Performance point limitations are ridiculous

[Lion-Face]

I thought any car that fit the PP limit could win the time trial. They don't exactly set demanding targets for the gold time attacks. I mean, you see the fastest guys with the fastest cars setting record times up to 20 seconds below the gold time. 20 seconds is a lot of time to cover every car that can fit inside the PP limit.

Just for curiosities sake, I took the 300ZX around the Cape Ring time trial, at 440pp I got gold on my third lap.

 

[MrGrado]

I used the 300ZX for the 500PP time trial. Some wipeouts for a few mins while I get used to the car and track, then gold on first completed lap. I had better top end speed than the #1 time on the leaderboard too.

 

[analog]

Yes, except that real racing is balanced. PP is hideously un-balanced, but there's no way of knowing how.
By HP/weight being more realistic, I mean it relates better to real life. PP is like a magical number which relates to the car's performance in some way. that no one quite understands.

And that would be fine, if it was balanced. But it's not.

Thing is, you need to take into account the category or type of car yourself, the game doesn't do that for you, I guess PD assumed people playing GT5 have some common sense (although they forgot to put in enough filtering options to make online races easier to organize).
Only using the power/weight ratio as an indicator doesn't take into account things like downforce or torque, etc. but it does ensure in the way it's implemented (absolute weight versus absolute power instead of one figure giving the ratio itself) that you almost automatically end up with the same type of cars, thus creating a false sense of it being more accurate.

In the Seasonals you have to figure out yourself which type of car with that amount of PP allowed is best suited for that track (or event) which isn't really rocket science or can't be solved with basic trial and error.
So even though the PP system has its flaws, it's not the system itself which is unbalanced or takes numbers out of thin air, it mainly is an indicator to be used alongside the grey matter residing between the ears.
A properly organized online race with cars of the same class with the same amount of PP is much more evenly matched than between cars weighing the same and having the same amount of horsepower.

It's the organizing part which is really a chore and should be improved, not finding a proper car to enter those seasonals, at least it isn't for me.

 

[Denilson]

The funny thing with the pp system is that it's correct, but still so incotrect.
It takes bhp, weight, powerband and aero in to concideration.
In that aspect it's correct.

But this does'nt mean that all cars with the same pp is identical or even close at a specific track.

Take 2 opposites to demonstrate my example:
Bugatti Veyron
1036 bhp
1880 kg
649 pp
0 aero

Nissan AUTECH MOTUL GR-R
570ish (can't remember exactly)
1100 kg
649 pp
40/65 aero

So both cars have the same pp. And the calculations are correct for both.
Which car will win at Route X?
Which car will win at Suzuka?
We know the answers.

All cars have different strong or weak spots despite it's pp.
So what it comes down to is to look at what track you're going to race.
More twisty: Less weight, less power, more aero (if an option ofc) is the way to go.
A track with long straight: More power, more weight, less aero

Weight is is'nt a factor when it comes to top speed, aero and dragcooficient is.
Weight is a huge factor when it comes to acceleration and handling.

It's all about searching among the cars which caracteristics fit the track best. 👍

 

[analog]

Yep, that's basically what I meant, completely different cars having the same amount of PP might be confusing to some, yet that's only the number being equal, not how it delivers and what it delivers.
You don't enter a 550PP online WRC event with a 550PP Cobra, that's maybe a bit of an obvious extreme example, the fact there are more subtle examples (which you need to understand yourself logically) is maybe the most confusing part (to some).

 

[CJSpencer77]

The PP system works fine but it has limitations. Once you understand it's limitations it's easier to work with. If you expect it to be perfect you'll always be disappointed.

The PP system does not work fine, it is fundamentaly flawed, obviously you could always boil it down to the thousandth degree and say well this car on the same pp as another car is better, but atm it is miles and miles out, i race in a league and when we are testing a new seasons races pp very rarely balances a group of 5 cars ( that are of the same type ) close enough.

PD's car balancing system uses Weight, BHP/Torque and Aero and nothing else, this is not even close to enough variables to make thier PP system work, which means you could have an average car on the same pp as a lawn mower that has a gigantic spoiler to raise its pp up.

