Suspension Glitch

[FPV MIC]

This video was made only a few days in. By the end of the week, it was all Altaza’s with jacked suspension.

Then why use it as evidence? It clearly proves what you said was incorrect.

I just don’t understand why people want to argue against it? Any single person can go tale one of your 600 or 700 cars, jack the suspension and see how much your PP goes down and how HP you can gain.

I wasn't arguing against it existing, I was pointing out that your 'evidence' was poor and inconclusive, and that the 'evidence' you used pointed to what you said being outright false.

Edit: If you want to show something to be true it's wise to not use contradictory evidence

 

[Tassie_tiger]

There's certainly some in the top 10 using it but it doesn't look to be all as you claim, and there's not 2 to 3 seconds difference that's for sure. I see @Mistah_MCA was in the top 10, if you don't mind me asking were you using this weird set-up or a more traditional one?

Edit: Whosever video it is actually does a really poor job of pointing out cars that do have the high front ride height as most of the ones he shows don't have it.

I'm not all that fussed regarding particular setups used by individuals. Everyone has the opportunity to take full advantage of the system as it stands.

Simple example: the same car with a 49:51 weight distribution vs a 51:49 weight distribution. Which car has the highest PP?
Then push that example to the extreme and you end up with people finding these 'optimum' tunes.

Now, is this any sort of an exploit similar to using a Tomahawk X with ridiculous gearing against road cars? In my opinion, No.
But is it an inevitable end to a very intricate in-game system with almost endless variables? Yep. Almost without question.

The deeper the system, the more variables it has, the more time it takes trying to balance those variables.
No game, regardless of the genre, is immune to this.

 

[boostdmarkii]

saw that Race A (allegedly) will be 500pp RH tuning next week, thought I’d fiddle around to see what is quickest… hopefully they eliminate the suspension or else it’ll be another waste of a race slot. It’s not even worth testing cars at the flat 500pp knowing that any marginal choice can just be squatted down to fit… and any “how a normal car works” tune is half the HP. Cool stuff

all cars get faster squated yes.. However the tuning races are still a great time as once you get a car set up real well around that carolina squat its 10x faster than some car someone just squatted and didnt tune it around said squat hahaha

 

[FPV MIC]

I'm not all that fussed regarding particular setups used by individuals. Everyone has the opportunity to take full advantage of the system as it stands.

Simple example: the same car with a 49:51 weight distribution vs a 51:49 weight distribution. Which car has the highest PP?
Then push that example to the extreme and you end up with people finding these 'optimum' tunes.

Now, is this any sort of an exploit similar to using a Tomahawk X with ridiculous gearing against road cars? In my opinion, No.
But is it an inevitable end to a very intricate in-game system with almost endless variables? Yep. Almost without question.

The deeper the system, the more variables it has, the more time it takes trying to balance those variables.
No game, regardless of the genre, is immune to this.

You're right, it's nothing new and it's open to everyone, and a lot of the time these set-ups are okay to pull off a one lap qualifier but often they're not nearly as good for a race. I'm not sure what it's like in GT7's case because I haven't tried it yet, but from the footage I have seen in this thread they look pretty unstable.

I've seen so called 'glitches' used in just about every car racing game I've ever played. Back in GT6 days it was common practice to jack the front ride height, use obscene amounts of rear toe and zero camber in Time Trails to the point where cars felt like a fork lift to drive, but I don't recall people racing them like that.

 

[Samus]

You have an issue.

This: ""These cars should handle very badly, but they don't in GT world"" is just flat out wrong.
Deal with it.

Deal with it because you say so? No.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

Deal with it because you say so? No.

'Deal with it' because it's a simple fact that a car set with an extreme high front end and a low rear end handles worse, and has a slower lap time, than a comparable car that doesn't.

Do you disagree?

 

[Meythia]

Which was my entire counter-point.

Not much of a rational counterpoint it is.
Raising the front: reduces PP, makes car handle worse than before
Adding weight to the front: reduces PP, but restores handling, can make it even better than before or at least provide enough handling to do decent laptimes.
So what do you have at that point?
A car that is slightly slower but with identical handling to a car setup that you would use in a real situation.
But you still have PP left to spare, adding power increases the cars speed to a higher degree than the other car at the limit would have.

