FR/FF etc), untuned/tuned/race cars and any number of other choices. I would also want to see the option to set a single type of car to totally level the field.
PP shouldn't be dropped, it should be improved!
- 1,702
- balang_479
agree
..so I think it's getting better.
magburner
Premium
- 2,693
- The Empire State
- magburner, GTP_madgurner, showtime_uk
Ardius
This is the whole reason for my dislike of PP in the first place - 'the odd car here and there'. I like to race a variety of cars, only one of which is a popular model, but I can never find a race where there are people driving anything other than 'the odd car'.
Its infuriating to think that PD spent all that time modelling those cars (6 months each so I believe), and yet they allow the races to be dominated by a very, very small handful of cars. Why waste the time creating 70+ cars, if they are never going to be used? I also wonder how many of the 600+ cars that are rumoured to be in GT5 will end up un-raced?
Ardius
What's wrong with HP/Weight or a power-to-weight-ratio limit? At least those two systems are based on facts rather than judgement.
In previous versions of GT, I could almost perfectly tune a car to a certain power-to-weight-ratio that was some way in between the highest and lowest of the field of cars I would be facing. If the ratio was nearer the fastest car in the field, the race was easy, but if the ratio was nearer the slowest car in the field it was a lot more challenging.
It is for this reason that I would lean towards having entry requirements based strictly on a cars power-to-weight-ratio.
timbutdim
Exactly! Whilst the above mentioned cars dominated because they were superior to their counterparts, performance points allow a car to dominate depending on some guys judgement. There is a difference between those two facts, and (as I have said), if the premise of the performance points is to create an even playing field, why not include a more balanced choice of cars? It seems like PD are trying to fix a flaw with a flaw.
timbutdim
Are you 100% sure of that, considering what I just quoted above? After all, Gran Turismo is Gran Turismo, so I'm more inclined to believe that there will be no difference at all, unless you know something I don't...
timbutdim
The only way to improve PP is to remove them!
- 10,373
- Manchester
- Ardius_
There will always be that "odd car". No system can ever be perfect and there will always be one or two cars that benefit more than others.
The domination of the Clio is not even that great, they are beatable with other cars and I've rarely been in a race recently where all cars are Clio's. The last time I ever saw entire grids of one car was back in the days of the Lotus Elise/Tuned being rediculously faster than anything else and given a PP value far too low. Other than that, there haven't been any cars that have dominated to a level where they are easily blitzing the field, the Clio's aren't invincible, though they do have an advantage.
And I have seen every car in Prologue used at least twice if not more, just because the general punters don't use them, does not mean they are never used. When the full GT5 comes out with private rooms, we can organise races using all of the cars and specific rules etc, its not such a big deal, we already do that now and it works fine.
I don't get why it infuriates you to know punters only care about winning and have no interest in driving different cars - why care? We have our own private races with all types of cars and have fun, what does it matter whether the general idiots don't do the same? I find this amusing actually, because not a year ago, you were one of the many, many, many drivers online to be using the Lotus Elise extensively, when the grids were full of them.
- 23,800
- Philippines
I agree with Ardius.
If you're an avid follower of racing and racing series, you'll know that there's always one or two cars with an unfair advantage. It happens everywhere. Say, low level touring cars... Hondas have a particularly big advantage over their competitors... many rule sets will restrict modifications after the stock air sensors (which, in Hondas, is in the manifold, allowing you to have a ridiculous amount of freedom in designing ram tubes for multiple resonances)... or in pro-touring levels, where handicaps give an advantage to cars with turbos as stock... or to diesels (most noticeable at LeMans, where diesels get more displacement, variable vane turbos, bigger restrictors)...
The PP system is not perfect, but it works, to an extent. I've creamed Clios with GT-Rs... seriously... why is everyone so scared of them? I've even been way up there with the Elise (the only reason the Elise can't win is that it's so light, it's easy to punt off). I've taken on the ever-present Integra (in the FWD races) with the Focus... and I usually win... I've even been able to win a race or two with the Mazda6, if you can believe that... though it's so heavy that my tunes are always on the edge of undriveability.
I even entered a few 650PP races at Daytona (with the infield) with an Integra. Fully tuned, I couldn't even get to 600PP, and the other cars would absolutely kill me on the straights, but with careful tuning, I had enough power and gearing to draft a faster car on the straights. Never won against decent opponents, but I was able to finish mid-pack a few times against faster cars.