In PD's defence if u look at what their PP system would actually need to work properly its daunting, such as :- tyre compound/size, drag co-efficient of the whole car (not jut how much a spoiler pushes down), power/torque, weight, suspension setup, chasis , track characteristics, tyre wear etc. etc. etc. to work correctly it would have to consider some variables that dont actually exsist in the game at the moment.

To be honest they should have a seperate PP system for each catagory of car ie. DTM PP, GT 500 PP etc etc, this way because the cars are designed under one set of rules to start with PD would have been able to adjust each groups PP individually but with a universal PP system that is applied to all cars there are far too many holes, for instance you are never going to balance a Plymouth Cuda and a Honda NSX Type R on say 550pp no matter how hard you try, not that it works in coherent groups of cars anyway, go ahead and run GT500 on 600pp. ( ill have a nsx please )

 

[Skygrasper550]

Tires grade MUST be included in PP calculation as well.

ACTUALLY, "Tire Grade" WAS included in the PP calculation before, but PD ruled that out in an update, because the grip levels between Comfort, Sports and Racing Tires is just too big. I understand why they separated the Tire Grade from the PP, and I like it.

for me, PP limit is a lot better than power/weight ratio. because power/weight ratio fails to take into account A LOT of things, but not limited to these:

- torque
- how the car is able to handle and transmit the engine power to the ground
- handling performance of the car
- generally what type of car you are referring to: sports coupe, sedan, truck etc.

suppose a Lotus Elise 111R and a Honda Civic EG6 have the same power and weight. It's clear which car is the winner in terms of overall performance.

yes, the PP system is flawed, because some cars feel like they have more PP than on paper, and some have less. But all in all, the PP system is better than PWR.

The funny thing with the pp system is that it's correct, but still so incotrect.
It takes bhp, weight, powerband and aero in to concideration.
In that aspect it's correct.

But this does'nt mean that all cars with the same pp is identical or even close at a specific track.

Take 2 opposites to demonstrate my example:
Bugatti Veyron
1036 bhp
1880 kg
649 pp
0 aero

Nissan AUTECH MOTUL GT-R
570ish (can't remember exactly)
1100 kg
649 pp
40/65 aero

So both cars have the same pp. And the calculations are correct for both.
Which car will win at Route X?
Which car will win at Suzuka?
We know the answers.

All cars have different strong or weak spots despite it's pp.
So what it comes down to is to look at what track you're going to race.
More twisty: Less weight, less power, more aero (if an option ofc) is the way to go.
A track with long straight: More power, more weight, less aero

I totally agree with this one. To put simply, the Bugatti Veyron takes its PP mostly from its powerful engine, while the R35 GT500 takes its PP mostly from its handling ability and light weight.

Weight is is'nt a factor when it comes to top speed, aero and dragcooficient is.
Weight is a huge factor when it comes to acceleration and handling.

It's all about searching among the cars which caracteristics fit the track best. 👍

Weight DOES and CAN have a huge factor in top speed. Heavier car = slower acceleration = lower top speed. Try strapping a ballast on an R/C car that's about the same weight as the car. I doubt it will be as fast as it was without the ballast.

 

[analog]

To be honest they should have a seperate PP system for each catagory of car ie. DTM PP, GT 500 PP etc etc, this way because the cars are designed under one set of rules to start with PD would have been able to adjust each groups PP individually but with a universal PP system that is applied to all cars there are far too many holes, for instance you are never going to balance a Plymouth Cuda and a Honda NSX Type R on say 550pp no matter how hard you try, not that it works in coherent groups of cars anyway, go ahead and run GT500 on 600pp. ( ill have a nsx please )

It already is to be regarded as separate despite the PP number being the same, that's what I tried to say when mentioning you yourself have to figure out as well which cars can logically compete against each other and taking into account on which track (which would for example mean having multiple PP numbers for each single car related to each track alone if I extend your logic).
Ofcourse a Plymouth Cuda and NSX-R with the same amount of PP aren't evenly matched yet which one wins also depends if you're driving on RouteX or the Nordschleife (which depends on gear settings as well which isn't taken into account).

