My beef with Performance Points

[SleazyBig slim]

Let me start off by saying I love the PP system. It makes things a whole lot easier when deciding which cars are better, when choosing which car to use in obscure races, etc. But the whole system has a major flaw that is really annoying. You would think they would base it on the normal stuff HP, weight, torque blah blah blah, which sounds great, until you start looking at the problems it creates.

Main problem is the system takes torque into account, when it shouldn't be. Looking at it, it seems like something that should be considered, but it really messes up the system. For example, the Lamborghini Murcielago SV has 672 hp, and weighs like 1560 somthing kg. Somehow, the McLaren SLR, which has 628 hp and 1760 something kg has MORE performance points. This really confused me, and I thought it was some kind of bug, until I realized that the reason is the Lambo has 478 ft-lbs of torque, while the SLR has 586.

This definitly doesn't accurately represent their performance, because if you've driven the two, the Lambo runs circles around the SLR.

This really needs to be fixed as the PP system is really great but now it's pretty much useless because I have to check the power and weight anyways on each car to make sure that the torque thing isn't screwing up it's PP rating.

I think you may need to go under the hood and do a little tuning. I think the PP is accurate for the most part, more torque should yield a higher PP, some cars are harder to tune then others. If GT5 suggest 1 car is better then another, it pretty much is, its up to you to know how to find and unleash that power in it.

 

[maxpontiac]

PP is pretty good because it serves as a good general guideline, and naturally "good" cars will tend to fall within the same range of laptimes given properly balanced PPs..

I always believed that was obvious, and easily understood with common sense.

 

[leb111]

Theres also a strange issue about PP :

Sometimes, when I finish a race, my car's pp increased by 1 point and I have to use the power limiter to get it back to the pp limit. Anyone know why it happens ?

 

[leb111]

I think you may need to go under the hood and do a little tuning. I think the PP is accurate for the most part, more torque should yield a higher PP, some cars are harder to tune then others. If GT5 suggest 1 car is better then another, it pretty much is, its up to you to know how to find and unleash that power in it.

Yeah and I learned by myself that using the power limiter to get lighter car in a race is not always good. If the course has long straight you better take a heavy wight car with a high HP because it will go a lot faster in the straight

 

[Goshin2568]

Are you high? It runs faster times around Nordschlieife and DEFINATELY has a higher top speed then the SV.
255 MPH and <6:30 at nurb.

It also only weighs 1328 KG at 943 HP.

870 Lb Ft at 3900 RPM FTW

What??? 1328 kg at 943 hp? The SLR?

No.... 617 hp at 1768 kg.


EDIT:
And ring times are irrelevent anyway. The times in question were by a different driver. And the SV definitely could go faster because the regular LP640 murcielago did a faster lap than the SLR.

And just for the record, the SV has a quicker lap time on the top gear power lap board. By the SAME driver.

 

[Goshin2568]

Are you high? It runs faster times around Nordschlieife and DEFINATELY has a higher top speed then the SV.
255 MPH and <6:30 at nurb.

It also only weighs 1328 KG at 943 HP.

870 Lb Ft at 3900 RPM FTW

I just reread your post. Are we talking about the same car? If we are you clearly have no clue what you are talking about.

I'm talking about the Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren. 617 hp. 1768 kg.
Top speed is 211 mph.

The Lamborghini Murcielago LP670-4 SuperVeloce has 661 hp and weighs 1550 kg.
Top speed is 213 mph.

If you hadn't noticed, the SLR has 44 LESS horsepower and 218 MORE kg of weight.

Also, not only is the SLR's speed not "definitely" higher, it's not even higher in the first place.

 

[Tonkz]

PP is rubish, you also need to watch your date of acquisition.

i have a few cars that i have in more than 1 exemplary with 0 mile/switch like the merc Sauber, peugeot 905, shelby 350, they have never been touch and came from tickets.
there's 30 to 60 point difference in between the exact same car. The only numbers on the spec that are different are the date of acquisition, probably because adjustments haven't been implemented from 1.06 to 1.07

👍

true True...
I Learnt that when i aquired the Mazda 767 & couldnt figure out why its PP was soooo far of the Peoguet LM Car, figured it out & then went through all 500+ of cars, (Went into settings which automatically resets the PP as per 1.07)

 

[Yev]

Fully tuned Dodge Viper ACR has more PP than McLaren F1, riiiiiiight.

 

[xNEVER-ONEx]

Fully tuned Dodge Viper ACR has more PP than McLaren F1, riiiiiiight.

Are they both fully tuned?

 

[bartonesq]

Another thought about PP-- I think it uses an area under the curve approach to power, meaning peak power is not weighted so heavily in the PP calculation if the power band is very narrow. High torque cars tend to have broader power bands, therefore have more area under the curve. I haven't tested that theory or seen it suggested elsewhere, but my observations seem to support it.

 

[Obli]

I'm more concerned that the PP calculation doesn't take tyre choice in to account since the 1.06 update.

 

[leb111]

I'm more concerned that the PP calculation doesn't take tyre choice in to account since the 1.06 update.

Yes I agree, everyone ALWAYS use racing soft now....

 

[sinbad]

Yes I agree, everyone ALWAYS use racing soft now....

This is why people should be more keen on running rooms that have a realistic tyre limitation. It's not fun to drive low PP road cars and tuned cars on sticky sports or racing tyres.

This notion that more grip equals "better" is really annoying.

 

[niky]

For those who don't like the PP system... in real-life racing, as far as I know, there is no fair system that works with wildly varying cars without a lot of rules tweaking, exceptions, bonuses, penalties and fine-tuning between competitors. These tweaks don't often work in favor of uncompetitive vehicles until later in the season... and here, we're talking of only a dozen or so different cars, at the most.

The best balanced I'm aware of is the VW cup... and even then, with the extremely good handicapping they apply, the diesel estates/vans in the series are simply not top-tier cars.

It's likely impossible for a single group to do that with the hundreds of cars that can be eligible for any power/weight cap in GT5. Especially as GT5 doesn't allow you to accurately balance tire size, profile and grip. And even then, once you've balanced a subset of cars for one track, there's no assurance that this balance will work for another track. I could probably make a WRX and a Trueno work similarly on a simple track like Autumn Ring Mini, with the exact same PP, but go to a tight track like Eiger and I'd need to change the balance. Go to a faster track like Suzuka and you'd need to change it again... and even then, the older aero of the Trueno may woefully handicap it whatever you do. (will try this later...)

It's impossible for any universal system to take all variables account, without massive input from a big user base. Polyphony Digital has the opportunity to do this via the online time trials... find cars that are naturally faster within certain PP limits and tweak their PPs. But they don't run enough of them to do this effectively.

What this argues for is a custom PP system that allows you to set a variable limit for each car. This would help tremendously for those running custom online events such as "Touring Car" races.

I doubt they'll do this any time soon. But it would be nice.

EDIT: I like that they took tires out of the equation. Even though I used to use "mini-maxing" with race tires to produce some wild runners in PP-limited races in GT5P. Besides... the only way to make tires "fair" is to allow us to change tire profile, build and dimensions, and to tweak pressures... which no GT has ever allowed.