The challenge in class-racing is learning how to tune and drive around the shortcomings of your car to achieve the best possible results. There's more of a feeling of accomplishment in polishing a turd to perfection and getting 3rd place when the car normally wouldn't get higher than 16th, than in winning with a car that's just as good as the other guy's.
The only difference I'd make to the PP system is to lock tire choices in the races... You're given a max PP for the race, but are restricted to a certain class of tires.
EDIT: Even better, make the PP system dynamic... based on touring car rules. If a certain car starts winning all the time, it gets a weight handicap applied via PP. (say, if the car wins 80% of races in an event)... unlike touring cars, this is applied to everyone who uses said car in said event on said track. The next best car would start winning, and would then get the penalty... This would continue until no car wins more than 30% of the time.
You'd obviously have to make room for irregularities, such as a handful of drivers dominating... but such a system would force said drivers to change cars, too... leaving more room for others to win.
If you're an avid follower of racing and racing series, you'll know that there's always one or two cars with an unfair advantage. It happens everywhere. Say, low level touring cars... Hondas have a particularly big advantage over their competitors... many rule sets will restrict modifications after the stock air sensors (which, in Hondas, is in the manifold, allowing you to have a ridiculous amount of freedom in designing ram tubes for multiple resonances)... or in pro-touring levels, where handicaps give an advantage to cars with turbos as stock... or to diesels (most noticeable at LeMans, where diesels get more displacement, variable vane turbos, bigger restrictors)...
The PP system is not perfect, but it works, to an extent. I've creamed Clios with GT-Rs... seriously... why is everyone so scared of them? I've even been way up there with the Elise (the only reason the Elise can't win is that it's so light, it's easy to punt off). I've taken on the ever-present Integra (in the FWD races) with the Focus... and I usually win... I've even been able to win a race or two with the Mazda6, if you can believe that... though it's so heavy that my tunes are always on the edge of undriveability.
I even entered a few 650PP races at Daytona (with the infield) with an Integra. Fully tuned, I couldn't even get to 600PP, and the other cars would absolutely kill me on the straights, but with careful tuning, I had enough power and gearing to draft a faster car on the straights. Never won against decent opponents, but I was able to finish mid-pack a few times against faster cars.
The challenge in class-racing is learning how to tune and drive around the shortcomings of your car to achieve the best possible results. There's more of a feeling of accomplishment in polishing a turd to perfection and getting 3rd place when the car normally wouldn't get higher than 16th, than in winning with a car that's just as good as the other guy's.
The only difference I'd make to the PP system is to lock tire choices in the races... You're given a max PP for the race, but are restricted to a certain class of tires.
EDIT: Even better, make the PP system dynamic... based on touring car rules. If a certain car starts winning all the time, it gets a weight handicap applied via PP. (say, if the car wins 80% of races in an event)... unlike touring cars, this is applied to everyone who uses said car in said event on said track. The next best car would start winning, and would then get the penalty... This would continue until no car wins more than 30% of the time.
You'd obviously have to make room for irregularities, such as a handful of drivers dominating... but such a system would force said drivers to change cars, too... leaving more room for others to win.
Last edited:
- 4,004
- Croatia
I'm just doing a mess here with this: PERFORMANCE POINTS MUST STAY.
Performance Points (PPT in following txt) are one of the most important things that have ever happen to Gran Turismo, and although they're not something unique to GT series, they're extremely important for game such as GT from many reasons.
However, they need some adjustment, and those adjustment should happen on more fields than just car.
And if you're really interested in that matter, take some time to read the following. I know it's a lengthy read but this subject needs some further explanations to make it clear.
I have personally thought about that matter since GT4 and problems that me and my crew had with LAN races. Main problem is that almost all of us are good drivers that drive somewhat same times. Problem that arises is that we just can't drive different cars because there is always difference in performance. Even two different Castrol JGTC Supras from the same year differ (for example Denso and Woodone where Woodone is more than 1 sec faster in average) while difference is even more visible on the street cars.
Hence, in order to make racing "fair" - without anybody being favored because of the car - you have to use the same car for everyone. Which is bad and wrong, since it limits you so much when you race the people who are on the same level as you. Especially in the game with so many different cars that more-less belong in the same "class".