This is counterintuitiv, this is against any physics, it is downright stupid.
You clearly can understand this, but it seems you dont want to see the flaw that is directly in sight.

Do you disagree?

So it seems I have to correct my last sentence before, because yes, I disagree:
it doesnt handle worse with additional setup and is faster.
See above.

Ignorance doesnt make bug dissappear.
Even if everyone can make use of it, it still is abusing a weakness in the game that by definition of "the real driving simulator" cant be intended. Everyone is cheating doesnt make it any better. But as long as no one in competitive play has to suffer, there is no harm, I guess.

 

[Samus]

'Deal with it' because it's a simple fact that a car set with an extreme high front end and a low rear end handles worse, and has a slower lap time, than a comparable car that doesn't.

Do you disagree?

No, because that was never the point. The point is it doesn't handle as badly as it should do and/or the PP drops too far.

I mean, what are you even trying to argue here? That there isn't an issue at all? Because it's pretty clear there is.

A car set up normally should be faster than the same car set up with a jacked up front/dropped rear and extra power added to reach the same PP, but it isn't.

 

[Grimm6Jack]

Tires and tuning settings should not affect PP. It’s a mess because of this.

They absolutely should... Everything needs to affect PP because everything affects performance. Some things more than others.

PD simply has to make things right. Raising the front suspension to be much higher than the rear should not give you performance points, it should take them away, a lot, and the car should be almost undriveable.

Really don't like the ideas of making things simple just to appeal to a more casual playerbase.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

@Meythia
"Raising the front: reduces PP, makes car handle worse than before".
Correct. Which was whole point. What exactly is wrong with the physics here?

"Adding weight to the front: reduces PP, but restores handling, can make it even better than before or at least provide enough handling to do decent laptimes."
Again, correct. and again, my whole point. Raising the front and dropping the rear ultimately does what to the weight distribution? If this is the winning combination, why don't these tunes add weight to the rear? Counter-intuitive to the first action. The advantage here is the weight added, therefore the weight/power ratio allowing for more BHP.

"It doesn't handle worse with additional setup and is faster.
Well there's the problem.

@Samus
"No, because that was never the point."
Ummm, when you make statements like this: "The problem here is the physics system, not the PP per se. These cars should handle very badly, but they don't in GT world".
That's exactly the point. They do in fact handle badly when using extreme front and rear ride heights.

Now, if people are going to adjust spring rates and also add ballast to counter those extreme ride heights, which exactly why they are doing such things, then once again, I'm not interested in what 'expert metric' you've decided to judge that upon, other than the fact that they aren't doing it because the car handles beautifully with the chosen ride height settings and decided to do it for fun.

If you wish to find something to criticise, which of course you always do, have a crack at the PP system, not the physics, because the physics implications in this matter don't seem all that far off the mark to me.

They absolutely should... Everything needs to affect PP because everything affects performance. Some things more than others.

PD simply has to make things right. Raising the front suspension to be much higher than the rear should not give you performance points, it should take them away, a lot, and the car should be almost undriveable.

Really don't like the ideas of making things simple just to appeal to a more casual playerbase.

Agreed.
Why people think that tyre selection or suspension settings shouldn't apply to 'performance points' of a race car is beyond me.

 

[Samus]

Now, if people are going to adjust spring rates and also add ballast to counter those extreme ride heights, which exactly why they are doing such things, then once again, I'm not interested in what 'expert metric' you've decided to judge that upon, other than the fact that they aren't doing it because the car handles beautifully with the chosen ride height settings and decided to do it for fun.

If you wish to find something to criticise, which of course you always do, have a crack at the PP system, not the physics, because the physics implications in this matter don't seem all that far off the mark to me.

So you really think that cars set up this way would be drivable in real life? Ballast or other suspension tweaks would never fix the inherent problem running a car like that would bring.

The tweaks people are making are just to make it even better, that's pretty common sense and no different from tuning any other philosophy. The point is this philosophy shouldn't work at all. It's inherently wrong.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

So you really think that cars set up this way would be drivable in real life? Ballast or other suspension tweaks would never fix the inherent problem running a car like that would bring.

The tweaks people are making are just to make it even better, that's pretty common sense and no different from tuning any other philosophy. The point is this philosophy shouldn't work at all. It's inherently wrong.

