TCV1 Discussion Thread

[Rotary Junkie]

Yep. It's time.

Enough of the ZOMG LAP TIME MOAR IMPOARTAANT THAN ANYYTHIIING contests, enough having 2 weeks to put a car together and a week for judging.

It's time for the big one.

Now, I'd thrown some thoughts around for what would've been TCV6 in GT4...

The basic idea was that there'd be 3 classes; FWD, RWD, AWD. All on S3s, all based on production (or tuner-modified production) vehicles, judged out of 100 points as follows:

50 points: Handling character
20 points: Improvement of performance versus default settings. 1 point for every .1 shaved.
20 points: Relative performance against the other vehicles in class purely in terms of lap time. Fastest car of class gets the full 20, the point difference per place will be decided upon closure of entries (seeing as it depends on the number of entries).
10 points: Lenience. How far you can alter your lines, braking points, and general driving style without causing large losses in time.

Yes, extremely open to judges' interpretation. Track selection would be up to each individual judge (track specific tuning? Hah).


Now, GT5's thrown a bit of a spanner in the works with the online/offline physics differences; meaning we need to decide which it'll actually be held on... And also whether we want to restrict the classes to a given PP level.

Basically, this thread is to figure out how exactly we want this to be done, sort out the regulations and judging, etc.

Once we figure that out, we'll set up at least a month's window for entries and a 2 or 3 month window for judging.

 

[VTiRoj]

I think there should be PP restrictions but only to promote a wider range of cars. I'd also say free reign for ballast but 90% power limiter is the max.

FWD 450PP (The FF Shootout was 500PP, so lowering it a bit lets some of the hot hatches in.)
RWD & 4WD 550PP (There's just been a 600PP Shootout.)

Offline physics would eliminate any chance of not being able to test or tune because of PSN or internet-related issues. Also you can't take borrowed cars online.

Also bring benchmark cars back? RWD class could try and take down the Amuse GT1 Turbo, FWD would have the Trial Celica I guess? 4WD Mine's R34.

 

[XDesperado67]

Looks interesting so far. I'm up to getting some cars tuned for it. Just a couple thoughts though.
Why not make the classes based on PP rather than drive configuration? If PP is anywhere close to an accurate reflection of relative competitiveness of cars then a 450PP FF should match up well against 450PP 4wd and FR cars. Also since much of the scoring is based on factors other than pure lap speed that becomes much less important.
If instead you wish to limit classes by drive layout or some other criteria such as weight or engine displacement or car class then I recommend foregoing PP.
Second I see no reason to limit the use of the power limiter. Reason I say this is that as part of your scoring you talk about improvement over stock and general driving characteristics etc. So a car that has been severally power limited to make a class should be penalized in certain portions of the scoring.
Finally is there some reason this can't/shouldn't be a Federation of International Tuners and Test-Drivers event? We currently have several ongoing challenge events, and will continue having the relatively quick shootouts. This offers a middle ground event where tuners can take more time trying to get the "perfect" car and tune and because of the extended testing period means that test drivers don't need to feel rushed and/or overwhelmed by the number of cars needing testing in a relatively short period.
Looking forward to seeing some details worked out and starting this event.👍👍

 

[Onboy123]

There's only one reason it can't be a F.I.T.T event. RJ runs it. And he likes being independent

 

[mafia_boy]

You know I'm down for it bro. You and I need to have a talk about this in detail on PSN. 👍 Let's show you new guys how us old schoolers run a challenge.

 

[XDesperado67]

You know I'm down for it bro. You and I need to have a talk about this in detail on PSN. 👍 Let's show you new guys how us old schoolers run a challenge.

