SNAIL - Endurance Series (Archive)

  • Thread starter BradESPN
  • 3,788 comments
  • 125,998 views
Status
Not open for further replies.
I thought tex won last week

I just grabbed it from Gunny's stream:

upload_2018-9-24_12-4-34.png



...this is correct, right?
 
I did notice at the end of the race that the results got mixed up as people crossed the line. Wonder if doing X amount of laps that are roughly 90 minutes would be better than a timed race where this kind of scewiness happens. Especially being multiclass-ish.
 
Yea i thought TEX won too for D2 , and i came in second i thought blixen was behind thrash but i might be wrong i was too busy trying to keep the car on the track and with gas at that point in the race. I wish i would've taken a screen shot of it.
 
I did notice at the end of the race that the results got mixed up as people crossed the line. Wonder if doing X amount of laps that are roughly 90 minutes would be better than a timed race where this kind of scewiness happens. Especially being multiclass-ish.
I'd rather do time, laps makes it too easy to plan pit stops.
 
@MSgtGunny

I don’t get it, how is it different? I didn’t practice at all for this one so I divided the time up to plan pit stops but then it didn’t matter anyhow because fuel usage was so high I had to pit every 6 laps regardless. Dividing time or laps is kinda the same process.
 
@MSgtGunny

I don’t get it, how is it different? I didn’t practice at all for this one so I divided the time up to plan pit stops but then it didn’t matter anyhow because fuel usage was so high I had to pit every 6 laps regardless. Dividing time or laps is kinda the same process.

It gets tricky with timed endurance because you don't necessarily know where the race leader is, so you don't know if there are X laps remaining or X+1 laps remaining... which can make for some last lap drama.

I like the added strategy/risk involved, but I'm also the moron that ran out of gas TWICE last week...
 
It gets tricky with timed endurance because you don't necessarily know where the race leader is, so you don't know if there are X laps remaining or X+1 laps remaining... which can make for some last lap drama.

I like the added strategy/risk involved, but I'm also the moron that ran out of gas TWICE last week...
I always assume X+1 just to be cautious. Might lose a position in the end but consistency is key in an overall season.
 
There was definitely some messed up things within the games timing system last week.

Drivers who were on the lead lap were having their races ended.
I think it might be a smart idea to have the racing set to a # of laps for tomorrow - solely because something was obviously not right with the game when it forced JW and Neutty to finish effectively making it look like they were a lap down when really they weren't (not saying it affected them, but what if JW and Neutty were racing for position, I think one of them had underfilled on fuel and was worried they weren't going to make another lap).

IF we do a # of laps instead of a time to mitigate any potential weirdness going on with the games internal system - remember than the # of laps won't really matter for the slower cars as they'll effectively be multiple laps down depending on the length of the circuit.

All in all, I'm not sure how you want to do it - but there was definitely something going on last week - and the game really fukced it.
 
There was definitely some messed up things within the games timing system last week.

Drivers who were on the lead lap were having their races ended.
I think it might be a smart idea to have the racing set to a # of laps for tomorrow - solely because something was obviously not right with the game when it forced JW and Neutty to finish effectively making it look like they were a lap down when really they weren't (not saying it affected them, but what if JW and Neutty were racing for position, I think one of them had underfilled on fuel and was worried they weren't going to make another lap).

IF we do a # of laps instead of a time to mitigate any potential weirdness going on with the games internal system - remember than the # of laps won't really matter for the slower cars as they'll effectively be multiple laps down depending on the length of the circuit.

All in all, I'm not sure how you want to do it - but there was definitely something going on last week - and the game really fukced it.
That is true we were both pushing it really close on fuel and another lap would of made it extremely tight I think I would of finished with maybe a tenth left
 
Just to clarify I am fine with doing it either way. I know from experience that it is hard enough to run a series without people throwing their 2 cents at you all the time. I just saw some irregularities at the end of the race and wanted to at least point it out and put my opinion out there if it’s helpful. Up to the organizers to determine how to proceed from here and I’ll go with the flow unless my opinion is directly requested.

All in all I am very impressed with how well this league is run and coordinated and how well the organizers have handled input and rolled with issues within the game. It is a sterling addition to the snail franchise. If only I had the time and energy to help resurrect GT-1 for the tuning oriented snails out there. Maybe one day.
 
There was definitely some messed up things within the games timing system last week.

Drivers who were on the lead lap were having their races ended.
I think it might be a smart idea to have the racing set to a # of laps for tomorrow - solely because something was obviously not right with the game when it forced JW and Neutty to finish effectively making it look like they were a lap down when really they weren't (not saying it affected them, but what if JW and Neutty were racing for position, I think one of them had underfilled on fuel and was worried they weren't going to make another lap).

IF we do a # of laps instead of a time to mitigate any potential weirdness going on with the games internal system - remember than the # of laps won't really matter for the slower cars as they'll effectively be multiple laps down depending on the length of the circuit.

All in all, I'm not sure how you want to do it - but there was definitely something going on last week - and the game really fukced it.
So looking at my video, I'm pretty sure I crossed the line right as the timer ran out. You can tell because the race end countdown didn't start until the next person crossed. So the game didn't glitch out, the people behind me were actually a "lap" down because they only did 64 while I did 65.

 
So it looks like the game still counts a full second after the timer shows 0:00 (which means it ticks to 0:00 when its really 0:00.99999).
 
There was definitely some messed up things within the games timing system last week.

Drivers who were on the lead lap were having their races ended.
I think it might be a smart idea to have the racing set to a # of laps for tomorrow - solely because something was obviously not right with the game when it forced JW and Neutty to finish effectively making it look like they were a lap down when really they weren't (not saying it affected them, but what if JW and Neutty were racing for position, I think one of them had underfilled on fuel and was worried they weren't going to make another lap).

IF we do a # of laps instead of a time to mitigate any potential weirdness going on with the games internal system - remember than the # of laps won't really matter for the slower cars as they'll effectively be multiple laps down depending on the length of the circuit.

All in all, I'm not sure how you want to do it - but there was definitely something going on last week - and the game really fukced it.

Actually, now that i think about it, wouldn't the division in the slower car have no clue when the race is going to finish? I guess they could estimate that it would be about 90 minutes, but I'm worried that the drivers on the party chat would have an unfair advantage (they could just ask drivers in the other division what lap they're on).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back