Author Topic: My personal valuation of GPBikes  (Read 2116 times)

matty0l215

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3530
  • CAWS Racing #61
    • View Profile
Re: My personal valuation of GPBikes
« Reply #15 on: March 28, 2018, 11:11:46 AM »
If the option is there it is still only optional you wouldnt have to use it :P

Those sorts of crashes would be very unfortunate but i would rather have a feild of riders who ride with respect than a bunch of riders who accept crashing as a part of common riding practice

Olaf Lehmann

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 96
    • View Profile
Re: My personal valuation of GPBikes
« Reply #16 on: March 28, 2018, 11:16:58 AM »
Quote
Does everyone forget that fact that in real life you have more control, feedback than in game? A mistake can more easily be avoided in real life than in gpbikes. Not to mention just crashes because of connection or some bugs, slick curbs, track edges... .
Absolutely, this point often forget friends of the perfect simulation.
I'm not a "hardliner".  ;) Therefore I'm not for "crash and out", but I'm for relative small problem in case of a crash/es for the rest of the race - if  possible in independency from the kind of crash(es) like KG_03 said.
Only after let's say 10 medium crashes or four highspeed crashes should come the totally out.

BR Olaf 

« Last Edit: March 28, 2018, 11:21:04 AM by Olaf Lehmann »

Stout Johnson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 737
    • View Profile
Re: My personal valuation of GPBikes
« Reply #17 on: March 28, 2018, 11:27:20 AM »
It is definitely possible to race long races without crashing. But it is also true, like Wimp says, that we have less feedback in GPB than irl.

So I think, although I would absolutely love the idea to have realistic crash/DNF-rates (~80%...? I would estimate out of 10 crashes only about 2times one can continue racing), it might need some relaxation in GPB. My idea would be to have a sort of g-force related crash-and-you-are-out relation. If the g-forces of the crash exceed a certain pre-defined limit, the crash would result in a DNF. If it is below the threshold, the rider should be able to walk to the bike and continue racing.

And it should be a server side option to be able to set the threshold value of g-force of an impact, which makes continuation of the race impossible (--> DNF). So if one wishes to allow only high-speed crashes to result in a DNF, then the threshold should be high, if one wishes to have even slow-speed crashes result in DNF, then the threshold should be very low.
    -----------   WarStout Kawasaki Team   -----------

Blackheart

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: My personal valuation of GPBikes
« Reply #18 on: March 28, 2018, 11:33:43 AM »
It is definitely possible to race long races without crashing.

Its possible sure, but I remember years ago, I won the only Endurance event race here, a very long race and with the worst bike ever --> the default 125, but I crashed 1 time for a bike in middle at the track after an incident.

Imho its possible finish a race without crashes but its very rare.

« Last Edit: March 28, 2018, 11:36:33 AM by Blackheart »

Hawk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6098
  • MOD Team: CAWS / GP-Team: Horizon GP #7
    • View Profile
Re: My personal valuation of GPBikes
« Reply #19 on: March 28, 2018, 04:12:08 PM »
It is definitely possible to race long races without crashing. But it is also true, like Wimp says, that we have less feedback in GPB than irl.

So I think, although I would absolutely love the idea to have realistic crash/DNF-rates (~80%...? I would estimate out of 10 crashes only about 2times one can continue racing), it might need some relaxation in GPB. My idea would be to have a sort of g-force related crash-and-you-are-out relation. If the g-forces of the crash exceed a certain pre-defined limit, the crash would result in a DNF. If it is below the threshold, the rider should be able to walk to the bike and continue racing.

And it should be a server side option to be able to set the threshold value of g-force of an impact, which makes continuation of the race impossible (--> DNF). So if one wishes to allow only high-speed crashes to result in a DNF, then the threshold should be high, if one wishes to have even slow-speed crashes result in DNF, then the threshold should be very low.

Yep... I could well agree to that Stout, sounds good to me.  ;)

I would just like some(any) sort of crash system that promotes sensible riding and penalises crashing.... In other words, if you ride within your limits then the chances are you'll not crash.... If you push your limits then it's likely that at some stage during the race you'll make a mistake and crash and that should be penalised with a poorly handling bike due to bike damage..... But as I've said before, all these solutions will also promote rage-quitters; the ones who quite races because they know they don't stand a chance of winning anymore during a race. Maybe there is some sort of server data that can prove whether a rider rage-quits or if in actual fact it was the server itself that broke the connection? Then something could be done about those types of riders too.  :P

Crashing is what riders do when they go beyond their skill levels or lose focus and make a mistake..... If you can't hack it without crashing then your simply not as good a rider as you think you are, simple.... you can't give yourselves excuses for crashing and expect it to be the accepted norm. Lol! :P  ;D

uberslug

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 324
    • View Profile
Re: My personal valuation of GPBikes
« Reply #20 on: March 28, 2018, 11:54:00 PM »
I haven't taken part in a race recently, so I'm not going to comment the stability issues (i.e., core.exe and things like that) under heavy load. However, I think your comments on things that can be improved are spot on (and BTW, I love the "Crash and you're out" idea suggested by Hawk, I'd really like to see that in the future).