If you expect to win on the Nordschleife in a 550PP room in a Cuda with other drivers who've got roughly the same amount of skill using cars like an NSX-R it isn't a flaw in the PP system but simply a poor car choice.

 

[CJSpencer77]

It already is to be regarded as separate despite the PP number being the same, that's what I tried to say when mentioning you yourself have to figure out as well which cars can logically compete against each other and taking into account on which track (which would for example mean having multiple PP numbers for each single car related to each track alone if I extend your logic).
Ofcourse a Plymouth Cuda and NSX-R with the same amount of PP aren't evenly matched yet which one wins also depends if you're driving on RouteX or the Nordschleife (which depends on gear settings as well which isn't taken into account).

If you expect to win on the Nordschleife in a 550PP room in a Cuda with other drivers who've got roughly the same amount of skill using cars like an NSX-R it isn't a flaw in the PP system but simply a poor car choice.

yh totally, but my point was it doesnt work in specific groups either, on a set pp certain nsx's will kill all the other gt 500 cars easily in a room of equal skill. Or the Mercades CLK in the DTM group, the list goes on and on.

Rather than go round round and round in circles the bottom line is no matter what the regs there are 3 or 4 cars maximum that are easily faster than the rest every time, in a room of road cars 550pp sports softs on normal tracks (not oval) everyone knows that the cars to be in are the CSL or the type R and one or two others, the same is true for nearly all race types when using pp, hence pp =fail

 

[analog]

I agree that some cars perhaps need a higher PP number as some indeed outperform anything else within the same category, that's perhaps one of the flaws even though a possible miscalculation on PD's part doesn't make that the entire system is automatically flawed, even though its effects might ruin a race for those who don't use those obvious choices.

 

[Skygrasper550]

I agree that some cars perhaps need a higher PP number as some indeed outperform anything else within the same category, that's perhaps one of the flaws even though a possible miscalculation on PD's part doesn't make that the entire system is automatically flawed, even though its effects might ruin a race for those who don't use those obvious choices.

*cough* S2000 R1 *cough*

 

[Exorcet]

Yes, except that real racing is balanced. PP is hideously un-balanced, but there's no way of knowing how.
By HP/weight being more realistic, I mean it relates better to real life. PP is like a magical number which relates to the car's performance in some way. that no one quite understands.

And that would be fine, if it was balanced. But it's not.

Real racing has lots of imbalance. F1 teams love to cry about other F1 teams who are faster than them. It's always going to happen.

PP is balanced enough for me to be able to go online, pick a car simply because I like it and race competitively. Occasionally I might end up in something too slow, but this is rare. PP isn't all that unbalanced, and it's far better than HP/weight where you could have wild differences in downforce, drivetrain, power curve, etc that would completely upset race balance.

 

[thesuperfunk]

Most of the go-karts have more PP than something in the STI or Evo range, IIRC. And I'm fairly certain they aren't any quicker.

Yeah, the PP system needs to be either fixed or abolished.

In fairness most karts also have a better power-to-weight ratio than stuff in the STI or Evo range, so that isn't really an effective way to measure actual perfomance either.

 

[IceMan PJN]

I'm over it. The game sets a performance point limitation for a seasonal event, and the event is ruined. Because all cars with the same performance points aren't equal. It becomes about trying to find which cars will be faster for a specific number of performance points, trying to find how the game's logic works so you can get a competitive car. And that boils down to trying out a bunch of different cars to find the best one, which is boring as hell.
It's just crazy.
At least if they used a more traditional metric, like horsepower or power-to-weight, you'd know which cars are more suited. "Performance points" is silly.

The thought of starting up the game and using trial-and-error to find a car that can win one of the recent seasonal events just makes me want to stop playing. Because my lightened 300ZX will never be able to do it.

You can still use logic like power-to-weight. It's just that PP factors in more than that. You can take 600 horsepower against my 450, but if power is the only difference between our cars then clearly you have an advantage, whereas PP limitations will require that you have weaknesses relative to mine to balance that out a bit.

