PURE | JGTS - Going on strong and adapting in the face of change!
- Thread starter Denilson
- 4,412 comments
- 177,490 views
- 4,881
- Stockholm
- chorda / GTP_chorda
Hi Imari!
Yes, we did use a system like that in WSGTC since we had enough drivers for 2 divisions.
Def something to concider.
We experianced some issues with the point scales overlapping too much, so if we go that route, maybee the D2 winner should earn equal points to D1 12th, since that's the position he in theory achieve.
D2 2nd place shoul earn same as D1 12th, and finally D2 3rd will earn same points as D1 14th.
There is one problem with this:
If the D2 race for some reason concist of only 3 drivers (not unlikely once or twice during the season), the D2 guys are already making the same points as the bottom D1 drivers without even racing for it.
NOTE: Regarding the D1/D2 variant where we'll be using the bumping method instead of quali:
What if 4 drivers that was supposed to race in D1 do not race, as in a planned and stated absence, what happens then?
Does the bottom 3 drivers always get bumped down to D2? In theory, that could meen that the D1 winner gets bumped to D2..
If not, wich guys should get promoted from D2? Still top 3?
Should absence per automatic bump you down (if you're in D1), and if (let's say) 6 D1 drivers do not race, then top 6 from D2 will get promoted?
This will only come in to affect if more than 3 drivers are not participating in D1.
I don't think that it will be a disadvantege since 99% of us most likely will miss 2/10 races or something like that. It will be the same for the most of us.
If it's an advantage for any, it's the D2 guys, wich will meke the drivertables even tighter wich is a good thing.
Well, just something to concider.
Yes, we did use a system like that in WSGTC since we had enough drivers for 2 divisions.
Def something to concider.
We experianced some issues with the point scales overlapping too much, so if we go that route, maybee the D2 winner should earn equal points to D1 12th, since that's the position he in theory achieve.
D2 2nd place shoul earn same as D1 12th, and finally D2 3rd will earn same points as D1 14th.
There is one problem with this:
If the D2 race for some reason concist of only 3 drivers (not unlikely once or twice during the season), the D2 guys are already making the same points as the bottom D1 drivers without even racing for it.
NOTE: Regarding the D1/D2 variant where we'll be using the bumping method instead of quali:
What if 4 drivers that was supposed to race in D1 do not race, as in a planned and stated absence, what happens then?
Does the bottom 3 drivers always get bumped down to D2? In theory, that could meen that the D1 winner gets bumped to D2..
If not, wich guys should get promoted from D2? Still top 3?
Should absence per automatic bump you down (if you're in D1), and if (let's say) 6 D1 drivers do not race, then top 6 from D2 will get promoted?
This will only come in to affect if more than 3 drivers are not participating in D1.
I don't think that it will be a disadvantege since 99% of us most likely will miss 2/10 races or something like that. It will be the same for the most of us.
If it's an advantage for any, it's the D2 guys, wich will meke the drivertables even tighter wich is a good thing.
Well, just something to concider.
Last edited:
- 10,456
- United States
- WrecklessAbandon
True, but the bottom 1 or 2 of D1 don't really have to race for it either. I think it's harder to win D2 then to finish 12th in D1, most likely that will be back in the "biggest mistakes" placement of the race, where the winner of D2 is in the "least mistakes" end of their race. Hopefully that doesn't sound retarded...
I think weekly qualifying for division is best. Still has the "random crash in qualifying" factor to it, no issues with "missing weeks" also.
- 2,978
- England
- WilliamsJIM_Adam
Yes I agree. However... I think it could be more exciting if we had demotions and promotions to and from divisions, at least for part of the season.
Here's 2 different ways I've thought of that we can go about it this division thing.
Full-time Division placements (4 demotion/promotion events throughout the season) (weekly qualifier aside, I like this)
Atfer the divisions have been decided (i.e. from the qualifier), every 2 races there will be a number (3, 4?) of drivers demoted into D2, and the same number of drivers promoted into D1. To determine who is going to be demoted, the drivers' points haul from the first 2 races are calculated and the lowest 3/4 scorers in D1 are demoted, the highest 3/4 scorers in D2 are promoted.
About planned absences: If a D1 driver who finished 3rd in the first race and missed the second race, it would be unfair to demote him because he would be locked into D2 for 2 races. This is why we can assume he would also finish well in the second race. Here we can say 1 of 2 things.
