PENALTY SYSTEM IS STILL A PIECE OF ****!!!

[BjoBosUndies]

They could split the dailies as follows:

S, A+ and A (above 40k DR) ranked drivers only get matched with each other.

And, A (below 40k DR) through to E can all race each other.

Or have an option before a race, points race and non points race where the driver selects which kind of race they would like to enter.

Anyone contesting a non point race neither gains or loses DR. This way the ones who race just for fun and the ones who race competitively can be separated.

 

[breeminator]

It was interesting to see/hear on the Forza Monthly stream that they are getting into the blame assignment game with a collision penalty system being added to FM7 soon. Will be interesting to see if it's any better than GTS's system, but either way, it's good to have both franchises pushing forward with this.

 

[Outspacer]

I think my 'true' DR is somewhere a bit below 40K, at least that was my average when I still qualified for each race. (prior to day 220 ish) Without qualifying it goes up and down much faster, yet even with qualifying 'weird' things happen. There is this magic border where the top 99 SR room gets split in A+/S to B/S and B/S to D/S. One day while I was getting back up, one race I would start top 3 in B/S to D/S room, gain points, so the next race I would start bottom 3 in the A+/S to B/S room, and although having faster pace (better people to draft) I would lose points and be back top 3 in the B/S to D/S room. This went on for 6 races until the entries changed enough to brake the cycle.

It's been some time since your 40k days... and as we know quite a few A+ players disappear into FIA or lobbies only. I'm not sure how much that affects the scores of those who are left. Plus, I hope you've improved a bit in the last year So all things considered, maybe those visits to A+ weren't entirely unfounded, is all I'm saying.

I'm about 99.9% sure that's how it works. I can always race with other 90+ SR racers on here, no problem to get into the same room. And every time a lower SR player needs to fill up a room it's always a high DR player. I always see A/A added to rooms of B/S to D/S, never a D/A player in an otherwise B/S to D/S room.

Maybe I'm just going on out of date impressions then. I certainly remember a few evenings where the matchmaking would flick back and forth between well matched rooms and rabbit races a couple of times before settling down to rabbits, as it got well past midnight, and it wasn't giving those rabbit races just because it couldn't match a room better. But whatever it was, it would've been based on a simple parameter that PD could well have tweaked since.

By using a larger sample, ie everyone that enters a time slot, the hope is that that balances out the effect of being a vulnerable A+ in badly matched room. You can take all entries in the world to do the math instead of per region. 24 time zones should balance things out further, although it would be a bit weird to be ranked against players you will never see on track.

Essentially what you're trying to make is a sorting algorithm based on race pace. After each race you have a sorting order of all players that entered that race which you now compare to the current sorting order (DR) and then adjust DR with the latest results. My idea is to gain points from players you beat that had higher DR (previously sorted above you) and lose points to players that beat you with lower DR (previously sorted below you). Anyone that beat you that already had higher DR has no effect on your rating as well as the opposite.

How many points should be exchanged per player, I don't know. But I do think it would be more fair to do it this way (for example 5000 points divided per total entries as the base amount per exchange) than 'stealing' 160 points from players that where unlucky enough to enter up in lobbies with much faster players sporting the wrong DR (after a reset or new account). In this system they would 'steal' fewer points from many more players.

I'm all aboard the idea of using a global sample. I didn't get what you meant at first and thought it was just looking at pace within a race. TBH, it needn't even be just per race time slot - it could merge multiple together if it helped. I reckon with approx 25k daily players your figure of 1000 per race slot is about right though, and enough. On that scale I don't think it works to transfer DR around in a zero-sum fashion, better to work it out as an absolute metric somehow. (Probably something like an asymmetric bell curve with the peak at the average pace).

 

[Sven Jurgens]

It's been some time since your 40k days... and as we know quite a few A+ players disappear into FIA or lobbies only. I'm not sure how much that affects the scores of those who are left. Plus, I hope you've improved a bit in the last year So all things considered, maybe those visits to A+ weren't entirely unfounded, is all I'm saying.

It does get easier to get to A+, the DR pool is slowly inflating as well as improving myself. The problem is, I don't really like to race with the A(+)/S crowd, a lot are too aggressive to win/gain DR at all cost, pushing and bumping for position while making full use of the knowledge that any SR loss will give them an easy race to be right back at max SR. Hence as long as the penalty system does not promote clean racing, I rather just race from the back.