Reason I started the Federation of International Tuners and Test-Drivers was because you ole skool types were complaining about the shootouts not being done "right", but not showing us how they should be done.
Well I'm all for you showing us how to do things as long as we can keep having fun.👍👍

 

[mafia_boy]

Reason I started the Federation of International Tuners and Test-Drivers was because you ole skool types were complaining about the shootouts not being done "right", but not showing us how they should be done.
Well I'm all for you showing us how to do things as long as we can keep having fun.👍👍

It is fun, and that's not saying that the current shootouts haven't been fun already. It's just to us, there is a certain nostalgia of doing this type of event and I'm sure that you guys will soon agree with us that this format allows cars that normally wouldn't have a chance (such as your Bergmeister) in a timed format would be up there for a podium or better in this format. 👍

 

[XDesperado67]

It is fun, and that's not saying that the current shootouts haven't been fun already. It's just to us, there is a certain nostalgia of doing this type of event and I'm sure that you guys will soon agree with us that this format allows cars that normally wouldn't have a chance (such as your Bergmeister) in a timed format would be up there for a podium or better in this format. 👍

Couple things, as I said in my earlier post here, because of the extended time frame with this setup I don't see why it can't be an addition to the events already scheduled in F.I.T.T.. The problem we were running into with the top speed, short length shootouts was that multiple people all wanted to run their shootout next so the initial purpose behind F.I.T.T. has been accomplished by setting up a schedule for those types of events. I don't see the much longer time frame suggested here as causing a problem with the short format of 3-4 weeks for a shootout. So it should be easy to have both going at the same time without causing to many conflicts over available time.
Reasons I would like to see this as a F.I.T.T. sanctioned event are because; 1)it helps build community cohesiveness; 2)it encourages some of you old school types to get involved in F.I.T.T. and helping lend your acquired knowledge of things that have worked in the past and things that haven't to us newer members of the community; 3)I'm a bloody egomaniac who wants to rule the world!

just joking about number 3

 

[CSLACR]

So basically the same with a bias more for driver preference and longer tuning/testing times?
I love it.

Of course there's the new school question of can tuners be testers?

And I would prefer it be for online with the extra long timeframe, with more time there's no reason to not.

 

[bigberry]

Agreed on the online part , especially so that the tunes are completely usable . A lot of people only drive online , and with a good time limit theres no reason why we cant build the cars. Unless someone enters a Miura or Ford Mark 4.

 

[mafia_boy]

So basically the same with a bias more for driver preference and longer tuning/testing times?
I love it.

Of course there's the new school question of can tuners be testers?

And I would prefer it be for online with the extra long timeframe, with more time there's no reason to not.

I was able to do it for TCv5. I had set it up with four judges, allowing the four judges to enter aswell. The normal entries were judged by all four judges and the worst score was dropped. The judges entries however were judged by the other three and that was their score. That way, every entry had three scores to get an average off. 👍 More judges would allow more scores for a more precise average. 👍

@Desperado, I'm not RJ, that's why my stuff is with FITT. But @ Part 3.

 

[XDesperado67]

I was able to do it for TCv5. I had set it up with four judges, allowing the four judges to enter aswell. The normal entries were judged by all four judges and the worst score was dropped. The judges entries however were judged by the other three and that was their score. That way, every entry had three scores to get an average off. 👍 More judges would allow more scores for a more precise average. 👍

@Desperado, I'm not RJ, that's why my stuff is with FITT. But @ Part 3.

Hey Maf any chance of you being on PS3 in next few minutes? Would like to attempt to make a verified 200mph run in my Pikes Peak. Just speaking of your stuff with F.I.T.T..

 

[mafia_boy]

Hey Maf any chance of you being on PS3 in next few minutes? Would like to attempt to make a verified 200mph run in my Pikes Peak. Just speaking of your stuff with F.I.T.T..

I'd say within the next 30 for sure, if I can get my damn son off the PS3. I bought him Cars 2 and he's been playing that like I play GT5.

 

[Onboy123]

I'd say within the next 30 for sure, if I can get my damn son off the PS3. I bought him Cars 2 and he's been playing that like I play GT5.