What? It is the worst idea ever...

Watch this! Some info because the vid its in italian:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBiSM39fTFk

Category: CIV Superbike
Track: Mugello
Rider: Michele Pirro

Michele Pirro lose the rear in the FIRST corner. There are just 12 laps in this race.

Lap 1/12

Now Pirro has +30 seconds from the last rider.

But after some laps other 5-6 are out.
The remains riders in 2:18... Pirro 2:14

Lap 8/12

Leader in 2:16... Pirro 2:12.801

Lap 9/12

Michele Pirro is 3th

Lap 10/12

Michele Pirro is 2th

Lap 11/12

Michele Pirro is 1st

 ;D

So, I watched the video as you suggested. It isn't applicable because he low sided at low speed in the rain. If he had crashed like the guy in the lead up [bike flipping end over end many times] he would not have remounted as there wouldn't have been anything left to ride.

As I have suggested before, if you low side at <=50 kph then you run to the bike, take ten seconds to pick it up, and go on your way. If you crash at 250 kph, you're done.

uberslug

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 324
    • View Profile
Re: My personal valuation of GPBikes
« Reply #21 on: March 29, 2018, 12:03:20 AM »
It is definitely possible to race long races without crashing.

Its possible sure, but I remember years ago, I won the only Endurance event race here, a very long race and with the worst bike ever --> the default 125, but I crashed 1 time for a bike in middle at the track after an incident.

Imho its possible finish a race without crashes but its very rare.

It really isn't all that rare. While the races I participate in are not heavily populated, my race completion without a crash rate is well over 50 percent. Two of the last three races I have done on Johor were crash free and the one I crashed in was a low side in the middle of the chicane.

If one can't get through a race crash free, perhaps one shouldn't be racing...

Or...

If one can't get through a race crash free, perhaps PiBoSo's adage 'Obviously your ambition outweighs your talent' applies...
« Last Edit: March 29, 2018, 12:05:41 AM by uberslug »

Phathry25

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 211
    • View Profile
Re: My personal valuation of GPBikes
« Reply #22 on: March 29, 2018, 12:36:21 AM »
No offense Uber, but you are incredibly slow.  I could probably crash once a lap and still beat you.

Is there anything less simulation than an arbitrary "if you crash at greater than a certain amount of speed you are out" feature? You either code a damage model or you do nothing.  With the current state of the game there's really no sense in any of this.  Let make the riding experience more predictable before we worry about punishing people for falling.

uberslug

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 324
    • View Profile
Re: My personal valuation of GPBikes
« Reply #23 on: March 29, 2018, 02:12:11 AM »
No offense Uber, but you are incredibly slow.  I could probably crash once a lap and still beat you.

Is there anything less simulation than an arbitrary "if you crash at greater than a certain amount of speed you are out" feature? You either code a damage model or you do nothing.  With the current state of the game there's really no sense in any of this.  Let make the riding experience more predictable before we worry about punishing people for falling.

In the past I have readily admitted that I am more than slow on anything faster than a Moto3 bike. I have not lined up in the International since the first race because I am too slow to competently compete AND I crash the Moto2 bikes WAY too often. My participation would be little more than a hindrance to the other participants. I was not, however, the slowest person on the track and a number of much faster participants quit because they repeatedly crashed and, I guess, got frustrated. Oh, and just so you know, my primary objectives when I line up for a race are to complete it WITHOUT crashing and to record consistent lap times. If I have to go a little slower in order to achieve these objectives, so be it.

I am pretty sure most bikes are unrideable after a 250 kph crash so it would be far more 'simulation' than being able to continue as if nothing happened. I am also pretty sure most bikes are rideable after a slow speed low side so having to run to the bike before heading off would also be reasonable. A steeply curved graduation of damage between these extremes would seem appropriate.

I do not recall ever having seen you on one of my NAFPRA Moto3 Servers. Perhaps you should come out and play sometime...

Stout Johnson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 737
    • View Profile
Re: My personal valuation of GPBikes
« Reply #24 on: March 29, 2018, 07:03:04 AM »
No offense Uber, but you are incredibly slow. 
Here we go  ::) here is the speed discussion. This is not the point. The point is, this is a sim and people should not be taking all kinds of risks, crash multiple times and still win. In real life the art is to be fast without crashing. Almost anybody can go fast for one lap. But doing it consistently over a race distance or even over a season, cannot be done by everybody. Look at Iannone, he can be fast. But he does it by taking more risk than others. That's why he crashed so often, never would be in the championship picture and that's why he got dumped by Ducati.