In conclusion, PPT system is something that game as Gran Turismo needs in so many fields - including most important for the future - online racing in private rooms.
But what should be done in order to move if from being so basic and limited in true balancing as it is now?
It needs readjustment.
As you're maybe aware, PPT system in Gran Turismo 5: Prologue is working in almost exact way as A-Spec points were working in GT4 game - only made to work in "reverse" (A-Spec points were determined with exactly the same factors: power, weight, tire type and usage and values of aerodynamic parts).
Difference is that PPT in GT5
are not any more description factor of particular car (in GT4 A-Spec points were showing you the relation of your car performance opposite to other cars in particular race), but somehow also a limiting factor for particular race.
Ergo, after doing some thinking and analysis, here are my conclusions:
- PPT system needs inclusion of 3 new "group of factors" (4 factors in total) that would be calculated into overall PPT value of particular car besides those already existing in the game:
- every car starts with first basic factor which is existing type of PPT calculation and that number is foundation for further calculations. However, fact that game actually have 3 basic types of cars - street, tuned and racing cars - needs further differentiating between them. So, street cars would not gain any handicap for their PPT, while Tuned cars would get PP25 for example and racing cars would gain PP40 for the "handicap". Notice you could actually lower your PP at Tuned or Race Cars by adjusting aerodynamic values during QTS, while any street car would become Tuned if new parts would be added in Manufacturers/Tuners sections of Gran Turismo mode.
- second one is something I call "Index Value of the Drive" (IVD). IVD is a more-less a coefficient that gives multiplier value to the drive of particular car. Every type of drive - FF, FR, MR, RR or 4WD - has it's advantage over other in purely driving-performance ways, so PPT system needs inclusion of IVD which gives new variable into PPT calculation,
- third one is "Assists Usage Value" (AUV). Rule is: less assists, less PPT. So, if you're not using any of the assists, you have some more PPT so use in fields such as HP, weight or tire type. Every assists would add it's own value to overall PPT based on it's true advantagement: for example, turning-off ACS would give you 5 more PPT to spent, TCS 7 PPT, and ABS 15 PPT. That way players who do not use assists would get a "reward" for it and it would make them more competitive to assisted-players in the end.
And above concludes PPT calculations that should be done related to particular car. But it needs something more in order to be accurate and usable.
- fourth factor is "Track Value Index" (TVD), being almost important as "basic PPT" of the car. In order to make PPR system of any kind truly work for multiplayer races and allow usage of different cars for different races, you have to put car's PT (done as described above) in correlation with the particular track.
TVD would clearly need to be decimal number less than 1, where value of "1" should be given only to ideal straight track, without any elevations. TVD should be calculated from few variables of each track - pretty much on the same way as basic PPT is calculated for the car - number of turns, overall elevation, overall number of turns with less than 90 degrees, 120 degrees, 150 degrees and U-turns and overall lenghts of every straight.
For example, Test Track would than have TVD of 0,20, Deep Forest 0,65 while Nurburgring would have 0,32. That said, it is clear that TVD would in fact have to be present in every phase of PPT calculation before one particular race.
Although it sounds complicating, it is not. Only two factors that players can actually mess with prior to particular race are basic PPT and AUV. Other two - IVD and TVD - are nominated with the very choice of the car/track and other two are basically adjusting to them.
With careful calculations of described factors, it would certanly cause the real gap between cars to equalize in positive matter.
Of course, all values for new factors I've introduced are purely theoretical and have not been calculated with any comprehensive method.
However, it is clear that system as described would resolve all problems that can arise from idea to race the different cars on the same track under same conditions.
Thank you for reading, feel free to comment.
Performance Points (PPT in following txt) are one of the most important things that have ever happen to Gran Turismo, and although they're not something unique to GT series, they're extremely important for game such as GT from many reasons.
However, they need some adjustment, and those adjustment should happen on more fields than just car.
And if you're really interested in that matter, take some time to read the following. I know it's a lengthy read but this subject needs some further explanations to make it clear.