What range of ride height do you think people are applying to these tunes?
Drivable?
Seriously?

 

[FPV MIC]

Agreed.
Why people think that tyre selection or suspension settings shouldn't apply to 'performance points' of a race car is beyond me.

I only half agree here. The tyres should most definitely change the performance points but only selecting different types of suspension should (full race suspension = more PP than a sports suspension with less adjustability).

The reason I say this is because this is closer to how it works in real racing. I have never seen a race series make you change the engine performance of a race car due to the suspension settings they're running.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

I only half agree here. The tyres should most definitely change the performance points but only selecting different types of suspension should (full race suspension = more PP than a sports suspension with less adjustability).

The reason I say this is because this is closer to how it works in real racing. I have never seen a race series make you change the engine performance of a race car due to the suspension settings they're running.

Well, guaranteed I could give you 2 suspension settings on the same car and the lap times would be notably different.
Guess where I would start? No more positive rake angle for you.

So yep, suspension settings should without doubt be part of the PP calculation.

 

[FPV MIC]

Well, guaranteed I could give you 2 suspension settings on the same car and the lap times would be notably different.
So yep, suspension settings should without doubt be part of the PP calculation.

And yet it doesn't change anything in real life. Better suspension settings don't, and shouldn't have any effect on any other part of the car, they only have an effect on the stop watch. Edit: A different, better suspension package should.

Try telling Triple 8 that they have to lose horsepower because they have the best suspension set-up in the Supercars paddock.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

And yet it doesn't change anything in real life. Better suspension settings don't, and shouldn't have any effect on any other part of the car, they only have an effect on the stop watch.

Try telling Triple 8 that they have to lose horsepower because they have the best suspension set-up in the Supercars paddock.

Of course it changes everything. Not just lap times, but also tyre deg.
Triple 8 aren't working within an arbitrary 'PP' system.
They are free to set the suspension in any way they choose to suit the track and race conditions they expect to come across.

How often have you heard a race commentator, or even the driver, suggest a car isn't great over a 1 lap qualy but should be good for race pace?
Part of that, along with aero, is suspension, which go hand in hand.

 

[Samus]

What range of ride height do you think people are applying to these tunes?
Drivable?
Seriously?

We're talking about competitive driving/racing here, I obviously don't mean it'd be literally undrivable full stop. I mean it'd be undrivable the same way racing drivers sometimes say their car is undrivable because of a bad setup. But even then, you will not find anyone on the planet setting up a car to drive competitively by raising the front and dropping the rear to their maximum respective levels. Because it'd drive terribly, no matter what else you did to it. But in GT, all that you seem to get is some bouncing on heavy cornering, which as already mentioned, people are pretty easily dialling out.

End result is a ridiculous looking car going way faster than it ever should. It's a physics issue as much as a PP issue.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

We're talking about competitive driving/racing here, I obviously don't mean it'd be literally undrivable full stop. I mean it'd be undrivable the same way racing drivers sometimes say their car is undrivable because of a bad setup. But even then, you will not find anyone on the planet setting up a car to drive competitively by raising the front and dropping the rear to their maximum respective levels. Because it'd drive terribly, no matter what else you did to it. But in GT, all that you seem to get is some bouncing on heavy cornering, which as already mentioned, people are pretty easily dialling out.

End result is a ridiculous looking car going way faster than it ever should. It's a physics issue as much as a PP issue.

That's because race cars are outputting as much BHP as they can, or are allowed to.

Fine, do a BoP race with BHP and weight limits.
How many are using a stupid negative rake now?

If you want me to make a determination, it's a PP issue, and I say that because it has many, many parts involved in the calculation.
It's easier to find loopholes to take advantage of.
On the contrary, I see little evidence of individual physics issues.

 

[FPV MIC]

Of course it changes everything. Not just lap times, but also tyre deg.
Triple 8 aren't working within an arbitrary 'PP' system.

But Triple 8 are still governed by an arbitrary set of rules, much like the pp system, where the only real difference they can make to their car is to have a better suspension set-up than their competitors. This goes for many series, except some have more flexibility like gear ratios as well (which is well and truly stuffed in GT7's pp land).

How often have you heard a race commentator suggest a car isn't great over a 1 lap qualy but should be good for race pace?
Part of that, along with aero, is suspension, which go hand in hand.

