Is bugatti veyron gr.4 bop overpowered?

  • Thread starter Thread starter talhaONE
  • 57 comments
  • 9,959 views
They wouldn’t need to change BoP if they could just unlock gears (final gear/top speed) for sport mode.
My fear with this is that the Porsche 911 might get a big advantage given its position in the BoP table right now, and its long gears, along with some other overly-long geared cars
 
And unless you are an alien, you'll never be quicker in the meta car than the car you are comfortable with and can drive well
Exactly; I am just as quick, if not quicker, using the Gr.1 R18 as I am in the Bugatti VGT, because I just can't seem to drive the Bug as well as others can due to its drivetrain. The R18 is probably only the fourth or fifth-quickest Gr.1 on average.
 
Cool did not know this META abreviation.

That's not actually where it came from, that's a backronym at best and completely made up at worst.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta

The "meta-game" is the strategy that takes place at a higher level than basic strategy. The basic strategy is to drive as fast as possible. The meta-game is to select the best car, the best controller, and so on to improve your chances. This is particularly true in games like MOBAs or fighting games where the other person's choice could have a direct influence on yours. If Chun Li is a popular character, perhaps you want to play someone who stomps Chun Li even though that may not be your best character.

In racing games this is less of a thing. "Meta" in a racing game essentially means "current best ignoring driver skill". Outside of a few edge cases where a car is fastest on paper but has trouble overtaking in a real race, you're not selecting your car based on what other people are driving. You choose what is best for you. There are some meta-game aspects to things like pit stops, where you may vary your strategy based how other people behave so that even if you're not strictly the fastest you end up in an advantageous position on track.

But car selection is not generally meta in the common gaming sense of the word.
 
The WEC has used a per-track BoP since 2017 and every indication is that it has worked exceptionally well. Watch any WEC endurance race and you'll notice the commentators complimenting the BoP and how it is offering closer racing.

This is primarily an algorithm-based BoP, I believe based in part on analyzing qualifying and race lap times on each track, and would be perfect for GTS to adopt.

That is certainly true. But the way it is now it adds another layer of strategy to game. I quite like finding out what the best car is for each track. The best car for me, not necessarily the META.
 
The WEC has used a per-track BoP since 2017 and every indication is that it has worked exceptionally well. Watch any WEC endurance race and you'll notice the commentators complimenting the BoP and how it is offering closer racing.

This is primarily an algorithm-based BoP, I believe based in part on analyzing qualifying and race lap times on each track, and would be perfect for GTS to adopt.
Not sure if I'd really want BoP to go that far. I like the additional element of strategy that comes with an overall BoP compared to BoP per track.

FIA manufacturers series, to me, is more interesting when drivers need to select a Gr. 3 / Gr. 4 manufacturer based on their own assessment.

For example, if someone is really good with the Gr. 3 Porsche, they have to decide if that's their best option for the Gr. 3 races and be willing to sacrifice somewhat on the Gr. 4 races. Other people may choose a more balanced manufacturer. Or base their selection because they're really good at the Gr. 4 tracks, so maximize their chances there. Also need to choose based on tire wear, fuel burn, ability to pass/defend, etc.

Still on the fence here, but leaning towards the idea of a well done overall BoP.
 
That's not actually where it came from, that's a backronym at best and completely made up at worst.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta

The "meta-game" is the strategy that takes place at a higher level than basic strategy. The basic strategy is to drive as fast as possible. The meta-game is to select the best car, the best controller, and so on to improve your chances. This is particularly true in games like MOBAs or fighting games where the other person's choice could have a direct influence on yours. If Chun Li is a popular character, perhaps you want to play someone who stomps Chun Li even though that may not be your best character.

In racing games this is less of a thing. "Meta" in a racing game essentially means "current best ignoring driver skill". Outside of a few edge cases where a car is fastest on paper but has trouble overtaking in a real race, you're not selecting your car based on what other people are driving. You choose what is best for you. There are some meta-game aspects to things like pit stops, where you may vary your strategy based how other people behave so that even if you're not strictly the fastest you end up in an advantageous position on track.