PP considers multiple aspects of cars. Some circuits will favor some attributes over others, and PP can't help that, but it tries to work off of generalization; typical tracks in general rather than specific circuits.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

The OP is right in that the PP system is ridiculous, and IMO practically useless.

Several posts here including his, point out why.

Previous GTs didn't have it, and GT5 doesn't need it either.

The biggest problem with it is; the misleading inference that it conveys of a way to equalize cars, when of course it doesn't.
Hence as with Nauraushaun, the player is left scratching his ?..........
What good is this?
In real terms, practically nothing.

PD should have dropped the whole thing, instead of just the tire part.
Removing the tires, renders the whole system even more ridiculous.

JMO but the whole PP thing is just a stab by PD at keeping up with the Joneses, Forzas, or whoever.

Since, as has been pointed out, in a given situation, some cars "are more equal than others", the PP system would need to account for this
to be useful, in a real sense.

 

[Denilson]

Weight DOES and CAN have a huge factor in top speed. Heavier car = slower acceleration = lower top speed. Try strapping a ballast on an R/C car that's about the same weight as the car. I doubt it will be as fast as it was without the ballast.

Weight will have an impact on acceleration, yes.
But add 200 kg to the Veyron and see for yourself that it will reach the same top speed.
It will accelerate slower, but reach the same to speed.

If weight was that big of a factor, I doubt the fastest production car in the world would sit at 1900kg.
If weight was that big of a factor, the Koenigsegg Agera R would totally rape the Veyron with it's 1200 bhp and 1500ish kg... But it does'nt..

What (mainly) determines the top speed is:
Power/dragcooficcient

What (mainly) determines the acceleration is:
Power/Weight

 

[Exorcet]

Previous GTs didn't have it, and GT5 doesn't need it either.

Let's hope that GT6 is GT1, we don't want all the unnecessary garbage added to GT2-5.

Of course GT5 needs it. Every GT needs it, or else there's no way to balance out cars, especially for online racing, which previous GT's lacked.

The biggest problem with it is; the misleading inference that it conveys of a way to equalize cars, when of course it doesn't.

You'd think that no one would use PP online if this were true. I can't really recall seeing many PP rooms where the field instantly pulled apart after the go signal.

How else are you going to regulate the cars in a race? PP makes perfect sense. It rates cars based on multiple parameters.

JMO but the whole PP thing is just a stab by PD at keeping up with the Joneses, Forzas, or whoever.

Something they should do far more often.

Since, as has been pointed out, in a given situation, some cars "are more equal than others", the PP system would need to account for this
to be useful, in a real sense.

The bigger "problem" is that PP doesn't take the track into account. So if players don't use common sense (picking a low hp car for SSRX race), their loss if their fault. Though this actually isn't a problem, it's just part of the strategy for selecting cars.

The other thing PD got wrong is making PP and hp/weight mutually exclusive for no reason.

What (mainly) determines the top speed is:
Power/dragcooficcient

What (mainly) determines the acceleration is:
Power/Weight

This is right, though at high speed, drag determines acceleration too. The power/weight ratio is altered by drag, (power - drag power)/weight ratio.

 

[Denilson]

This is right, though at high speed, drag determines acceleration too. The power/weight ratio is altered by drag, (power - drag power)/weight ratio.

Yeah 👍

I was only trying to put it simple.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Let's hope that GT6 is GT1, we don't want all the unnecessary garbage added to GT2-5.

Of course GT5 needs it. Every GT needs it, or else there's no way to balance out cars, especially for online racing, which previous GT's lacked.

Apparently you missed the point.
The PP system won't balance out the the cars for practical purposes.
Its a "somewhere in the neighborhood" system.
That is the complaint in the OP.
I have to agree.
You can still balance the cars for online by specifying the upgrades on each car based on actual performance at each track.
Thats the only truly "equal" way.

You'd think that no one would use PP online if this were true. I can't really recall seeing many PP rooms where the field instantly pulled apart after the go signal..

The start doesn't tell the tale, the finish does.
Besides that, such as it is, its the only system in the game to use as a performance comparer.
Furthermore, its to the hosts advantage if he's done his homework, and already knows which cars are "more equal" at the given PP and track.
Most have.