1. He could finish 3rd in the 2nd race too and saying he scored 36 points in each race = 72 points.
2. He could finish have finished 'in and around' 3rd place and you reduce his points a bit, giving him a penalty of missing the race for example and giving him a larger chance of being demoted. He scored 36 points in the first race, and 36*0.75 points in the second race = 36+27 = 63 points. That 0.75 could be reduced to say, 0.5, it's just a suggestion.
Weekly Qualifier placements with 2 demotion/promotion events
Weekly qualifier decides divisions for race 1, 2 and 3. The points haul from each driver throughout these 3 rounds decides Division 1 and Division 2 for race 4. Top 14 points scorers will be in D1, bottom 14 in D2.
Of course though, like the other method it would be unfair if most drivers raced in all 3 and a few had missed a race. We can times their points scored by a certain factor again. If a driver had scored in 2 rounds and missed 1, multiplying by 1.5 would give a reasonable points score of what they could have achieved if they hadn't missed a race. So again we can penalise them a bit by multiplying their points by 1.25 or something.
So by the end of race 3 we will have divisions for race 4 decided. The divisions for race 5 is decided by the race results of race 4. Top 3/4 D2 drivers get promoted into D1, bottom 3/4 D1 drivers get demoted into D2.
The cycle happens again for races 5-7, and 8 and 9. Points haul from races 5-7 decides the divisions for race 8, and the results from race 8 decides the divisions for race 9. That leaves the final race, race 10 to be decided by a classic weekly qualifier.
You might say it's unfair if a driver misses 2 races out of the 3 'points haul' races, but should a driver really miss 2 out of 3 races in a 10 race championship?
Just a few ideas anyway...
Last edited:
SuperSic
(Banned)
- 293
- tony1311
Most suggestions sound just too complicated:
I'll stick with my initial suggestion of fixed divisions. If the initial qualifier is a bit more extensive i seriously doubt there will be misplacements due to drivers knowing one track lees than the other or being unlucky. Three different tracks (which we can vote for) with 5-6 flying laps for each is more than enough.
I'll stick with my initial suggestion of fixed divisions. If the initial qualifier is a bit more extensive i seriously doubt there will be misplacements due to drivers knowing one track lees than the other or being unlucky. Three different tracks (which we can vote for) with 5-6 flying laps for each is more than enough.
- 4,881
- Stockholm
- chorda / GTP_chorda
While I agree with SuperSic, I def think Aderrrms idea sounds interesting.
I love the way you guys help out with your respective input! đź‘Ť
It will contribute to make this championship awesome!!
So basically, just to make sure I got it right, Aderrrm says that we are "stcuk" in a division for 2 races, the 3rd race is open for promotion/relegation (D1 12-14 down / D2 1-3 up)
If a relegation take place before race 3, it's because a drivers result in the race he participated in last (I.e 1st race), then have a number that the last collected points are multiplied with.
Driver finish 5th (Let's say 30 points worth) in D1 1st race, does not race in race 2.
Then his points from previus round id multiplied by, let's say 0,75.
30 x 0,75 = 22,5p.
If a driver in D2 earns 23 points, he'll take that drivers spot in the D1 race.
If the result after the "0,75 multiplication" still are more than any driver in D2 made, he stays in D1. If he miss the 3rd race, his points should be multiplied with an even lower number (0,5?).
Meening: A driver that does not race, does not get relegated automatically for the next round. The result he performed will decide. The better his result, the bigger margin to drop races. Sounds fair to me. đź‘Ť
So what happens when we reach the 3rd race, where the door for top 3 / botom 3 are open, and a driver do not race? Still use the same method?
- 3,585
- Phoenix, AZ
- GTP_Snaeper
Hey guys, dunno if I'll be interested in joining this series or not, but I was just doing a little research for my own and I have to say this: It sure feels like math class in here.
I understand you guys are trying to have fun and be creative, but why not just keep things simple. So that everyone can figure it out? Denilson said that he expects drivers to be within two seconds of each other throughout both divisions, so why all the points nonsense? I would foresee someone getting relegated and then dropping out of the series completely after one or two bad races at the bottom. This isn't professional racing where sponsors and contracts keep you coming back for more disappointing finishes each week. If I spent a few weekends at the bottom of Div. 2 and it didn't look like I'd get to the top, I'd be gone. Then you'd have to contend with a domino effect of other drivers leaving too, most likely.