But car selection is not generally meta in the common gaming sense of the word.
This, all day.
 
Not sure if I'd really want BoP to go that far. I like the additional element of strategy that comes with an overall BoP compared to BoP per track.

FIA manufacturers series, to me, is more interesting when drivers need to select a Gr. 3 / Gr. 4 manufacturer based on their own assessment.

For example, if someone is really good with the Gr. 3 Porsche, they have to decide if that's their best option for the Gr. 3 races and be willing to sacrifice somewhat on the Gr. 4 races. Other people may choose a more balanced manufacturer. Or base their selection because they're really good at the Gr. 4 tracks, so maximize their chances there. Also need to choose based on tire wear, fuel burn, ability to pass/defend, etc.

Still on the fence here, but leaning towards the idea of a well done overall BoP.

I can see where you're coming from, but I think with a per-track BoP the strategy just shifts to how best you can exploit the strengths of your car as they apply to each track, instead of which car should you pick to minmax your chances in the race. The latter just feels too videogamey to me, the former feels more like the reality of every real race driver who is stuck with a car that's not the fastest on the field, but may for instance be great in the twisties. I guess I'm more interested in the dynamics of the race itself rather than the higher-level strategic aspects outside of that. I don't even like dealing with tire and fuel management, that's what the rest of the team is for. ;)
 
My fear with this is that the Porsche 911 might get a big advantage given its position in the BoP table right now, and its long gears, along with some other overly-long geared cars

I hope so because Im always at a disadvantage in the Porsche but it's my favorite Gr.4 car to drive.
 
I hope so because Im always at a disadvantage in the Porsche but it's my favorite Gr.4 car to drive.
The Cayman would be adequately competitive with shorter gears, but the 911 would probably be overpowered. Maybe have PD adjust the gears themselves?
 
Yeah but where do you draw the line? If you open up final gear transmission tuning why not allow me to tune the diff on tricky MR or RWD cars?

I think for sport mode no tuning is by far the better option, all things considered.
 
Yeah but where do you draw the line? If you open up final gear transmission tuning why not allow me to tune the diff on tricky MR or RWD cars?

I think for sport mode no tuning is by far the better option, all things considered.
Yeah the diffs should be reworked(looking at you GR3 Lambo)

but i think a lot of the BOP issues have to do with poorly geared cars. You can increase the power and lower the weight but the Cayman still needs shorter gearing to be competitive at most tracks.

Even if they dont open the final gear for individual adjustment, maybe they could make a preliminary BOP per track by adjusting the gear ratio themselves.
 
try as I might last night on Sport B Gr.4 race on Nurburgring GP I just could not go faster in the Veyron than I could in the Mustang, sure the Veyron has some straight line speed but braking and acceleration from corners just werent working for me, where in the Mustang I had easily 1.5sec better lap times..... maybe not the right track for the Veyron
 
Because the WEC-BoP for GTE has been mentioned...

This BoP is NOT a BoP for individual tracks. It calculates a new one based on data gathered at past events, no matter on what track. The overall result is then used on the following tracks, without any consideration of what the next track will be. All this is done with exemption of Le Mans, I assume because it’s too different from other standard tracks.

So, this process would not deliver a balanced field on every track, but the balance getting better over time with different cars having an advantage on each track. Which is where we are headed in GTS anyway...
 
There are a different BoP champions on each track. The Supra is todays champion on Blue Moon. Peugeot VGT is champion on Tokyo East. There are others as well.
Supra is overpowered. If you check the car stats on settings, almost all oval settings are exactly the same, except Supra got 3 or 4 stats better than the others, more speed, more curve, more brake, it simply is just better than the others. The numbers are explicit.
 
The WEC has used a per-track BoP since 2017 and every indication is that it has worked exceptionally well. Watch any WEC endurance race and you'll notice the commentators complimenting the BoP and how it is offering closer racing.

This is primarily an algorithm-based BoP, I believe based in part on analyzing qualifying and race lap times on each track, and would be perfect for GTS to adopt.
Except there is a rule no one can beat toyota's lap time lol (I am serious)
 
Hmm. Maggiore, Bluemoon, and Brands, the 86 seems to be the META. At Suzuka it becomes a mixed bag, but more on the Megane side. Dragon Trail it's the Viper. For Interlagos it's mainly 4WD cars like the GTR, Atenza, Lancer, and Huracan, but not the Veyron.