How else are you going to regulate the cars in a race? PP makes perfect sense. It rates cars based on multiple parameters.

In theory it makes perfect sense. However as its been applied, lacking true accuracy, its not very practical.

Something they should do far more often...

I don't believe copying other games features is always the best idea, but if your going to go to the trouble, make it better than theirs.

The bigger "problem" is that PP doesn't take the track into account. So if players don't use common sense (picking a low hp car for SSRX race), their loss if their fault. Though this actually isn't a problem, it's just part of the strategy for selecting cars..

For better or worse that is the reality.
However as I said earlier, the PP system misleadingly infers to many players that it will equalize this situation when in reality it doesn't.

 

[Tornado]

Removing the tires, renders the whole system even more ridiculous.

Why?

Apparently you missed the point.
The PP system won't balance out the the cars for practical purposes.
Its a "somewhere in the neighborhood" system.
That is the complaint in the OP.
I have to agree.

Are you sure that you didn't miss the point? The complaint of the OP is that the PP system is completely broken (and he's made it clear that at least part of his reason for thinking that is because he doesn't know how it works, since he's repeatedly implied that it is more or less random in his experience when it is far from it), and that PD should remove it and make players rely on far worse systems (namely, PWR) instead to balance the cars because he's able to understand those. No one has ever said that the PP system is exact or perfect. Quite frankly, it can't be, for things I'll get back to. Merely that things aren't nearly as bad as people keep making them out to be; and that all of the alternative systems would be much worse in all the ways the OP outlined.

The start doesn't tell the tale, the finish does.

Which means... what, exactly? You can have a wide variety of cars in a room and still have good races with close finishes when the room is limited by PP. I've been in sequential races where the lead swapped back and forth for the entirety of each race between a Lotus Elise, the Dodge Ram and the VW Bus; with me nipping at their heels with the VW Jetta. I've competed for the lead against Lotus Esprits and Chevrolet Corvettes with my DeLorean. I've held off NSX-Rs and Lotus Esprits with my Ford RS200; and lost races against Gallardos and Lexus LFAs by fractions of a second with my Countach 25th Anniversary. I've even managed to make the Cizeta competitive in races against things up in the 580PP range, and seen people absolutely slaughter fields of modern supercars with RUF RGTs and BTRs.

The system seems to me, outside of unlucky chances, to give you a pretty decent shot at putting together a car wholly different from others and still have it be competitive. Maybe not the absolute best car in the field, but good enough that you can overcome the others if you drive it better.

Furthermore, its to the hosts advantage if he's done his homework, and already knows which cars are "more equal" at the given PP and track.
Most have.

It is only to the host's advantage if he knows how it works and no one else in the room does. If I set a race to SSR7 @ 600PP and giggle to myself because I have the master car for the event that is unbeatable, I'll probably find when the race starts that I'm not the only one who thinks that they have the best car for the event. It isn't as if room restrictions are hidden from everyone but the host.

In theory it makes perfect sense. However as its been applied, lacking true accuracy, its not very practical.

So fix the problems with it rather than tossing it out for inherently inferior systems. There are three areas where it breaks down with all of my experience with it: Weight (which seems to have logarithmic effect on PP as weight goes down, when it probably should be much more linear for really lightweight cars), downforce (doesn't have nearly as much of an effect on PP as it should, and might be because of the game's crappy way of calculating/modeling it) and weight distribution (which barely seems to register most of the time, and almost never registers at all for AWD cars). Modify the level that those variables effect the PP (and completely redesign how weight distribution is accounted for) and you would clean up a lot of the problem cars with the system.

However as I said earlier, the PP system misleadingly infers to many players that it will equalize this situation when in reality it doesn't.

The only way that the PP system would be taken as 100% gospel is if the player lacked an understanding of how cars work. A 600PP Caterham isn't going to keep up with a 600PP GT500 car, and simply looking at them should tell you that.

Furthermore, having a basic understanding of the system should make it clear that there are some things that would be impossible for PD to factor into any car balancing system, because some aspects of a car (suspension settings, LSD settings, transmission settings and even torque split settings) are subjective in regards to how much they benefit the driver; with one driver being able to make them perform flawlessly and a different driver crashing with them.