Exactly right, and realistic! And how often do you here a commentator say, he's got a great handling car, but due to his great suspension settings we're docking him xx amount of horsepower.

You should be free to adjust your suspension settings (Edit: As I previously mentioned, suspension type should incur pp changes) without losing or gaining horsepower. Your aero will sort itself out (cornering or straight line) in PP land and be track dependant. That should be all your choice, within certain parameters of course, just like IRL.

 

[Samus]

On the contrary, I see little evidence of individual physics issues.

That's because you see a car running these crazy ride heights and feeling very few negative effects as normal, apparently. I see it as something that really shouldn't work AT ALL with a realistic physics system, even if you do add some more power to compensate.

Fine, do a BoP race with BHP and weight limits.
How many are using a stupid negative rake now?

I don't know, has there been any of those since this was discovered?

 

[Tassie_tiger]

But Triple 8 are still governed by an arbitrary set of rules, much like the pp system, where the only real difference they can make to their car is to have a better suspension set-up than their competitors. This goes for many series, except some have more flexibility like gear ratios as well (which is well and truly stuffed in GT7's pp land).

Exactly right, and realistic! And how often do you here a commentator say, he's got a great handling car, but due to his great suspension settings we're docking him xx amount of horsepower.

You should be free to adjust your suspension settings without losing or gaining horsepower. Your aero will sort itself out (cornering or straight line) in PP land and be track dependant. That should be all your choice, within certain parameters of course, just like IRL.

Dude.
"where the only real difference they can make to their car is to have a better suspension set-up than their competitors."
Umm, yeh. It's a better performing car.

In what world does a car that has the best lap time due to (who knows who determines this) suspension settings gets docked BHP output?
You have the best performing car with a driver that can extract the best from the car.
This is what makes cars, and drivers, win championships.

I'm lost as to what else to say here.

The 'best car' with a driver good enough to use that car to it's full potential wins. Chassis and suspension settings play a big role in that equation.

@Samus
"That's because you see a car running these crazy ride heights and feeling very few negative effects as normal, apparently. I see it as something that really shouldn't work AT ALL with a realistic physics system, even if you do add some more power to compensate."

As I've mentioned, I kinda don't care. I obviously would prefer to not see people taking advantage of loopholes, but I'm willing to accept that very complicate systems like this will have issues, and people will do what they do.

"I don't know, has there been any of those since this was discovered?"
C'mon now. You know as well as I do that people wouldn't be running negative rake because there is a handling advantage.
They do it, along with adding counter ballast, because the end result is adding more BHP.
End of story.

 

[Famine]

In what world does a car that has the best lap time due to (who knows who determines this) suspension settings get docked BHP output?

The world of the World Endurance Championship.

 

[Samus]

Dude.
"where the only real difference they can make to their car is to have a better suspension set-up than their competitors."
Umm, yeh. It's a better performing car.

In what world does a car that has the best lap time due to (who knows who determines this) suspension settings get docked BHP output?
You have the best performing car with a driver that can extract the best from the car.
This is what makes cars, and drivers, win championships.

I'm lost as to what else to say here.

The 'best car' with a driver good enough to use that car to it's full potential wins. Chassis and suspension settings play a big role in that equation.

Yes, but what he's saying is that suspension set ups are not part of the regulations. Two cars can enter the same race series with the exact same car, one can tune their car to have a really nice suspension setup, the other one can get it wrong. Both still meet the regulations, the one with a good setup isn't suddenly now beyond the regulations. But that's what is happening with GT and PP. Two identical 500PP cars, one with a good suspension setup could be 510PP and now no longer able to enter, the bad one is 490PP and can. Still the same car. Still meeting the same regulations.

 

[Mistah_MCA]

There's certainly some in the top 10 using it but it doesn't look to be all as you claim, and there's not 2 to 3 seconds difference that's for sure. I see @Mistah_MCA was in the top 10, if you don't mind me asking were you using this weird set-up or a more traditional one?

Edit: Whosever video it is actually does a really poor job of pointing out cars that do have the high front ride height as most of the ones he shows don't have it.

I used two cars that early Monday morning: the Toyota Tundra, and the Ford GT40.