I don't know what you're talking about. The Veyron is a one-trick pony in Monza, and honestly for me the brakes are horrible. Also, while the Megane might not have "balanced" handling (I don't believe this) as the Veyron, the acceleration it gives around the corners is good enough to justify its bad handling. Why do you think it was the META for a month before it got nerfed (and buffed again)?
Tokyo and blue moon infield B are Veyron's territory.
In America and Asia there is more variability still, Europe's charts are funny. If suddenly someone tops on a different car, in ten minutes the page will be filled with it.
 
That's not actually where it came from, that's a backronym at best and completely made up at worst.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta

The "meta-game" is the strategy that takes place at a higher level than basic strategy. The basic strategy is to drive as fast as possible. The meta-game is to select the best car, the best controller, and so on to improve your chances. This is particularly true in games like MOBAs or fighting games where the other person's choice could have a direct influence on yours. If Chun Li is a popular character, perhaps you want to play someone who stomps Chun Li even though that may not be your best character.

In racing games this is less of a thing. "Meta" in a racing game essentially means "current best ignoring driver skill". Outside of a few edge cases where a car is fastest on paper but has trouble overtaking in a real race, you're not selecting your car based on what other people are driving. You choose what is best for you. There are some meta-game aspects to things like pit stops, where you may vary your strategy based how other people behave so that even if you're not strictly the fastest you end up in an advantageous position on track.

But car selection is not generally meta in the common gaming sense of the word.
Cool thanks for the nice read and explanation 👍
 
Except there is a rule no one can beat toyota's lap time lol (I am serious)
Oh man don't bring that up. It boils my blood everytime I read an article at how the privateers SHOULDN'T, EXCPLICITLY BY THE RULES, defeat Toyota :banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 bastards over at ACO and FiA aren't even trying to hide that sandbag
Tokyo and blue moon infield B are Veyron's territory.
In America and Asia there is more variability still, Europe's charts are funny. If suddenly someone tops on a different car, in ten minutes the page will be filled with it.
Oh yeah I forgot to include those tracks
 
I think the Veyron, the M4 and some cars I'm forgetting are overpowered, but nothing is as badly out of balance as the Alfa 4C Gr.4 car. On a track like Bathurst, you might as well be racing Gr. 3 cars. It is utterly useless on any track with straights, and only competitive at best on tight tracks like Brands Indy or Tsukuba.

That is my biggest problem with the manufacturer cup because I adore the 4C. It's by far my favorite Gr.3 car. But the Gr. 4 is so bad, it's infuriating that PD has the nerve to call it a "balance of performance" system when it couldn't be further from it.

I should call Thanos and tell him about this. He likes things to be balanced.
 
I think the Veyron, the M4 and some cars I'm forgetting are overpowered, but nothing is as badly out of balance as the Alfa 4C Gr.4 car. On a track like Bathurst, you might as well be racing Gr. 3 cars. It is utterly useless on any track with straights, and only competitive at best on tight tracks like Brands Indy or Tsukuba.

That is my biggest problem with the manufacturer cup because I adore the 4C. It's by far my favorite Gr.3 car. But the Gr. 4 is so bad, it's infuriating that PD has the nerve to call it a "balance of performance" system when it couldn't be further from it.

I should call Thanos and tell him about this. He likes things to be balanced.
If that's your opinion, I suggest you drive the Gr. 4 Cayman. :lol:
 
I think the Veyron, the M4 and some cars I'm forgetting are overpowered, but nothing is as badly out of balance as the Alfa 4C Gr.4 car. On a track like Bathurst, you might as well be racing Gr. 3 cars. It is utterly useless on any track with straights, and only competitive at best on tight tracks like Brands Indy or Tsukuba.

That is my biggest problem with the manufacturer cup because I adore the 4C. It's by far my favorite Gr.3 car. But the Gr. 4 is so bad, it's infuriating that PD has the nerve to call it a "balance of performance" system when it couldn't be further from it.