 

[sinbad]

What some of you don't realise is that if P.P always requires some kind of qualification and clarification for it to be relevant, it is of no more use than power/weight ratio.

If I should say car x and car y both have 400pp, but car x is obviously going to be faster because.......

Then I might as well say car x and car y both have 300bhp/tonne, but car x is obviously going to be faster because......

P.p is worse because it gives this illusion of creating parity. But we all know this is not the case. Modern cars can be seconds faster than older ones around normal circuits if the cars have equal pp.

At least before pp you didn't pick the old car in the hope that pp actually was of some use and the formula accounted for the clear advantages in grip which the modern car might enjoy.

However vague pp is intended to be (although 3 digits is hardly a vague scale) if its vague judgment of cars is not equal and consistent, it doesn't make much sense to use it.

 

[Exorcet]

P.p is worse because it gives this illusion of creating parity. But we all know this is not the case. Modern cars can be seconds faster than older ones around normal circuits if the cars have equal pp.

They can also be equal.

PP does not create an illusion. It creates fairly close races against a wide variety of cars. You can't match PP with mere parameters like power/weight unless you want to put in a lot more work in defining your race.

 

[Tornado]

If I should say car x and car y both have 400pp, but car x is obviously going to be faster because.......

Then I might as well say car x and car y both have 300bhp/tonne, but car x is obviously going to be faster because......

Except that is pretty blatantly not true for reasons that have already been pointed out several times in this thread. You are saying that because PP does not take everything into account (including subjective measurements that it can't measure), it is exactly as bad at balancing the game as a system that takes only two things into account and outright ignores everything else.

 

[grog]

The problem lies with a few dozen cars that are "cheater cars". Check the time trial rankings, those guys are always using the fastest cars for the PP.

It Should be fairly easy for us to come up with a list of offenders (NSX, Integra, S2000, Stratos, Turbulence, Kusabi, FR-S/GT-86, '08 civic, LFA, Elise 111R, Evora)

This has ruined most online racing for me. I avoid racing in rooms full of these cars.

I've been doing one make races and "themed races" to keep the cars close together, and it works great. you can even use the cheater cars as long as everyone is.



And to the idea of using tires in the rating, this worked horribly in GT5 Prologue. Ferrari's with tons more power on comfort hard tires VS low powered 350 Z's on sports softs made for terribly unequal races. The high powered cars would pull away on the straights and tip toe through the corners and the braking zones were totally different for these disparate tires and cars and it would result in many, many accidents.

It was definately worse (In GT5 prologue) than what we have now.

The only thing about a cars tires that should be taken into acount is tire width (hopefully it is already).

 

[Vegard]

A performance points system can never be perfect if it is to be used for such a wide selection of cars on such a wide selection of tracks.

The parameters for what makes a car quick around Route X is obviously not a big factor on Kart Space.

AND, the system can only function as well as the parameters are defined.

We all know how (in)competent PD have been with GT5.
The PP system is no exception.

However, the PP system can never achieve what people seem to expect, namely a field of cars with identical performance on various tracks, regardless of who sets the parameters.
We have one-make series for that.

 

[Exorcet]

However, the PP system can never achieve what people seem to expect, namely a field of cars with identical performance on various tracks, regardless of who sets the parameters.
We have one-make series for that.

Pretty much.

PP doesn't and shouldn't make all car identitcal to each other, that defeats the point, but once there are differences, even small ones, there is the potential for "imbalance" of some kind. One car better on straights, the other on the corners. If the track is only straights/corners, it's obvious what will happen. Most tracks are balanced enough to allow a good variety of cars.

 

[SuperCobraJet]

Why?

? Tires I guess have nothing to do with performance?
What is the use of a performance points system that does not take this into account?