Maybe I'm just going on out of date impressions then. I certainly remember a few evenings where the matchmaking would flick back and forth between well matched rooms and rabbit races a couple of times before settling down to rabbits, as it got well past midnight, and it wasn't giving those rabbit races just because it couldn't match a room better. But whatever it was, it would've been based on a simple parameter that PD could well have tweaked since.

PD has tweaked matchmaking a couple times in the past. It's hard to tell when you don't know how many people actually entered. Competition from FIA races can mess with the entries as well. Anyway since matchmaking starts at max SR/DR, the lower you get the more 'random' it becomes as you continually deal with random cut offs and left over rooms that need to be filled. If you're that B/S player on the 'border' you can end up in a well matched room one race, then drop down to an unmatched room next race.

I'm all aboard the idea of using a global sample. I didn't get what you meant at first and thought it was just looking at pace within a race. TBH, it needn't even be just per race time slot - it could merge multiple together if it helped. I reckon with approx 25k daily players your figure of 1000 per race slot is about right though, and enough. On that scale I don't think it works to transfer DR around in a zero-sum fashion, better to work it out as an absolute metric somehow. (Probably something like an asymmetric bell curve with the peak at the average pace).

The actual score doesn't really matter. You want to get a global ranking of players on race pace that's somewhat stable. An absolute metric based on your last x races would work as well. That way you would quickly get sorted in the right spot when you start racing and then it all averages out. The zero sum approach works since not everyone races all the time. The problem is how do you update the ranking with people that don't play for a while. With a zero sum approach you keep the overall value the same over time. Actually it's slowly inflating as those with DR.1 still give out points without losing any, thus if you don't play your DR slowly loses value over time. DR resets take points out of the system, but that's a really sucky way to balance things.

 

[Groundfish]

It does get easier to get to A+, the DR pool is slowly inflating as well as improving myself. The problem is, I don't really like to race with the A(+)/S crowd, a lot are too aggressive to win/gain DR at all cost, pushing and bumping for position while making full use of the knowledge that any SR loss will give them an easy race to be right back at max SR. Hence as long as the penalty system does not promote clean racing, I rather just race from the back.

See you are so right. The problems got nothing to do with dr. It’s sr that’s messed up. Too simple to get and regain for fast people.
“Oh darn I got too much sr down for punting Sven and diving and sideswiping Sebastian.””
“Guess I will have to play a couple races and regain all that”. WHEN THIS HAPPENS FREE WINS ARE COMING TO THIS PERSON IF THEY ARE FAST AGAINST WEAK COMPETITION, FURTHER SLOWER PLAYERS ARE DISCOURAGED BECAUSE THERE IS ALWAYS A PLAYER MUCH FASTER AT THE FRONT 1-2.
THIS ASPECT IS TOTALLY MESSED UP!

That right there is the TOTAL BS. THIS HAS LED TO DRIVING WAY WAY TOO AGGRESSIVE BEING REQUIRED IN A S.

Plus, high ranked players don’t want to risk their precious dr so what happens is they get alt accounts and go in there and add more mayhem to INNOCENT players maybe just doing their best.
IMO it’s never ok to move another car aside with contact ESPESCIALLY if you know you are faster. A very fast player even said “I worry WHEN I push slow people aside about them going off track”
Is this acceptable? Not to me, if you are mr fastest person in the world ITS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO OVERTAKE CLEANLY.

I am what top 2 percent right now, but I often avoid racing because of the violence and aggressiveness REQUIRED in the 90 plus sr rooms.

The MINI BUMP maneuver these drivers all do makes me sick.

If you guys are talking about ranking forget dr that’s fine. SR is the issue. SR right now means if you have it use it to your advantage to aggressively push others out of the way. For me, that’s not racing, that’s gaming.

Even without any major changes they could go back to shared fault next maintenance. Imo if they did that the game would be better fr everyone to drive in sport mode.

I personally don’t like the standards I see. I feel it’s too aggressive. It’s because that’s the way the game is setup right now.

Maybe driving dirty and well is a skill too, but it prevents expanding the player base imo, because many will see this a few times and just go lobby/league whatever.