My point: If all the drivers are almost as equally as fast, then you should get almost as much of a reward in Div. 2 for winning as you would in Div. 1. And more points should be rewarded through Div. 2 than just 1 otherwise you'll have drivers questioning whether 1 point is worth their time spent finishing the race.
Just giving a little outsider's insight.
I understand you guys are trying to have fun and be creative, but why not just keep things simple. So that everyone can figure it out? Denilson said that he expects drivers to be within two seconds of each other throughout both divisions, so why all the points nonsense? I would foresee someone getting relegated and then dropping out of the series completely after one or two bad races at the bottom. This isn't professional racing where sponsors and contracts keep you coming back for more disappointing finishes each week. If I spent a few weekends at the bottom of Div. 2 and it didn't look like I'd get to the top, I'd be gone. Then you'd have to contend with a domino effect of other drivers leaving too, most likely.
My point: If all the drivers are almost as equally as fast, then you should get almost as much of a reward in Div. 2 for winning as you would in Div. 1. And more points should be rewarded through Div. 2 than just 1 otherwise you'll have drivers questioning whether 1 point is worth their time spent finishing the race.
Just giving a little outsider's insight.
Last edited:
- 2,978
- England
- WilliamsJIM_Adam
You're on about the first option right? Let me lay it out a bit better. The same thing happens every 2 races essentially.
4 demotion/promotion events.
Points haul from race 1+race 2 decides the demotions/promotions after race 2 which determines the divisions for race 3.
Points haul from race 3+race 4 decides the demotions/promotions after race 4 which determines the divisions for race 4.
Do this up to race 8.
DEMOTION EXAMPLE (Promotion would just be opposite):
Assume we use 28 points down 1, respective of all positions and that 3 drivers get demoted:
Driver: result R1 / result R2 / points for each race = total points
Driver A: 3rd / missed race / 26 + 26*0.75 = 45.5 points
Driver B: 6th / 6th / 23 + 23 = 46 points
Driver C: 11th / missed race / 18 + 18*0.75 = 31.5 points
Driver D: 12th / 12th / 17 + 17 = 34 points
Driver E: 13th / 13th / 16 + 16 = 32 points
Driver F: 14th / 14th / 15 + 15 = 30 points.
- It would be unfair to have the 3rd driver demoted just because he missed a race. It would mean he would be locked into D2 for races 3 + 4. So you can assume he would have finished 3rd in the race he missed, but with an added penalty. That number here is 0.75.
- You can see that he would have been penalised down to a similar points haul of a driver finishing in 6th position on average.
- Drivers C, E and F get demoted.
- You might say it is harsh on the 11th place driver that he gets demoted into D2. But he missed race 2 and seeing as he is near the bottom of the division, can work himself back up to D1 in 2 races time.
- Driver D could be a slower driver than Driver C, but he must be awarded for attending both races unlike Driver C. It would be unfair to assume Driver C could finish in 11th position in the race he missed, because he might not have. This is why we use 0.75 to penalise them a little. (Using 0.75 as an example. We could penalise drivers further for example by setting it at 0.5).
Sure we can use the weekly qualifier thing and determine the divisions like that. But please read what I've suggested and see if you like it. The downsides to the weekly qualifier are it takes time, and when a driver can't commit to qualifying but can commit to the race, he'll be stuck in D2.
I'm sure this series will start when it was going to start. There's no harm in throwing ideas around before then. If all else fails, the weekly qualifier it is.
- 4,881
- Stockholm
- chorda / GTP_chorda
I hear you about keeping it simple and all that.
We are the moment discussing different alternatives, and try to come to a mutual agreement, or as close as possible..
Do not be frightened about the complex posts suggestions.. We will go with the one that suit us best in the end.
Wich system that will be, is yet to be decided.
But if you're (hypotheticly) a driver that leaves after 5 rounds, this championship is not for you.
- 1,121
- Barcelona
- GV27-
I have a "mad scientist" idea.