Are you sure that you didn't miss the point? The complaint of the OP is that the PP system is completely broken (and he's made it clear that at least part of his reason for thinking that is because he doesn't know how it works, since he's repeatedly implied that it is more or less random in his experience when it is far from it), and that PD should remove it and make players rely on far worse systems (namely, PWR) instead to balance the cars because he's able to understand those. No one has ever said that the PP system is exact or perfect. Quite frankly, it can't be, for things I'll get back to. Merely that things aren't nearly as bad as people keep making them out to be; and that all of the alternative systems would be much worse in all the ways the OP outlined.

My interpretation of the OP is that the PP system is faulty enough that it can't be trusted. If it can't be trusted, then what good is it.
Thats a valid point, since except with experience, you don't know when you will be a couple houses down or a few blocks away with a
"in the nieghborhood " PP system.
Depending on the experience of the player and the upgrades chosen, as the saying goes, "results may vary", to some degree.
Nevertheless, it is patently evident, depending on the track, that there can be a considerable difference, even with similar class cars at the same PP.
Saying the PP system could be worse, is a pretty lame defense.
Even if it can't be perfect, it could be a lot better than it is.

Which means... what, exactly? You can have a wide variety of cars in a room and still have good races with close finishes when the room is limited by PP. I've been in sequential races where the lead swapped back and forth for the entirety of each race between a Lotus Elise, the Dodge Ram and the VW Bus; with me nipping at their heels with the VW Jetta. I've competed for the lead against Lotus Esprits and Chevrolet Corvettes with my DeLorean. I've held off NSX-Rs and Lotus Esprits with my Ford RS200; and lost races against Gallardos and Lexus LFAs by fractions of a second with my Countach 25th Anniversary. I've even managed to make the Cizeta competitive in races against things up in the 580PP range, and seen people absolutely slaughter fields of modern supercars with RUF RGTs and BTRs.

Like I said, personal results may vary.

The system seems to me, outside of unlucky chances, to give you a pretty decent shot at putting together a car wholly different from others and still have it be competitive. Maybe not the absolute best car in the field, but good enough that you can overcome the others if you drive it better.

Sometimes maybe so.
Sometimes maybe not.
Without previous experience at a given track and class of car, there is no way to know when you will be close and when you won't..
Like I said, personal results may vary.

It is only to the host's advantage if he knows how it works and no one else in the room does. If I set a race to SSR7 @ 600PP and giggle to myself because I have the master car for the event that is unbeatable, I'll probably find when the race starts that I'm not the only one who thinks that they have the best car for the event. It isn't as if room restrictions are hidden from everyone but the host.

This is derived from experience, not trusting the PP system.
Even though its not hidden, the uninitiated don't know that any other 600PP car will not be competitive.

So fix the problems with it rather than tossing it out for inherently inferior systems. There are three areas where it breaks down with all of my experience with it: Weight (which seems to have logarithmic effect on PP as weight goes down, when it probably should be much more linear for really lightweight cars), downforce (doesn't have nearly as much of an effect on PP as it should, and might be because of the game's crappy way of calculating/modeling it) and weight distribution (which barely seems to register most of the time, and almost never registers at all for AWD cars). Modify the level that those variables effect the PP (and completely redesign how weight distribution is accounted for) and you would clean up a lot of the problem cars with the system.

The only way to fix it, is to base it in the actual performance of the each car, which I doubt will ever happen.
Thats why I'm not a fan of points systems.
They all seem to be inherently flawed.

The only way that the PP system would be taken as 100% gospel is if the player lacked an understanding of how cars work. A 600PP Caterham isn't going to keep up with a 600PP GT500 car, and simply looking at them should tell you that.

Looking at them will, but the 600 PP says they should be competitive.

 

[Exorcet]

? Tires I guess have nothing to do with performance?
What is the use of a performance points system that does not take this into account?

Tires need to make sense first. They don't in GT.

Thats a valid point, since except with experience, you don't know when you will be a couple houses down or a few blocks away with a
"in the nieghborhood " PP system.
Depending on the experience of the player and the upgrades chosen, as the saying goes, "results may vary", to some degree.
Nevertheless, it is patently evident, depending on the track, that there can be a considerable difference, even with similar class cars at the same PP.
Saying the PP system could be worse, is a pretty lame defense.
Even if it can't be perfect, it could be a lot better than it is.