The thing is to my view, keep everything the same and implement back the original system as it was at first. Keep the pen zones, but for gods sake switch some of the locations. The pen zones are a brilliant concept, and they improved things greatly, but they can be improved more...

They could keep matchmaking and everything the same as it is right now, even pen system, just simply add one thing...That is when a player loses sr prevent them from dr gain. Say you lose like twenty sr in a race. Make it so for the next five or ten races you can’t gain dr, or do some variant of that idea...
That’d change the behavior right away imo.

Can anyone tell it was a tough day at work?

 

[Outspacer]

PD has tweaked matchmaking a couple times in the past. It's hard to tell when you don't know how many people actually entered. Competition from FIA races can mess with the entries as well. Anyway since matchmaking starts at max SR/DR, the lower you get the more 'random' it becomes as you continually deal with random cut offs and left over rooms that need to be filled. If you're that B/S player on the 'border' you can end up in a well matched room one race, then drop down to an unmatched room next race.

OK, I know this is getting a bit off-topic, but I just want to show more precisely what I meant. In this I've simplified by only considering a bunch of 16 SR S drivers getting matched into 4 races of 4 players, in the two styles I'm convinced were happening. Normal is as you described earlier - fill races one at a time from top to bottom DR. Rabbit fills races by going across the races, filling all the Rank 1 slots first, etc - the grid is the transpose of Normal.

I haven't bothered with any A+ because it screws with the formatting

There seemed to be some threshold number of players to match that would cause it to use Rabbit when below it, and it was set fairly high - it flicked from great matching to poor and back much more quickly than could be explained by usual changes in the number of players available with Normal style matching. So it could still be there with a much lower threshold, or it could have been removed entirely.

So, yeah, I'm not arguing, just wanted to put it into your head in case you notice anything like it

The actual score doesn't really matter. You want to get a global ranking of players on race pace that's somewhat stable. An absolute metric based on your last x races would work as well. That way you would quickly get sorted in the right spot when you start racing and then it all averages out. The zero sum approach works since not everyone races all the time. The problem is how do you update the ranking with people that don't play for a while. With a zero sum approach you keep the overall value the same over time.

I understand the ELO-style pretty well, and it's good for producing a ranking when looking at individual events (like races), but it is just relative - i.e. it only says e.g. DR A should be better than DR B (for active players). However since this idea could look at about 1000 players at a time, and it could use a fairly well-defined metric of race pace, it could sidestep a lot of the problems with ELO by being more of an absolute rating. Not entirely, because it would still be relative to the average race pace of all players (either just in that race slot, or accumulating from all races with that combo).

So for each race it could say that a player did it comparable to a particular DR, and with some averaging over a number of races assign an actual DR. (Simplest way is an IIR filter, e.g.: new DR = old DR * 0.9 + race DR * 0.1).

There would be more than enough data for the average, but what would be harder to define is the range. As in, if the average pace is 5 minutes, what is the pace that would correspond to maximum DR? For any given combo it's arbitrary, but it needs to match up across all combos. It could use the best pace seen so far, but that would probably not be truly representative for the first few races of a combo - maybe that doesn't matter much though, since it will average out and improve long-term.

Actually it's slowly inflating as those with DR.1 still give out points without losing any, thus if you don't play your DR slowly loses value over time. DR resets take points out of the system, but that's a really sucky way to balance things.

TBH I'm not sure how there's enough points left in it! It's not just resets taking points out, high DR players not playing any more is another big loss. There are other gains from moving up DR levels, but still not enough as far as I can see. One possibility is that there is a large chunk of DR taken from the masses, as in, there could be many who actually deserve a higher level of DR.

 

[Groundfish]

Imo right now matchmaking ends up doing a good job at finding the fastest players willing to do whatever it takes to raise dr.
I think though that it needs changes that will allow like minded and close in ability players to play together.
Let’s say I am very slow but always race fair.
If matchmaking worked really well then I as that type of players should be matched against others with the same traits.
With the way sr scoring and matchmaking is right now I’m not sure this happens.
It’s one thing to setup a system in which the fastest are identified and benefit, but I think with improvement the rubbers and racers would be in different lobbies from the people who don’t make contact...