What about combining results of the 2 divisions? Take this example:
D1 Results:
DriverA: 15:45.215
DriverB: +10.415
D2 Results:
DriverC: 15:49.173
DriverD: +1.871
Final results:
1- DriverA
2- DriverC
3- DriverD
4- DriverB
I know it's not ethical in the sense that perhaps the victor on D1 had a hard fight with the 2nd, while the winner on D2 had a calm race that allowed him to be faster. But if D2 are the slower guys anyway, it could be a good way of evening the field.
Weekly qualifiers would create groups of similarly fast drivers, who would be able to have interesting races. Then you combine the result, and there you go. After all, GT5 gives a final result with times.
What about combining results of the 2 divisions? Take this example:
D1 Results:
DriverA: 15:45.215
DriverB: +10.415
D2 Results:
DriverC: 15:49.173
DriverD: +1.871
Final results:
1- DriverA
2- DriverC
3- DriverD
4- DriverB
I know it's not ethical in the sense that perhaps the victor on D1 had a hard fight with the 2nd, while the winner on D2 had a calm race that allowed him to be faster. But if D2 are the slower guys anyway, it could be a good way of evening the field.
Weekly qualifiers would create groups of similarly fast drivers, who would be able to have interesting races. Then you combine the result, and there you go. After all, GT5 gives a final result with times.
- 766
- Canada
- nastradamus87
- 4,881
- Stockholm
- chorda / GTP_chorda
I understand your idea. Use the total time to determine the positions..
This is why it won't work.
1. The formation lap does not require the exact same time in each race. It could with ease differ around 20 seconds from 1 race to another.. And that fact makes this idea impossible to use.
2. We are going to qualify for a reason. If both divisions got the same shot at finishing 1st, the qualifier would'nt meen anything.
3. Not fair, some drivers might end up in a battle for the whole race (As you mentioned).
- 1,121
- Barcelona
- GV27-
The whole point was that qualifying meant everyone had a similar level, thus similar possibilities of getting in battles with other drivers.
However, I never thought about formation lap!! My bad, my bad.
I already said it was a mad scientist idea, so . Thanks for taking the time to read it and see why it was not viable, though!!
I used to race online on a game (no names) in which races easily had more than 30 participants, and the system was unable to hold that many people, so we split in groups of 7-8 and used the total time to determine the positions. It feels weird to compete against people you can't see, because even if you're on the lead, you feel you have to keep pushing, just in case. And it's rather stressful. I've come to love GT5 precisely because races are real. You race against what you see, and that's that.
However, it was not as strange of an idea to me as it may be for other people, since I've already raced under those regulations in the past!
With that said, I want to stress the fact I will be okay with whatever the decision on the divisions is. Such is my trust on you guys đź‘Ť
And thanks, Nastra! Well you see, every now and then it's good to hear of such ideas... you gotta' love mad scientists all around the world!
However, I never thought about formation lap!! My bad, my bad.
I already said it was a mad scientist idea, so
. Thanks for taking the time to read it and see why it was not viable, though!!I used to race online on a game (no names) in which races easily had more than 30 participants, and the system was unable to hold that many people, so we split in groups of 7-8 and used the total time to determine the positions. It feels weird to compete against people you can't see, because even if you're on the lead, you feel you have to keep pushing, just in case. And it's rather stressful. I've come to love GT5 precisely because races are real. You race against what you see, and that's that.
However, it was not as strange of an idea to me as it may be for other people, since I've already raced under those regulations in the past!
With that said, I want to stress the fact I will be okay with whatever the decision on the divisions is. Such is my trust on you guys đź‘Ť
And thanks, Nastra! Well you see, every now and then it's good to hear of such ideas... you gotta' love mad scientists all around the world!
- 4,881
- Stockholm
- chorda / GTP_chorda
The whole point was that qualifying meant everyone had a similar level, thus similar possibilities of getting in battles with other drivers.
However, I never thought about formation lap!! My bad, my bad.
I already said it was a mad scientist idea, so
I used to race online on a game (no names) in which races easily had more than 30 participants, and the system was unable to hold that many people, so we split in groups of 7-8 and used the total time to determine the positions. It feels weird to compete against people you can't see, because even if you're on the lead, you feel you have to keep pushing, just in case. And it's rather stressful. I've come to love GT5 precisely because races are real. You race against what you see, and that's that.