DON'T SAY THAT ABOUT YOUR SON! And I'm guessing by that statement you mean he sits in front of a tunnel the wrong way, gunning it every 5 seconds and swearing a lot

Anyways, 'nuff onboy spam.

 

[Rotary Junkie]

Right then, how we gonn' do this?

We need a consensus as to online/offline, classes, and the criteria.

Also, do we want a 4th class? Say, N3 (well, C3) tires and unrestricted drivetrain, as was done in the past? Or what? Suggestions, stuff, things.

 

[Onboy123]

Well, how about doing it the GT4 way first? I've been reading through some of the old TCV (I thought it was TvC?) stuff and could sort of get how it worked but didn't quite get it. Looked fun though…we need to be shown how to run a shootout the old skool way.

Shame Mafs ragequitted though…

 

[Rotary Junkie]

Well, how about doing it the GT4 way first? I've been reading through some of the old TCV (I thought it was TvC?) stuff and could sort of get how it worked but didn't quite get it. Looked fun though…we need to be shown how to run a shootout the old skool way.

Shame Mafs ragequitted though…

This is the "GT4 way". We talk about how we want to do things for a few weeks, then give a grace period of a few weeks to get entries together, then testing.

 

[VTiRoj]

I think we need a mini-TCv1 to get everyone who hasn't been in a TCv before into the right state of mind. This is much bigger than anything that's been done on GT5 so far.

Instead of tuning 1 car, you could be tuning 4.
Instead of writing down lap times and making a brief comment, you'll be taking the average times too and making judgements on how the car actually feels and handles and then scoring it accordingly. Oh and the fact you could be testing anywhere between 40-80 cars.

This is why RJ says these events take months and why I think we should have a mini one to break people into the format.

 

[Turtle]

I think there should be PP restrictions but only to promote a wider range of cars. I'd also say free reign for ballast but 90% power limiter is the max.

FWD 450PP (The FF Shootout was 500PP, so lowering it a bit lets some of the hot hatches in.)
RWD & 4WD 550PP (There's just been a 600PP Shootout.)

Offline physics would eliminate any chance of not being able to test or tune because of PSN or internet-related issues. Also you can't take borrowed cars online.

Also bring benchmark cars back? RWD class could try and take down the Amuse GT1 Turbo, FWD would have the Trial Celica I guess? 4WD Mine's R34.

This. I would've said something similar to this, but way less detailed.

~Turtle

​

​

 

[Onboy123]

Ohhh……I see…well, a mini one would be good for us newcomers.

One thing, is there something like a benchmark tuner car? From what I recall reading the old threads, I think there was a benchmark car for every class…or was that only specific for Maf's one?

 

[VTiRoj]

Also with 4 divisions, you can run both physics sets.

400PP CS Online.
500PP SH Offline.
600bhp/1300kg SS Online.
900bhp/1250kg RM Offline.

Then in TCv2, you can switch it up. No arguments about physics and anyone who dislikes online physics can still participate.

 

[XDesperado67]

I'm in for whatever this turns out to be, but any online testing for me may be highly problematic/impossible for me to complete.

Oh and just a random thought here...spending the day trying to watch Initial D. (never seen it before...yeah I know but I'm old waddya expect) Anyways whatabout doing signature cars...i.e. only one of each specific car allowed so there can be say 2 RX-7s from the same year but they have to be different models or a JDM and export coded one. Tuners would get the cars on a first come basis, so it encourages people to make their selection early on but you don't wind up with half the entries all being the same car. Just a random crazy thought...

Oh and let's try the simplified version to get us new guys acquainted with the format.👍👍

 

[krenkme]

I'm still confused. (I'm an idiot) But it sounds complicated and I'm sure to waste everyones time.... count me in

 

[DigitalBaka]

I think the only thing that concerns me is the time line in respect to the offline/online choice. Offline we all know is fairly easy so long as people have space for FRs *coughRojcough*. Bringing the event online will stick us with the stupidity of not being able to use borrowed cars online (or can we now?). Building is easy enough but then there is the break in period. Splitting by class for testing makes that easier but obviously we'll need to accommodate the time line appropriately.