 

[Sven Jurgens]

OK, I know this is getting a bit off-topic, but I just want to show more precisely what I meant. In this I've simplified by only considering a bunch of 16 SR S drivers getting matched into 4 races of 4 players, in the two styles I'm convinced were happening. Normal is as you described earlier - fill races one at a time from top to bottom DR. Rabbit fills races by going across the races, filling all the Rank 1 slots first, etc - the grid is the transpose of Normal.
View attachment 832725
I haven't bothered with any A+ because it screws with the formatting

There seemed to be some threshold number of players to match that would cause it to use Rabbit when below it, and it was set fairly high - it flicked from great matching to poor and back much more quickly than could be explained by usual changes in the number of players available with Normal style matching. So it could still be there with a much lower threshold, or it could have been removed entirely.

So, yeah, I'm not arguing, just wanted to put it into your head in case you notice anything like it

The change PD made is to increase the SR range sooner to fill up rooms. The SR boundaries is what causes the rabbit races. In your diagrams you need to account for SR. With enough players the system still tries to split on 10 SR point ranges, hence you are likely to get a much easier race if your SR drops below 90. Let's call the top split S9 for the 90-99 SR range, and the one below S8 for 80-99 range.

One race you can get
room 1 A9, B9
room 2 B9, C9, D9
room 3 A8, B8, D9
room 4 B8, C8, D8
Looking very normal

Next race
room 1 A9, B9, C9
room 2 A8, C9, D9
room 3 A8, B8, C8
room 4 A7, C8, D8 (SR.A DR.A is added)

Or
room 1 A9, B9, C9, D9
room 2 A8, B8, C8, D8 both called SR.S but different SR ranges
room 3 A7, B7, C7, D7
room 4 A6, B6, C6, D6 both called SR.A but different SR ranges

Only a few players shifting a bit in SR can keep the system alternating from rabbit races to better matched races, since the few S9s that get lowered to S8s will get an easier (more spread out) race and become S9s again.

With less players you now sooner get rooms like

room 1 A98,B98
room 2 B98,C98,D98

Instead of creating more rabbit rooms. But I don't know what the threshold is from switching from that to

room 1 A9, B9, C9
room 2 A8, B8, D9

I understand the ELO-style pretty well, and it's good for producing a ranking when looking at individual events (like races), but it is just relative - i.e. it only says e.g. DR A should be better than DR B (for active players). However since this idea could look at about 1000 players at a time, and it could use a fairly well-defined metric of race pace, it could sidestep a lot of the problems with ELO by being more of an absolute rating. Not entirely, because it would still be relative to the average race pace of all players (either just in that race slot, or accumulating from all races with that combo).

So for each race it could say that a player did it comparable to a particular DR, and with some averaging over a number of races assign an actual DR. (Simplest way is an IIR filter, e.g.: new DR = old DR * 0.9 + race DR * 0.1).

There would be more than enough data for the average, but what would be harder to define is the range. As in, if the average pace is 5 minutes, what is the pace that would correspond to maximum DR? For any given combo it's arbitrary, but it needs to match up across all combos. It could use the best pace seen so far, but that would probably not be truly representative for the first few races of a combo - maybe that doesn't matter much though, since it will average out and improve long-term.

You need some kind of self organizing system, like ELO is. But yup, updating the range during the week with a simple filter doing the work should work well enough.

TBH I'm not sure how there's enough points left in it! It's not just resets taking points out, high DR players not playing any more is another big loss. There are other gains from moving up DR levels, but still not enough as far as I can see. One possibility is that there is a large chunk of DR taken from the masses, as in, there could be many who actually deserve a higher level of DR.

Every new account adds 2000 points into the pool. Points enter the system at the bottom and leave at the top. Anything earned over 75K is lost, yet anything owed at 1 DR gets added to the pool. There are many more players at 1 DR than 75K (20% is at DR.1, 0.3% DR 50K to 75K) and thus many more races where a DR.1 player gives points to those finishing above them. The gains from moving up levels are taken away when falling back a level. Yet of course those that stay above have added those 1500 extra points to the pool. (That also lessens the loss of DR resets)

The whole system is set up to inflate, except DR resets take points out of the pool. But it seems avg DR is (very slowly) increasing.

 

[Outspacer]

The change PD made is to increase the SR range sooner to fill up rooms. The SR boundaries is what causes the rabbit races. In your diagrams you need to account for SR. With enough players the system still tries to split on 10 SR point ranges, hence you are likely to get a much easier race if your SR drops below 90. Let's call the top split S9 for the 90-99 SR range, and the one below S8 for 80-99 range.