I should call Thanos and tell him about this. He likes things to be balanced.
I am sorry, but I doubt it, 4C is completely not fitted for bathurst, 4C requires a completely different driving style. Also, bathurst is the track you can get on top 10 on completely different gr4 cars, from Lancer (very low top speed and good to turn) to Mégane (a dog to turn).
I've never seen a 4C on top 10 bathurst, there was one on America's top of LM last week, and I just couldn't make it work like in brands hatch where I got under 1 29.
With all due respect, I wanna see your 4C lap on bathurst, honestly, if you can pull that one out you will have my respect for life.

Edit: if you beat my atenza record on bathurst on a 4C, I will have on my lobby greeting "TomBrady is the king of the 4C" for a week. BoP, daily races setting, needless to say.
 
Last edited:
That's not actually where it came from, that's a backronym at best and completely made up at worst.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta

The "meta-game" is the strategy that takes place at a higher level than basic strategy.

That's what I thought it meant and then some of my gamer friends kept insisting it was an acronym. That's what I get for trusting gamers over my education. In film the term Meta is usually used to describe something that is self referential, or a theme within the obvious theme.

In classics games, it would simply be called game strategy or even game theory.

Either-way, unless your an A+ driver it's all kind of pointless. At DR B, I definitely know that I'm not pushing my cars to their absolute limits, so doing mediocre driving in an optimum car isn't really going to help me that much. I'd rather stay acclimated to a specific car and develop better car control until I'm matching similar peak lap times in that car.
 
That's what I thought it meant and then some of my gamer friends kept insisting it was an acronym. That's what I get for trusting gamers over my education. In film the term Meta is usually used to describe something that is self referential, or a theme within the obvious theme.

In classics games, it would simply be called game strategy or even game theory.

Either-way, unless your an A+ driver it's all kind of pointless. At DR B, I definitely know that I'm not pushing my cars to their absolute limits, so doing mediocre driving in an optimum car isn't really going to help me that much. I'd rather stay acclimated to a specific car and develop better car control until I'm matching similar peak lap times in that car.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metagaming

This wiki page is not well cited but I think it has an accurate description of metagaming that is easy to understand.

I have only ever heard it in roleplaying games. In RPGs Meta means to use knowledge that your character wouldn't possess to make decisions that affect the outcome of the game. Which defeats the whole role playing part
 
I am sorry, but I doubt it, 4C is completely not fitted for bathurst, 4C requires a completely different driving style. Also, bathurst is the track you can get on top 10 on completely different gr4 cars, from Lancer (very low top speed and good to turn) to Mégane (a dog to turn).
I've never seen a 4C on top 10 bathurst, there was one on America's top of LM last week, and I just couldn't make it work like in brands hatch where I got under 1 29.
With all due respect, I wanna see your 4C lap on bathurst, honestly, if you can pull that one out you will have my respect for life.

Edit: if you beat my atenza record on bathurst on a 4C, I will have on my lobby greeting "TomBrady is the king of the 4C" for a week. BoP, daily races setting, needless to say.
I think you misunderstood what @TomBrady meant. The meaning was that other Gr. 4 cars are so much faster at Bathurst and the Gr. 4 4C is so uncompetitive there that there's no difference in results against Gr. 3 or Gr. 4 cars. The next sentence explains why it's useless and which tracks it is competitive at.
 
I think the Veyron, the M4 and some cars I'm forgetting are overpowered, but nothing is as badly out of balance as the Alfa 4C Gr.4 car. On a track like Bathurst, you might as well be racing Gr. 3 cars. It is utterly useless on any track with straights, and only competitive at best on tight tracks like Brands Indy or Tsukuba.

That is my biggest problem with the manufacturer cup because I adore the 4C. It's by far my favorite Gr.3 car. But the Gr. 4 is so bad, it's infuriating that PD has the nerve to call it a "balance of performance" system when it couldn't be further from it.

I should call Thanos and tell him about this. He likes things to be balanced.

You're tripping ... the 4C will do well almost anywhere else except Bathurst
 
Back