I could probably crash once a lap and still beat you.
This actually shows the dilemma.

Is there anything less simulation than an arbitrary "if you crash at greater than a certain amount of speed you are out" feature? You either code a damage model or you do nothing.   
Well not sure where you get the link to speed from. My proposal was to link the DNF's to the amount of g-force which occured during crash. And that is not contra-simulation. What do you think a damage model is? It is basically an estimation on which parts brake/get damaged at which g-forces during a crash. And which parts prevent the bike from continuing to race. So using a link between g-forces and DNF's is the easiest way of getting a non-visual damage model  (we won't get a visual damage model from Piboso).
    -----------   WarStout Kawasaki Team   -----------

Blackheart

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: My personal valuation of GPBikes
« Reply #25 on: March 29, 2018, 07:21:16 AM »
No offense Uber, but you are incredibly slow.  I could probably crash once a lap and still beat you.

Is there anything less simulation than an arbitrary "if you crash at greater than a certain amount of speed you are out" feature? You either code a damage model or you do nothing.  With the current state of the game there's really no sense in any of this.  Let make the riding experience more predictable before we worry about punishing people for falling.

This was my point, if you are 10 seconds slower imho is not possible crash but where is the fun? I prefer keep my race pace, if I have a incident... who care Im to PC not on a bike, I can continue to play. Because its just a hobby.

Wimp #97

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 282
    • View Profile
Re: My personal valuation of GPBikes
« Reply #26 on: March 29, 2018, 08:02:22 AM »
If you want to simulate real life things you might aswell make the simulation so that the result is the same as in real life, what i mean by that is that the fastest guy propably wins the race if he is consistent and doesn't try to run qualifying laps. Just like in real life, the race pace should be about 1 - 1.5 seconds slower than qualifying lap (assuming ur running harder tyres in the race).

In real life the riders are able to do this pace without crashing, the one that can do it a bit better than the rest will win. So therefore we should try to simulate the pace of the racers as that would be most accurate and to be honest the pace we run in game compared to quali laps is pretty similar in difference than in real life. Its just that real life gives more control of situations whereas the game there is much more that can go wrong.

If we would implement a damage system it could cause that pace to drop even more to a point where people are riding just in fear of crashing and not flowing on the track. In real life you don't "fear" crashing when you are racing especially not when you feel comfortable.

Making a damage system will make people much slower than they are right now. Which would actually get us further from the realistic pace simulation...

The whole point is to make people drive less reckless, a penalty system should be designed, not a damage system.

Anyway, a damage system should be at the bottom of the priority list right now as its difficult to design properly and brings lots of negatives with it in my opinion.

And i'm not saying all this because I crash during races, I actually don't crash that often...
Wimp #97

Youtube channel with irl trackdays: https://www.youtube.com/user/OnboardRacing1

Stout Johnson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 737
    • View Profile
Re: My personal valuation of GPBikes
« Reply #27 on: March 29, 2018, 09:14:21 AM »
@Wimp:
First of all, I can follow you arguments. They seem logic and than in itself is something that should be applauded. :) But I have a different view on some of your remarks.

If we would implement a damage system it could cause that pace to drop even more to a point where people are riding just in fear of crashing and not flowing on the track.
I have done many races where I did not crash and I had a pace that was in a realistic relation to my qualifying times. It is doable in GPB as it doable irl. It would be even easier to do with some physics flaws out of the way (which we all agree on should be the prerequisite). But I agree with you, that irl you have much more feedback from the bike. So to be able to do it in GPB, you need much more practice in GPB than irl. All has to be automatic. The braking points, the downshifts, the amount of leaning. All has to be automatic. And I disagree that real life riders don't have a fear for crashing.

In real life you don't "fear" crashing when you are racing especially not when you feel comfortable.
Not sure whether "fear" is the right word. But a risk-reward-relation is always part of racing. You can clearly see that real life riders often could be faster, but they don't try to push it in order to be able to finish the race. Just look at Dovizioso last year. He was a master at this. He could hold off for the 3/4 of a race, not doing more than he needed to do. Then he would do a push within the last laps to seperate himself from the pack. Real life racing is always not only about all out racing but also about risk management. And those guys we see on TV are the absolute best of the best. Many of those you see in a GPB server are just casuals at best.

Making a damage system will make people much slower than they are right now. Which would actually get us further from the realistic pace simulation...
That would only be true if you did not have to care about crashes in qualifying and would not have to care about crashing in racing. Irl, riders very rarely go at 100% risk, even in practices or qualifyings. Because you always have to take into consideration, that you would totally demolish your bike, you would lose ~15mins to go back to the pits to be able to go out again (if you have a second bike), you might injure yourself which hurts, you might injure yourself long-term which might cost your championship aspirations, you might ruin the engine if it runs in the sand pit etc. etc. There's a thousand reasons to take into consideration. And those apply for all riders.