One race you can get
room 1 A9, B9
room 2 B9, C9, D9
room 3 A8, B8, D9
room 4 B8, C8, D8
Looking very normal

Next race
room 1 A9, B9, C9
room 2 A8, C9, D9
room 3 A8, B8, C8
room 4 A7, C8, D8 (SR.A DR.A is added)

Or
room 1 A9, B9, C9, D9
room 2 A8, B8, C8, D8 both called SR.S but different SR ranges
room 3 A7, B7, C7, D7
room 4 A6, B6, C6, D6 both called SR.A but different SR ranges

Only a few players shifting a bit in SR can keep the system alternating from rabbit races to better matched races, since the few S9s that get lowered to S8s will get an easier (more spread out) race and become S9s again.

With less players you now sooner get rooms like

room 1 A98,B98
room 2 B98,C98,D98

Instead of creating more rabbit rooms. But I don't know what the threshold is from switching from that to

room 1 A9, B9, C9
room 2 A8, B8, D9

Bear in mind I'm talking about over a year ago, and surely things have changed since. One evening's play in particular cemented my thought. I'd been playing since about 10pm with closely matched races (As and Bs) until about midnight, when it started to decline gradually with increasing Cs creeping in. Then about 1am to 2am it flicked between styles a couple of times then settled into all being Rabbit race style.

So that doesn't seem to fit what you describe with SR bands - with that it's kind of the opposite, with fewer players giving closer matching on DR (at least for a while, as numbers decline) due to using the wider SR band. I can see how it also flicks between race styles though.

You need some kind of self organizing system, like ELO is. But yup, updating the range during the week with a simple filter doing the work should work well enough.

Well, ELO is trading points, and I don't think this idea needs (or wants) that.

Every new account adds 2000 points into the pool. Points enter the system at the bottom and leave at the top. Anything earned over 75K is lost, yet anything owed at 1 DR gets added to the pool. There are many more players at 1 DR than 75K (20% is at DR.1, 0.3% DR 50K to 75K) and thus many more races where a DR.1 player gives points to those finishing above them. The gains from moving up levels are taken away when falling back a level. Yet of course those that stay above have added those 1500 extra points to the pool. (That also lessens the loss of DR resets)

The whole system is set up to inflate, except DR resets take points out of the pool. But it seems avg DR is (very slowly) increasing.

Yeah, I guess a lot more comes from those DR 1 players than one might think, although someone in that situation is surely quite likely to quit before long! Looking at it another way, almost every player has already quit, and it's only a small proportion who continue. So, since there still seems to be an increasing number of points in the system, we can infer that most players quit with almost no DR.

The inflation is not by design though - I think PD hoped there would be more players in sports mode.

 

[Redneckchef]

I got to admit that while I think they need to make SR harder to get it would make for smaller race fields if they stuck to narrower bands. Still think SR needs to be harder to come by, although I am going to have to farm it for a bit now. Daily race A turned into the kamikaze dive in my SR. 1 cowboy punted several of us and did the swerve and go off track penalty cheat to pass us. 2 races with this idiot (i know I should have pulled out when seeing him for second time) and I drop 22 SR points! Can't earn that much with a clean race there. Then it is just avoiding psychos in the lower races while trying to stay clean at the front. But I am not that good at that yet. Although I don't normally expect to get brushed off on the straight while leaving room to pass.
The main downside I see to tighter groupings is that several players in the lower races were trying hard to race clean and just struggle to avoid the bashers. I had my own 2 mistakes that hurt my SR but managed not to trash others races, I gave them the spot back. But I still think there has to be a combo to improve this whole thing. I managed to drop from 97 to 62 in 4 races, but 4 clean races there still wouldn't give me 20 points. Is it possible to max the SR you can lose in a race to the same you can gain, but if you max then you get booted and get dnf? Might be hard in daily race A though

 

[Redneckchef]

Okay, so my attempt to farm SR didnt work. Races at Sardegna. Yeah. So my method was to basically lay back and find a gap to fit in so I can actually race and work laps, but only pass if I have way unbeatable speed to blow by due to them doing something and, when someone is close enough for a pass I let them by. Riiiight. Trying to claw out of SR B and A back to S. The demons pull me back into the pit. Sooo many penalties that they keep appearing behind me again and use me as a bumper to pass, even when I pull to the side out of the way. Yet they keep getting penalties for the same move and don't seem to learn. Definitely think there needs to be a way to register some form of intent to get into different brackets, gamer or attempted racer. Separate rankings for both and booted into gamer if too many incidents per race over a set race period. Could be done with current system.