For the Tundra, it had stock suspension. For the GT40, it had evenly raised suspension.

I think I put those times in before people started reverse-raking the Atenzas, so that wasn't in my mind at the time.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

The world of the World Endurance Championship.

I don't know the correct term, but some sort of Performance penalty to even the field?
Yes, I roughly know of systems like that where things like ballast is added to winners.
Fair call, but not really what I was going for regarding my comment.

@Samus
How you can argue against suspension settings not applying to PP calculations is beyond me.
"Two identical 500PP cars, one with a good suspension setup could be 510PP and now no longer able to enter, the bad one is 490PP and can."
They aren't 'identical' though.
One has a "good" suspension setup. The other doesn't.
Guess which car 'performs' better?

 

[Samus]

I don't know the correct term, but some sort of Performance penalty to even the field?
Yes, I roughly know of systems like that where things like ballast is added to winners.
Fair call, but not really what I was going for regarding my comment.

@Samus
How you can argue against suspension settings not applying to PP calculations is beyond me.
"Two identical 500PP cars, one with a good suspension setup could be 510PP and now no longer able to enter, the bad one is 490PP and can."
They aren't identical.
Are they.
One has a "good" suspension setup. The other doesn't.
Guess which car 'performs' better?

They are physically identical in terms of parts but with different setups, incredibly common in racing. They both still meet the entry regulations though. Both should still enter the same races, even if yes, one is faster than the other. That's racing. That's the skill of setup. There is no regulation for entry that says you can't have really good setup or you can make your car a bit better somewhere else if your setup is garbage. That's on you/your team.

In Formula 1 this season the Mercedes cars have been regularly running with different setups, Hamilton more experimental and Russell more conservative. They are still physically usually the same cars (if they're not testing new parts), they both still comply with the F1 regulations. But more often than not Russell's choice has been faster. He isn't disqualified from entering, his car isn't suddenly illegal because he made improvements to his car via setup.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

They are physically identical in terms of parts but with different setups, incredibly common in racing. They both still meet the entry regulations though. Both should still enter the same races, even if yes, one is faster than the other. That's racing. That's the skill of setup. There is no regulation for entry that says you can't have really good setup or you can make your car a bit better somewhere else if your setup is garbage. That's on you/your team.

In Formula 1 this season the Mercedes cars have been regularly running with different setups, Hamilton more experimental and Russell more conservative. They are still physically usually the same cars (if they're not testing new parts), they both still comply with the F1 regulations. But more often than not Russell's choice has been faster. He isn't disqualified from entering, his car isn't suddenly illegal because he made improvements to his car via setup.

I understand what you are saying.
But here's the thing. Formula 1 and Aussie Super Cars that Triple 8 compete in have countless rules.
Some arbitrary video game PP calculation isn't one of them.

And if what you are advocating occurred within GT7, people would be here on this forum complaining about META cars.

The system in the game is what it is.
It's not perfect. It has loopholes.
But 'performance points' relate to performance of the car.
Suspension settings alter the performance of the car, for better or for worse.

I could give you a suspension setting that your lap time would basically equate to using a lower grade of tyre.
It's why, for many years now, PP system or not, people have actively created, and others searched for, better tunes of certain cars. And the suspension settings on those cars play a huge part.
And yet you feel suspension settings shouldn't be part of the PP calculation?
The 'Performance Points' of the car?

There is little more I can say.

 

[FPV MIC]

How you can argue against suspension settings not applying to PP calculations is beyond me.

How you can argue for it is beyond me . Full on Racing Suspension versus a cars stock suspension should absolutely count towards it but nothing else.

 

[Tassie_tiger]

How you can argue for it is beyond me . Full on Racing Suspension versus a cars stock suspension should absolutely count towards it but nothing else.

So let's add Racing Suspension but it has the same settings as Stock suspension.
All good. Here, take a PP hit even though your suspension is exactly the same.

Seems fair and reasonable.

 

[FPV MIC]

So let's add Racing Suspension but it has the same settings as Stock suspension.
All good. Here, take a PP hit even though your suspension is exactly the same.

Seems fair and reasonable.

Take the Racing Suspension off then, simple .

You'd have to be pretty foolish to do that when the main reason you'd put it on is to work outside the range of the settings the stock suspension has to offer.