However, it was not as strange of an idea to me as it may be for other people, since I've already raced under those regulations in the past!
With that said, I want to stress the fact I will be okay with whatever the decision on the divisions is. Such is my trust on you guys đź‘Ť
And thanks, Nastra! Well you see, every now and then it's good to hear of such ideas... you gotta' love mad scientists all around the world!
Really appritiate your input. No idea is bad.
Every thing brought up to discussion will take us one step closer to the final product!
Thanks again! đź‘Ť
- 4,881
- Stockholm
- chorda / GTP_chorda
Thank you all for your input.
I believe that me and Wardez got enough input regarding the D1/D2 discussions.
Let's leave that behind and move forward.
Next topic:
Car selection.
We aim to have teams.
2 car teams, same car.
So roughly 14 cars to host 2 full grids.
Not all drivers can stay commited thru the entire series, and that's fine. As long as it's stated to us clearly. However, if a driver can not commit thru out the entire season, he will be assigned a "customer car".
This costumer car will be outside the team standings, but will ofc be on par with all the other cars.
Only drivers that can promise to stay commited (We do understand that things IRL can put a stop to your participation in a video game) the whole season are allowed to race in a team.
With this in mind, we believe that 13 cars should do it for the team driver (26 drivers). If more drivers show interest in a full time commitment, we will redo this list. But for now, initially, we got the following selection:
Fully commited drivers that race in a team can drive any of these cars (All cars are premium):
Nissan XANAVI NISMO GT-R
Nissan CASONIC IMPUL GT-R
Nissan YELLOWHAT YMS TOMICA GT-R
Nissan STEALTH GT500 GT-R
Nissan XANAVI NISMO Z
Honda ARTA NSX
Honda RAYBRIG NSX
Honda TAKATA DOME NSX
Honda STEALTH GT500 NSX
Lexus PETRONAS TOM'S SC430
Lexus DENSO DUNLOP SARD SC430
Toyota CASTROL TOM'S SUPRA
Toyota YELLOWHAT SUPRA
Customer cars (Drivers that want to participate, but can't commit thru the entire season):
Nissan AUTECH MOTUL GT-R
Lexus BANDAI DIREZZA SC430
Cars that needs to be tested to see if we can get them up to par:
Nissan WOODONE ADVAN CLARION GT-R
Lexus ENEOS SC430
Honda EPSON NSX
No premium GT500 car is excluded as of now.
(Cars will have individual PP, tested and prooved on par in WSGTC. Some cars are going to be tweaked a tad to find that sweet spot. If you're not familiar with the WSGTC specs cars, head to the WSGTC main thread and look for the cr specs sheet in the OP)
So with this said, how do we handle car selection?
Options:
1. Run a qualifier, 6 laps, no fuel/tire wear, same car (recommended garage).
2 best and 2 worst laps are removed. The middle 2 will be your total time.
Fastest driver chose first, and so on.
2. Everyone post their 1st, 2nd and 3rd choice, and the admins will sort out the cars as close to all wishes as possible.
(We did like this in WSGTC, and it was successful)
3. Get together with a team mate. Discuss among you guys witch car you want to race.
Post your 1st, 2nd and 3rd choice as a team.
4. Randomly assign cars. (There is web sites for this)
5. Any other alternative you guys can come up with, please post your idea. đź‘Ť
NOTE: We know that Stealth cars are not possesed by all.
I believe that me and Wardez got enough input regarding the D1/D2 discussions.
Let's leave that behind and move forward.
Next topic:
Car selection.
We aim to have teams.
2 car teams, same car.
So roughly 14 cars to host 2 full grids.
Not all drivers can stay commited thru the entire series, and that's fine. As long as it's stated to us clearly. However, if a driver can not commit thru out the entire season, he will be assigned a "customer car".
This costumer car will be outside the team standings, but will ofc be on par with all the other cars.
Only drivers that can promise to stay commited (We do understand that things IRL can put a stop to your participation in a video game) the whole season are allowed to race in a team.