That said I'm all for doing it online. I don't do much (read: anything) online in GT5 but perhaps seeing some of these tunes in action might change that. And of course I'd be happy to run some testers through remote races to build up cash pools to be able to buy cars. Perhaps that could be a part of the pre-test readiness whatever.

Talking classes, a split by drivetrain works for me, but would you lump FR, RR and MR all together or split into two (RR by itself wouldn't make much sense)? Roj's PP limits make sense to me; high enough to be a challenge but also low enough to include more cars in the mix.

I'll brain dump more as I think of it...

 

[Rotary Junkie]

Alternatively, we could use either a central PSN account + save for testing (if online) or have everyone dupe copies of the cars around.

 

[VTiRoj]

I think the only thing that concerns me is the time line in respect to the offline/online choice. Offline we all know is fairly easy so long as people have space for FRs *coughRojcough*. Bringing the event online will stick us with the stupidity of not being able to use borrowed cars online (or can we now?). Building is easy enough but then there is the break in period. Splitting by class for testing makes that easier but obviously we'll need to accommodate the time line appropriately.

I've got pretty much everyone already, it's just when new blood appears is when I have to make space.

Also this is an event that will take months to finish. Time isn't a problem, so the time needed to build/send cars for online testing is available..

That said I'm all for doing it online. I don't do much (read: anything) online in GT5 but perhaps seeing some of these tunes in action might change that. And of course I'd be happy to run some testers through remote races to build up cash pools to be able to buy cars. Perhaps that could be a part of the pre-test readiness whatever.

I'm the exact same as you bud. I don't give two fingers for online in GT5, so I don't bother with it unless I have to.

Talking classes, a split by drivetrain works for me, but would you lump FR, RR and MR all together or split into two (RR by itself wouldn't make much sense)? Roj's PP limits make sense to me; high enough to be a challenge but also low enough to include more cars in the mix.

I'll brain dump more as I think of it...

I was just giving examples for the sake of showing my point. I'd rather have drivetrain-based classes too. RR is at a disadvantage anyway, so that can be a novelty division. FR and MR can mix quite well.

 

[CyKosis1973]

Alternatively, we could use either a central PSN account + save for testing (if online) or have everyone dupe copies of the cars around.

I'll happily volunteer my services as a Duping Machine 👍

{Cy}

EDIT:

And how about the restrictions for cars being based on weight, power and drivetrain, rather than PP. I hate PP...

eg:

FWD
Max BHP: 200
Min kg: 1100

RWD
Max BHP: 200
Min kg: 1150

4WD
Max BHP: 200
Min kg: 1200

 

[VTiRoj]

That works great, Cy, since that's how things used to be done anyway. 👍

 

[praiano63]

I`m in 100% . Depending when it will begin , i will present a car. I´m going back to Brasil in 1 month and i will not play a lot in april may..... Just when i will be home with my cockpit that i`ve left 1 year ago .
I would love to tune this
600bhp/1300kg SS Online.
900bhp/1250kg RM Offline.

 

[XDesperado67]

I'll happily volunteer my services as a Duping Machine 👍

{Cy}

EDIT:

And how about the restrictions for cars being based on weight, power and drivetrain, rather than PP. I hate PP...

eg:

FWD
Max BHP: 200
Min kg: 1100

RWD
Max BHP: 200
Min kg: 1150

4WD
Max BHP: 200
Min kg: 1200

Going with HP & weight sounds fine, but only 200HP with cars that heavy will seriously limit what cars are available and eliminate a lot of tuning options for them.

For a low power set of classes 200HP is fine but making the weights more like 800kg 850kg 900kg for minimum would allow many more cars as options like many of your hot hatches and Kei cars. Seeing how if I understand this correctly actual speed is only a small part of the event and improvement in handling + driving fun are the major factors, then you want as many choices of cars as possible don't you?