I have personally thought about that matter since GT4 and problems that me and my crew had with LAN races. Main problem is that almost all of us are good drivers that drive somewhat same times. Problem that arises is that we just can't drive different cars because there is always difference in performance. Even two different Castrol JGTC Supras from the same year differ (for example Denso and Woodone where Woodone is more than 1 sec faster in average) while difference is even more visible on the street cars.
Hence, in order to make racing "fair" - without anybody being favored because of the car - you have to use the same car for everyone. Which is bad and wrong, since it limits you so much when you race the people who are on the same level as you. Especially in the game with so many different cars that more-less belong in the same "class".
In conclusion, PPT system is something that game as Gran Turismo needs in so many fields - including most important for the future - online racing in private rooms.
But what should be done in order to move if from being so basic and limited in true balancing as it is now?
It needs readjustment.
As you're maybe aware, PPT system in Gran Turismo 5: Prologue is working in almost exact way as A-Spec points were working in GT4 game - only made to work in "reverse" (A-Spec points were determined with exactly the same factors: power, weight, tire type and usage and values of aerodynamic parts).
Difference is that PPT in GT5
are not any more description factor of particular car (in GT4 A-Spec points were showing you the relation of your car performance opposite to other cars in particular race), but somehow also a limiting factor for particular race.Ergo, after doing some thinking and analysis, here are my conclusions:
- PPT system needs inclusion of 3 new "group of factors" (4 factors in total) that would be calculated into overall PPT value of particular car besides those already existing in the game:
- every car starts with first basic factor which is existing type of PPT calculation and that number is foundation for further calculations. However, fact that game actually have 3 basic types of cars - street, tuned and racing cars - needs further differentiating between them. So, street cars would not gain any handicap for their PPT, while Tuned cars would get PP25 for example and racing cars would gain PP40 for the "handicap". Notice you could actually lower your PP at Tuned or Race Cars by adjusting aerodynamic values during QTS, while any street car would become Tuned if new parts would be added in Manufacturers/Tuners sections of Gran Turismo mode.
- second one is something I call "Index Value of the Drive" (IVD). IVD is a more-less a coefficient that gives multiplier value to the drive of particular car. Every type of drive - FF, FR, MR, RR or 4WD - has it's advantage over other in purely driving-performance ways, so PPT system needs inclusion of IVD which gives new variable into PPT calculation,
- third one is "Assists Usage Value" (AUV). Rule is: less assists, less PPT. So, if you're not using any of the assists, you have some more PPT so use in fields such as HP, weight or tire type. Every assists would add it's own value to overall PPT based on it's true advantagement: for example, turning-off ACS would give you 5 more PPT to spent, TCS 7 PPT, and ABS 15 PPT. That way players who do not use assists would get a "reward" for it and it would make them more competitive to assisted-players in the end.
And above concludes PPT calculations that should be done related to particular car. But it needs something more in order to be accurate and usable.
- fourth factor is "Track Value Index" (TVD), being almost important as "basic PPT" of the car. In order to make PPR system of any kind truly work for multiplayer races and allow usage of different cars for different races, you have to put car's PT (done as described above) in correlation with the particular track.
TVD would clearly need to be decimal number less than 1, where value of "1" should be given only to ideal straight track, without any elevations. TVD should be calculated from few variables of each track - pretty much on the same way as basic PPT is calculated for the car - number of turns, overall elevation, overall number of turns with less than 90 degrees, 120 degrees, 150 degrees and U-turns and overall lenghts of every straight.
For example, Test Track would than have TVD of 0,20, Deep Forest 0,65 while Nurburgring would have 0,32. That said, it is clear that TVD would in fact have to be present in every phase of PPT calculation before one particular race.
Although it sounds complicating, it is not. Only two factors that players can actually mess with prior to particular race are basic PPT and AUV. Other two - IVD and TVD - are nominated with the very choice of the car/track and other two are basically adjusting to them.
With careful calculations of described factors, it would certanly cause the real gap between cars to equalize in positive matter.
Of course, all values for new factors I've introduced are purely theoretical and have not been calculated with any comprehensive method.
However, it is clear that system as described would resolve all problems that can arise from idea to race the different cars on the same track under same conditions.
Thank you for reading, feel free to comment.
- 2,976
- Sweden
Weren´t there some similar thing in GT4?
Honestly, I don´t think the PP system will stay, at least not in its current form, and definitely not offline.