 

[Redneckchef]

Okay, other check. Watched replay of 2 races as I was iffy on some red down SR arrows I got. Lost SR and gqot the arrow after I braked early to ease off the car ahead and not threaten, but car behind was put off line. No contact, they just disn't stay in line or got swervy? Anyone else seen this yet? Not sure what happened or if this is new but along with ramming jackhammer drivers it really damaged my attempts to race clean at the back. How the hell am I supposed to race clean if I can't brake slightly early to prevent contact?

 

[Sven Jurgens]

Okay, other check. Watched replay of 2 races as I was iffy on some red down SR arrows I got. Lost SR and gqot the arrow after I braked early to ease off the car ahead and not threaten, but car behind was put off line. No contact, they just disn't stay in line or got swervy? Anyone else seen this yet? Not sure what happened or if this is new but along with ramming jackhammer drivers it really damaged my attempts to race clean at the back. How the hell am I supposed to race clean if I can't brake slightly early to prevent contact?

There must have been contact, very slight, perhaps with a little lag not even noticeable, but in the replay you should be able to see where your speed changes a tiny bit out of line. That's what triggers the SR Down since your client thinks you gained an advantage, ie a small speed increase (or lesser decrease under braking) while the car behind slows more.

The only SR Down you can get without contact with another car is from the pit entry wall or by driving backwards and getting the DQ timer on screen.

 

[dabz343]

Over 1800 posts, unbelievable PD.

 

[Dorofint]

Forza 7 now has a penalty system. If we discuss the bugs in GTS here, it would be good to see what the direct competition can do. I have therefore linked a video in which a Youtuber tests the new penalty system in Forza 7. The system is new and certainly has a few weaknesses. But also some other approaches than the system in GTS. The system in Forza seems to be designed to prevent false punishment in any case. In Forza you get, for example no punishment if you lose time through a collision or leaving the street. The system will also alert the players immediately if it detects a collision or an exit from the track. In addition, there is a rudimentary description of why a punishment was punished. For example, the message 'avoidable contact'. It would be nice if some people here watch the video and write what they like in Forza 7 as opposed to GTS and what they do not like.

 

[Sven Jurgens]

@Dorofint Wasted? Is that the real bowling simulator or something, not much of a real test lol.

"You got to allow some contact" Wrong. But this is against drivatars right? No lag involved and allows quite a bit of contact. Anyway it looks like a messy arcade game. Ugh can't watch this any longer lol, but it has spa!

 

[ROCKET JOE]

... there is a rudimentary description of why a punishment was punished. ...

^^^ The only good thing I've seen !

 

[Dorofint]

@Dorofint Wasted? Is that the real bowling simulator or something, not much of a real test lol.

"You got to allow some contact" Wrong. But this is against drivatars right? No lag involved and allows quite a bit of contact. Anyway it looks like a messy arcade game. Ugh can't watch this any longer lol, but it has spa!

Yes, the system in Forza is far from perfect. The track limits and the related penalties seem to be pretty good. The penalties imposed are not exaggerated and still ensure that no benefit from the abbreviate is obtained. It is also positive that the track limits can be displayed graphically as a blue line on request. This is not shown in the video. In the vehicle collisions, however, there is still much to do. Some penalties were correct but other incidents were totally overlooked. This becomes quite clear in the mass collisions. I guess there were no penalties because the causer did not win time and positions. But something like that has to be punished, of course. I assume they introduced the system in Forza 7 to improve it gradually. Aiming to have a mature version in Forza 8. With this background, I see the development as positive. At least at the track limits they have done a good job. If they can do that with the collisions in the coming months too, then Forza would definitely be a good alternative to GT.