With this in mind, we believe that 13 cars should do it for the team driver (26 drivers). If more drivers show interest in a full time commitment, we will redo this list. But for now, initially, we got the following selection:
Fully commited drivers that race in a team can drive any of these cars (All cars are premium):
Nissan XANAVI NISMO GT-R
Nissan CASONIC IMPUL GT-R
Nissan YELLOWHAT YMS TOMICA GT-R
Nissan STEALTH GT500 GT-R
Nissan XANAVI NISMO Z
Honda ARTA NSX
Honda RAYBRIG NSX
Honda TAKATA DOME NSX
Honda STEALTH GT500 NSX
Lexus PETRONAS TOM'S SC430
Lexus DENSO DUNLOP SARD SC430
Toyota CASTROL TOM'S SUPRA
Toyota YELLOWHAT SUPRA
Customer cars (Drivers that want to participate, but can't commit thru the entire season):
Nissan AUTECH MOTUL GT-R
Lexus BANDAI DIREZZA SC430
Cars that needs to be tested to see if we can get them up to par:
Nissan WOODONE ADVAN CLARION GT-R
Lexus ENEOS SC430
Honda EPSON NSX
No premium GT500 car is excluded as of now.
(Cars will have individual PP, tested and prooved on par in WSGTC. Some cars are going to be tweaked a tad to find that sweet spot. If you're not familiar with the WSGTC specs cars, head to the WSGTC main thread and look for the cr specs sheet in the OP)
So with this said, how do we handle car selection?
Options:
1. Run a qualifier, 6 laps, no fuel/tire wear, same car (recommended garage).
2 best and 2 worst laps are removed. The middle 2 will be your total time.
Fastest driver chose first, and so on.
2. Everyone post their 1st, 2nd and 3rd choice, and the admins will sort out the cars as close to all wishes as possible.
(We did like this in WSGTC, and it was successful)
3. Get together with a team mate. Discuss among you guys witch car you want to race.
Post your 1st, 2nd and 3rd choice as a team.
4. Randomly assign cars. (There is web sites for this)
5. Any other alternative you guys can come up with, please post your idea. đź‘Ť
NOTE: We know that Stealth cars are not possesed by all.
Last edited:
- 766
- Canada
- nastradamus87
I've ranked my personal preference by text size (
, weird choice, I know). I ranked them like this because I don't have any idea who will be my teammate, I would be fine with any of the cars, and I can't think of any good reasons for why a faster driver should should have first pick on a car over a slower driver. I'm sure at least a few people will disagree with me on this point. Any of the options would be acceptable. đź‘Ť(PS, I want the Honda ARTA NSX
.)
- 13,914
- Adelaide
- Neomone
I suspect randomly assigning cars is possibly the worst option, as chances are that a majority of people will end up in a car they don't want.
For me, I think option 2 (choosing a first, second and third car) would work out the best. Most, if not all, people will get a car they're happy with.
Discussing options as a team is also viable.
I agree that choosing a car should have little to do with speed, hence I think a qualifier for car choice is not such a good solution.
You might choose to do a lottery for pick orders though. People are randomly assigned numbers and choose cars in that order. Fair and simple.
TLDR: Option 2.
P.S. I'm an NSX man too Nastradamus, although I'm not too fussed which one I get. I'm leaning towards Raybrig at the moment for some reason. It may be because it's shiny...
For me, I think option 2 (choosing a first, second and third car) would work out the best. Most, if not all, people will get a car they're happy with.
Discussing options as a team is also viable.
I agree that choosing a car should have little to do with speed, hence I think a qualifier for car choice is not such a good solution.
You might choose to do a lottery for pick orders though. People are randomly assigned numbers and choose cars in that order. Fair and simple.
TLDR: Option 2.
P.S. I'm an NSX man too Nastradamus, although I'm not too fussed which one I get. I'm leaning towards Raybrig at the moment for some reason. It may be because it's shiny...
- 9,741
- Las Vegas UTC-8
- Wardez
- Wardez
Oh man, awesome Alien, looks like a little bit of a pre-season WSGTC reunion going.
Have any say on what division format we might be able to use or how to assign cars?
Here's one small idea I had, to sort of get it out of the way: who here would actually prefer to use an NSX?
Have any say on what division format we might be able to use or how to assign cars?
Here's one small idea I had, to sort of get it out of the way: who here would actually prefer to use an NSX?
- 7,284
- Inverness, Scotland
- GTP_PaulMac/paulmac2k9
yeah ill vote Option 2 aswell. atleast then someone like me who cant stand the NSX hopefully wont be stuck with one 