I can see no logic reason for a PP system offline, so I hope it goes. I want total freedom in setups and tuning, and I want to be able to test them aswell! A PP system would take away an aspect from GT, and that is the total freedom to enter just about what ever you want, wherever you want. It works so-so in GT5P, because there aren´t that many cars or tracks, but I still find it annoying.
Online however, there needs to be some sort of rules or guidelines.
? Honestly, I don´t think the PP system will stay, at least not in its current form, and definitely not offline.
I can see no logic reason for a PP system offline, so I hope it goes. I want total freedom in setups and tuning, and I want to be able to test them aswell! A PP system would take away an aspect from GT, and that is the total freedom to enter just about what ever you want, wherever you want. It works so-so in GT5P, because there aren´t that many cars or tracks, but I still find it annoying.
Online however, there needs to be some sort of rules or guidelines.
- 1,747
Weren´t there some similar thing in GT4
Honestly, I don´t think the PP system will stay, at least not in its current form, and definitely not offline.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Online however, there needs to be some sort of rules or guidelines.
That's exactly what I was thinking. 👍
In GT4
it was weight and power only and it was kinda cool to run light with stock power or a little more power... 
In GT5 they should just make different car classes compete with / without tire restrictions IMO, cause the current sytem suck big time, who in the right mind wanted to drive a car with more weight and less power than stock? Right...
- 23,800
- Philippines
Actually, offline, I'd say the PP system is much better than A-Spec points.
We can grumble and grouse, but really... in previous iterations of GT, once you had your first million or so under your belt, it was way too easy. Blowing past everyone with a car that's 500 pounds lighter and over twice as powerful? Where's the challenge in that?
-
@amar:
Actually, there are PP differences already for drive type... and I think that PP values for aero are fair, but yeah, I believe that PP should be calculated on a track-to-track basis.
As for assigning PP to assists, that would necessitate disabling the "on-the-fly" assist system... which I actually like... but it seems fair.
We can grumble and grouse, but really... in previous iterations of GT, once you had your first million or so under your belt, it was way too easy. Blowing past everyone with a car that's 500 pounds lighter and over twice as powerful? Where's the challenge in that?
-
@amar:
Actually, there are PP differences already for drive type... and I think that PP values for aero are fair, but yeah, I believe that PP should be calculated on a track-to-track basis.
As for assigning PP to assists, that would necessitate disabling the "on-the-fly" assist system... which I actually like... but it seems fair.
- 28,374
- Brooklyn, NY
- KR_Viper
- I Renown I
This is based entirely off of the use of said system in Prologue; I think it should go for several reasons, one, the performance cap is rather annoying when you're trying to compensate for a lack of power, or the adding of weight to max out power but at the same time you have to lug around (a possible) front or rear heavy vehicle that only wants to powerslide and/or understeer, repeatedly.
Two, I particularly understand they were included just for fun, goofing off, and to set ridiculous lap times but why include both the F2007 and GTConcept if you can't really use them? Alright, the F2007 aside because no matter what you could possibly do to it with Prologue's PP-System there would still be an immense handicap, but, the GT on the other hand could be tuned down to such PP levels, or at least theoretically - I don't remember if it's values are locked as I haven't played Prologue in quite a while.
Three, why in the World am I spending my hard-earned (Just making a point
) credits on S-Class vehicles when I have to lessen their stock outputs? Challenges are one thing, and I embrace them but to spend to 150-200k in credits on something I can't even get the full experience from in events specifically aimed toward said vehicles seems....empty.
Four, I....
Well, I think I covered everything.
Two, I particularly understand they were included just for fun, goofing off, and to set ridiculous lap times but why include both the F2007 and GTConcept if you can't really use them? Alright, the F2007 aside because no matter what you could possibly do to it with Prologue's PP-System there would still be an immense handicap, but, the GT on the other hand could be tuned down to such PP levels, or at least theoretically - I don't remember if it's values are locked as I haven't played Prologue in quite a while.
Three, why in the World am I spending my hard-earned (Just making a point
) credits on S-Class vehicles when I have to lessen their stock outputs? Challenges are one thing, and I embrace them but to spend to 150-200k in credits on something I can't even get the full experience from in events specifically aimed toward said vehicles seems....empty. Four, I....
Well, I think I covered everything.