 

[Sven Jurgens]

Yes, the system in Forza is far from perfect. The track limits and the related penalties seem to be pretty good. The penalties imposed are not exaggerated and still ensure that no benefit from the abbreviate is obtained. It is also positive that the track limits can be displayed graphically as a blue line on request. This is not shown in the video. In the vehicle collisions, however, there is still much to do. Some penalties were correct but other incidents were totally overlooked. This becomes quite clear in the mass collisions. I guess there were no penalties because the causer did not win time and positions. But something like that has to be punished, of course. I assume they introduced the system in Forza 7 to improve it gradually. Aiming to have a mature version in Forza 8. With this background, I see the development as positive. At least at the track limits they have done a good job. If they can do that with the collisions in the coming months too, then Forza would definitely be a good alternative to GT.

Making the actual track limits visible is great, but really when you cut the track like in that video you should be reset, not be allowed to continue with a penalty. Not slowing down for a chicane at all should not be possible. Luckily GTS has obstacles and reset points to prevent that.

This no penalties because the instigator didn't win time or positions should not be the criteria for a penalty. GTS makes the same mistake punishing the car that seemingly got an advantage. I don't see that as a positive development at all. Avoidable contact is a nice concept. Yet the only contact that's really not avoidable is when you are boxed in and the car in front brakes earlier than the car behind with no way to escape or when you get pushed into a wall without being able to brake on time.

Adding the penalties at the end is at least the right way to go about it, no penalty zones or slowing down. Stop and go would be better over 10 seconds and/or DQ over 20 seconds.

Anyway it needs a lot of work. Looking at the part where he tries to race clean and he gets a track cut penalty for basically getting pushed there by the car ahead and behind and gets nothing for using the wall a bit later. At least no SR Down for bumps from behind lol. He would have lost quite a bit of SR in GTS. The AI is quite poor, GTS has far less collisions and offs by the AI, but then again Forza tries to simulate real people with the drivatars. Dive bomb, his fault, no penalty. Cut track but hit a car that messed up, no penalty. Way to forgiving, "it was just a racing incident", you still messed up, cut the track and crashed into a car! So much contact, imo he would have been rightfully sent to SR.B in GTS.

BTW not getting penalties irks me as much as getting unfair penalties. I just did a race on the hatch, get punted off and the perp doesn't get anything.

Likely DR difference, I'm still A/S getting hit by a B/S or C/S. That should not be a factor.

 

[Trone_Colby]

Yeah I was also a victim of getting hit off track numerous times at Sardegna. The perps don’t get any penalties. The moment I bump someone off accidentally mid turn, SR Down, 4 seconds.

In one race there, racing side by side, the racer on my right hit me trying to make a quick left, and hit the wall. 5 secs. Lap afterwards, a car in front when of track after a turn (right before the slow down zone). He goes sideways. By then, I couldn’t react and I hit him. While serving my 5 secs, i get another on top of that so I just left the race.

 

[breeminator]

Some penalties were correct but other incidents were totally overlooked. This becomes quite clear in the mass collisions. I guess there were no penalties because the causer did not win time and positions. But something like that has to be punished, of course.

I think that element is fine. If someone is purely there to grief, they don't care what penalties they receive. It would be interesting for Super GT to try a different approach where he tries his hardest to win every race by using contact to gain places, and see if any such moves go unpenalised. About the only problem I could see in his video is it maybe assesses the advantage gained over too short a timescale, so there was one case where it appeared to reach a decision that there should be no penalty before he had gained a place, even though it was clear it would become a place gained.

 

[O604]

Likely DR difference, I'm still A/S getting hit by a B/S or C/S. That should not be a factor.

Just to look on the bright side, I'm pretty sure a week ago you would have got at least an orange warning for blocking(?). Progress?

My theory on Brands this week is the introduction of top 10 ghosts has everyone gas happy/impatient.

 

[STIGGY_34]

Is it just me or does your SR go down easier the higher your DR is??
Sorry if this has been covered but I'm tearing my hair out in some rooms and trying to figure out why this is occurring.
I'm not an overly dirty driver.
I'm prone to brain fades however my SR looks like I am a tank ramming dirty machine....

 

[GhostCaliber]

People seem to be talking about how easy it is to get SR back up... but forgetting that since the update they added that crippling reset if you hit C SR... Which let's be real, in some races you can easily go from S to C or worse when you get punted by someone, and just lose your cool and end up on a revenge punting, penalty spree.