And these significant differences are pretty hard to find. Most of the time, throw a bunch of random people into a random room, and the racing is good.

The only really careless thing about the PP system is that it doesn't seem to take fan generated downforce into account, but then again even wing downforce is kind of wonky since it's modeled so poorly.

Without previous experience at a given track and class of car, there is no way to know when you will be close and when you won't..
Like I said, personal results may vary.

I can only think of one case where this has happened, when I selected a 70's Supra for a 4xx PP race. I was having a hard time keeping it competitive and I eventually went to another car, and then another, and another. All but the first one worked fine.

It wouldn't surprise me if further tuning could make the Supra faster either. I've raced a lot from 400-700 PP and unbeatable cars aren't really things I've come across.

The only way to fix it, is to base it in the actual performance of the each car, which I doubt will ever happen.

It did happen. It's called PP. How is what you described any different from PP?

 

[sinbad]

Except that is pretty blatantly not true for reasons that have already been pointed out several times in this thread. You are saying that because PP does not take everything into account (including subjective measurements that it can't measure), it is exactly as bad at balancing the game as a system that takes only two things into account and outright ignores everything else.

Not exactly as bad, just: bad. Its purpose is to balance cars for you, but like you and others say it's virtually impossible, and imho even within the scope of possible balancing it has to work with, it's all too frequently wrong. Pp as a system only works if it does not require constant explanation of why it frequently does not work. There are just too many exceptions and completely inaccurate ratings.

If you join a fixed pp room, you can't simply choose a car with the correct pp and actually expect to be competitive. Whether you should expect to be able to or not (are accurate ratings possible) is irrelevant. Pp is useless if you can't. You can't use the argument that pp can not be expected to score all cars reasonably accurately as an argument defending it.

I should add that I quite like the idea of pp. But unless it's much more accurate than gt5 is at the moment, it's better left out imo.

 

[Tornado]

What is the use of a performance points system that does not take this into account?

No. I want an actual answer to that question. Why does the PP system not taking tires into account matter at all now that tires can be filtered separately?


Not to take this out on you, but if it is so obvious as the people in this and other threads keep acting like it is, it shouldn't be difficult to explain why; but almost every time an explanation is asked for the response is a snotty "it's common sense"-esque post.

Saying the PP system could be worse, is a pretty lame defense.
Even if it can't be perfect, it could be a lot better than it is.

No one ever said that it couldn't be improved. Nor did anyone ever try to defend it by saying it could be worse. I'd like to know where you are getting these arguments, because all that I've ever said was that it could be better but the alternative systems the thread OP was saying were better are worse.

This is derived from experience, not trusting the PP system.
Even though its not hidden, the uninitiated don't know that any other 600PP car will not be competitive.

The uninitiated likely wouldn't be winning races in the first place. Experience means more than just being a better driver. It also translates to learning and understanding the idiosyncrasies of the cars you've chosen to race with.

Looking at them will, but the 600 PP says they should be competitive.

There is a line where the tools cannot be blamed for the end result. I recognize that there are problems with it, but a bit of common sense should come into play as well when it comes to extreme examples.

There are just too many exceptions and completely inaccurate ratings.

Which I'm pretty sure has been acknowledged. What that does not mean is that it is worse than an inherently inferior system, which is exactly what your (and the OP's) argument was. If using PP as a guide results in trial and error, then using PWR as a limitation instead would be far worse.

If you join a fixed pp room, you can't simply choose a car with the correct pp and actually expect to be competitive.

I do all the time. I race in PP rooms exclusively, know almost nothing at all about tuning and I rarely use the same car twice. But I still very rarely run into anything that is completely uncompetitive.

You can't use the argument that pp can not be expected to score all cars reasonably accurately as an argument defending it.

I can use that argument, because the PP system does generally score all cars reasonably accurate. Most of the outliers would likely be corrected by making the changes that I already outlined; and PD could go through and clean them up by hand whatever was left over (like they did with the Chaparral 2J).


As such, I completely reject the notion expressed that the game would be better off without it, as if the entire thing is completely random and broken across the board.