That is why the lap times irl would also be much faster if players could never be injured, had unlimited amount of bikes available if they crash. They would risk so much more. So your argument concerning the difference between realistic gap between Q and Race times does not apply. We would have the exact same as irl, if we could not go all out at all times in GPB.

So your argument is to not have realistic damage because the difference between Q and Race times would be too big? If we had simulation of rider injuries and limited bikes to crash we would have the same difference. I think in the SBK X title there were realism settings which allowed for player injuries and also took bike repair times into consideration. That was pretty awesome. I don't necessarily say we need that (although I would love to have that). But you have to see why your argumentation is not based on the correct assumptions.

The whole point is to make people drive less reckless, a penalty system should be designed, not a damage system.
So I should be penalized if I lowside on my own without anyone else involved? I guess you don't mean that. You probably mean only for crashes between riders? But how do you implement that? This is hard/impossible to code in order not to penalize the rider that was the victim. It would need real players to act as race stewards. That would be possible. But probably not too many volunteers to do that.

But it would still not take away the unfair and unrealistic advantage that players that crash often should have much less chances to win. Being slower without crashing should always be promoted. It is realistic. And if we had a general approach to avoid crashing first, I think we might see much more realistic races. From my observation the way it is at the moment, people always try to go all out, try to hammer a time and go up there on the time sheet. They crash 20times until they finally manage to get 1 complete lap and then applaud themselves for their time. They condition themselves to drive recklessly. Then those people struggle in the race because after 2-3 laps max they crash, then get nervous, crash even more and finally are frustrated with the result because they feel they under-achieved ("well I had 3rd fastest time in Q, but I only finished 9th ... I deserve to be 3rd in the race."). Or they rage-quit in the race.
    -----------   WarStout Kawasaki Team   -----------

matty0l215

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3530
  • CAWS Racing #61
    • View Profile
Re: My personal valuation of GPBikes
« Reply #28 on: March 29, 2018, 09:56:53 AM »
If you want an example of how dificult a player to player impact penelty system is to impliment. Just look at the 8 Codemasters F1 games. They've had 9 years to get it right with a massively larger resource pool and they still managed to fuck it up for years.. it works, sure, but it has never been perfect and bogus penelties are still given.

Now transfer that to a beta game with 1-2 people (i belive) working on it. A basic damage system that would detour riders from riding reclessly would be a better option

Not nessecerrly from being a bad rider but if no one wants them to race because they keep crashing into others they will soon learn to be more courtious to other riders. Doesnt mean to say they have to slow down.

And if they still dont learn to be a courtious rider then they can be penilised for that by the community (not being allowed to race in championship etc.)

GPB is meant as a simulator not an arcade game last time i checked. And surley the added challenge of racing with the knowlege that if you crash you might balls up your race adds to the fun of it being a simulator. Take damage away from any of the top level car racing games abd they could decend into a demolition derby if allowed to by its community.

Stout Johnson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 737
    • View Profile
Re: My personal valuation of GPBikes
« Reply #29 on: March 29, 2018, 11:08:22 AM »
Oops my post became very long. My main point is: I would like to see more real-life-like track behaviour. I think we need more real-life-like consequences for that. I see Wimp's point that racing should not feel like a crash avoiding walk on egg-shells. But if we have consistent physics, real life like races are definitely possible in GPB. We already have that with experienced riders. And one has to practice and practice and practice. I had the best races with fellow GPB-veterans in onboard-view-only races. Close racing, few to none crashes, consistent paces and gentlemen-like fair behaviour. That's how it should be imo.

Imho a better risk-reward ratio would generally help to establish consistent race approach. Ride consistently without crashing will make one fast automatically sooner or later (each has his own plateau of course, not everyone has the same talent). At the moment we generally have a all-out fastest-lap-time-is-all-that-counts-even-if-I-crash-9-out-of10-laps-approach. And that makes for bad racing. My proposal would be to make a adjustable g-force related 'damage-system' which might result in a DNF. 

@Wimp: If you are too worried about every crash causing DNF's, then you should be able to adjust the g-force to a high enough value so that only high-impact (=high level of recklessness/risky behaviour) crashes result in a DNF.

I would even welcome options la SBK X and SBK 2011 as having calculated repair times for the bike, possible injuries to the rider calculated which might prevent finishing the race event, having to drive into pits all the time instead of just clicking 'go to pits' etc.  8) that would totally add to the sim experience and to the level of immersion.

Take damage away from any of the top level car racing games abd they could decend into a demolition derby if allowed to by its community.
Good point. Totally agree.
    -----------   WarStout Kawasaki Team   -----------