As soon as you hit C SR, your DR get's cut from whatever it was, all the way to 15K, which is just unbelievable.

I got burned by that with the Race C Sarthe "track limits" penalties where if you put two wheels over the kerb on some parts of the track they were giving penalties out like candies... one race I went from 35K DR, to 15K DR because of a reset.

 

[watto79]

and just lose your cool and end up on a revenge punting, penalty spree.

There's your problem.

If you value your SR then getting and maintaining a high SR is not difficult at all. I'm not going to be so high and mighty to claim I've never revenge punted someone, because I have, but as soon as you head down that road you can't blame the system for what happens to your SR.

 

[ShakesMcQueen]

Yes, the system in Forza is far from perfect. The track limits and the related penalties seem to be pretty good. The penalties imposed are not exaggerated and still ensure that no benefit from the abbreviate is obtained. It is also positive that the track limits can be displayed graphically as a blue line on request. This is not shown in the video. In the vehicle collisions, however, there is still much to do. Some penalties were correct but other incidents were totally overlooked. This becomes quite clear in the mass collisions. I guess there were no penalties because the causer did not win time and positions. But something like that has to be punished, of course. I assume they introduced the system in Forza 7 to improve it gradually. Aiming to have a mature version in Forza 8. With this background, I see the development as positive. At least at the track limits they have done a good job. If they can do that with the collisions in the coming months too, then Forza would definitely be a good alternative to GT.

What FM7 needs is to implement a combination of the current FRR system they are testing, and the recent anti-punting stuff put into Forza Horizon 4, where it analyzes speed differentials between players, and intelligently ghosts drivers who are going to plow into traffic, letting them hit the wall or go off the track instead. That would essentially solve all of Super GT's bowling incidents.

Trying to assess fault for collisions is hard enough for human observers, let alone some code on a server, so I think they are right to err on the side of not penalizing collisions if they can't 100% determine who is responsible. It's natural that occasionally it will be obvious to the players, but we don't know what it looks like in the game's "eyes".

 

[Dmac72]

Just back at my hotel after a trip to Silverstone. Not the first time I have thought a 10s penalty for rear ending the car in front was fair......

 

[ROCKET JOE]

Just back at my hotel after a trip to Silverstone. Not the first time I have thought a 10s penalty for rear ending the car in front was fair......

I've been a long time Vettel fan but I admit my adoration dwindles piece by piece. Guess he's one incident away from a DR reset !

 

[SjefGielen]

I've been a long time Vettel fan but I admit my adoration dwindles piece by piece. Guess he's one incident away from a DR reset !

It was a great race up until that mistake. But, looking at the two most recent races and steward decisions in F1, my original idea to really solve the gaming of the penalty system pops back into my head, just implement a proper damage system with damage repair costs, yes, I know the victim of erratic actions are also penalized this way, but that's solved by having two options for each and every daily race: choose the version with damage on of off, I strongly believe that this will separate the sim-races from the arcade-races eventually and serve both groups well, FIA races need to be with damage on obviously, you could even make sure that only serious and safe racers enter the FIA races by only doing DR and SR rating changes for the races with damage on.

 

[Dorofint]

I drove the last week Forza 7 because I wanted to try the new penalty system. In addition, GTS annoys me now extremely, because my races are constantly being destroyed by over-motivated or dirty drivers. GTS pisses me off now. However, I have found that in Forza 7 it is the same. There are many drivers in both games who drive clean and carefully. But there is a group that is constantly over-motivated and / or dirty. This group is estimated at 20 to 25% of the players. I rode several races with more or less the same players and it was always the same players who noticed negatively. In both games, this group destroys the games of the other 75 to 80% of the players. There must be a way to filter the filthy 20 to 25% and let them race their own race. We have already seen in kudosprime that you can clearly recognize the profiles of these players. It simply lacks an algorithm that does this automatically and divides the player accordingly. This is missing in both games. My comparison shows me that the differences in the penalty systems of the two games do not make such a big difference. Both systems have indifferent priorities and strengthen and weaken. But in both systems there is this group of players who exploit the respective weaknesses for themselves. Any weaknesses in the systems we might never be able to eradicate. It makes much more sense to recognize the dirty and over-motivated players on the basis of their statistics and to separate them from the clean players.