- 1
I've never posted here, but I recently realized something doesn't add up with the pp system.
The question I have is, if GT5 has performance mods, and the PP system is still around how are you supposed to lower the horsepower for certain races? For example, you have a car that has 600pp, and you buy an exhaust a system and the car is now at 625pp. So in order to race in a 600pp race you would have to take off the exhaust? Or will there still be a way to lower horsepower with a slider bar in a quick tune menu? That would not be fun nor realistic imo.
- 9,058
- Murica
- BasedAckbar
Weight and power restrictions should be brought in. That can make the races leveled as easy as PP system, but more realistic and more fun should I say to have.
- 23,800
- Philippines
PP is already based off of weight and power. It also takes into account tire choice and grip. It's slightly out of whack now in GT5P Spec III because they changed the grip values of certain tires without adjusting the PP system to compensate.
- 9,058
- Murica
- BasedAckbar
^I meant GT5 should just mandate up front the power level and minimum weight allowed, just like in previous GTs excluding GT5P.
- 67
- Darkdog786
I believe HP concept was much better than the PP.
- 2,949
- Austria
- GTP_SnowCrash
I agree totally that all these things have an influence on the performance of a car on a particular track. And to make cars with the same PPs equal you would need all those factors, BUT....
1) I disagree that AUV should be factored into the PP-system. My opinion is that the 2 should strictly be kept separate for the simple reason that you should be able to tune a car to a certain PP-limit and race it like this (no matter what assists you are using). If you want all drivers (and I'm saying "drivers" not "cars" on purpose here) on a level playing field, I think you ought to restrict the usage of certain assists for an event. In my opinion, that would be a cleaner solution.
2) The index depending on tracks is, of course, a big factor as an equalizer for different cars on a certain track, but isn't that the beauty of different characteristics between cars? Of 2 cars with the same PPs, one could be faster on faster tracks while the other has a distinct advantage on narrower, slower tracks. The result of using a track-depending factor as well would be, that you couldn't use the same car with the same setting in a racing series (on different tracks), because you would have to fiddle around with it for every single race. In real life, that's not what happens either. You use a car in a racing series, and it might be better on one track and worse on another. For single races on one track, it would work, I grant you that.
In summary, I think you would need a second performance-number with the inclusion of those 2 factors, but I'm not sure that wouldn't get too complicated in overall game-play.
ps: I also think that changing aero-settings should not result in changed PP-numbers. If there actually is the possibility to change aero-settings, the car should get a higher PP-number to begin with (as it can be adapted for any track), corresponding to how much influence the used aero-package allows.
- 1,702
- balang_479
i hate them... I want to be able to race online with different unique cars, with the power I see fit...
also If we have PP then the whole tuning thing will go to ruin, we cant pin points our power output on a real car...
I want to buy parts which i feel are necessary and not try to match a stupid points system, how ever good it is online.
also If we have PP then the whole tuning thing will go to ruin, we cant pin points our power output on a real car...
I want to buy parts which i feel are necessary and not try to match a stupid points system, how ever good it is online.
- 7,829
- U S A
- Tetsumura
- Nigel Fox
I couldn't think of anything to whittle out of this, my sentiments exactly.
I do understand that the PP system needs to be tweaked. But if you do away with it completely, you're going to be stuck with a situation like we have now with both Prologue and FM2 online, where you see races with 8 - 16 cars which are the same make, and if you don't use that car, you can forget keeping up with the pack, or at least the leaders. Is this really what you want?
- 296
- NC
- silent_killer59
Hmmm- I've been thinking about this as of lately too- in my personal reference- after getting GT:4 after GT:5P- I like GT:4 systems better- I like collecting those A-spec points, I'm sure they mean nothing later on, but it makes for a bigger challenge imo.
I've only had one real challenge in GT:5P- the time trial in the BMW M3 on eiger- The others after some tuning in the S-class- seemed to easy.
In GT:4- I've done the same races numerous times to get #1- and I love it.
I've only had one real challenge in GT:5P- the time trial in the BMW M3 on eiger- The others after some tuning in the S-class- seemed to easy.
In GT:4- I've done the same races numerous times to get #1- and I love it.
- 7,829
- U S A
- Tetsumura
- Nigel Fox
I like A Spec points too, and don't see why we can't have both.
