Question about PP

[Leoz96]

I just noticed that the mark IV Golf GTI and Mario Andretti's Hudson have a very similar PP (with a difference of 1 PP). While their weight and HP are also very similar, the Hudson has a considerably higher amount of torque. Do the Performance Points take into account Torque and Handling or are they just based on Horsepower and weight?

 

[CraigHyphenO]

It should in theory take everything into account. It even took downforce levels into consideration on GT5. However, PP is not necessarily a very good measurement. That's why in 600PP lobbies, a lot of people turn up in a TS030 for example, while nobody ever turns up in a Auto Union Streamline.

 

[eran0004]

I just noticed that the mark IV Golf GTI and Mario Andretti's Hudson have a very similar PP (with a difference of 1 PP). While their weight and HP are also very similar, the Hudson has a considerably higher amount of torque. Do the Performance Points take into account Torque and Handling or are they just based on Horsepower and weight?

It depends on what you mean by taking into account. Power is per definition a product of torque and engine speed, so since power is taking torque into account, a PP system measuring only power would indirectly take torque into account as well.

 

[TT92]

I just noticed that the mark IV Golf GTI and Mario Andretti's Hudson have a very similar PP (with a difference of 1 PP). While their weight and HP are also very similar, the Hudson has a considerably higher amount of torque. Do the Performance Points take into account Torque and Handling or are they just based on Horsepower and weight?

First up. The PP system is broken.

Secondly. The PP system is broken.

Once you fully understand those two points you will have the answer to your question ;-)

All cars are equal under the PP system except some are more equal than others ;-) That is why quite often in online rooms they will openly say that a certain car is banned from that PP class.

Having said that once you understand that the PP system is broken and group similar cars together then some really close racing can be had ;-)

Just prove the point when there is an online time trial have a look at the range of cars in the top 100. They nearly all use the same car because that is the one that has the PP advantage at that set PP level. e.g the Chaparral 2J or the Suzuki GSX R4.

One very interesting point that GT6 has over GT5 is that down force no longer impacts on PP which I find is very odd. Although high DF = slower speed but better cornering and low DF = higher speed and worse cornering so depending on track you can have an advantage with DF.

As a last statement, the PP system is broken ;-) Or at very least must be fine tuned by room owners to equalise out the discrepancies ;-) And then it is up to you whether or not you chose to race a "dog" or not ;-) e.g the Hudson ;-)

 

[Leoz96]

First up. The PP system is broken.

Secondly. The PP system is broken.

Once you fully understand those two points you will have the answer to your question ;-)

All cars are equal under the PP system except some are more equal than others ;-) That is why quite often in online rooms they will openly say that a certain car is banned from that PP class.

Having said that once you understand that the PP system is broken and group similar cars together then some really close racing can be had ;-)

Just prove the point when there is an online time trial have a look at the range of cars in the top 100. They nearly all use the same car because that is the one that has the PP advantage at that set PP level. e.g the Chaparral 2J or the Suzuki GSX R4.

One very interesting point that GT6 has over GT5 is that down force no longer impacts on PP which I find is very odd. Although high DF = slower speed but better cornering and low DF = higher speed and worse cornering so depending on track you can have an advantage with DF.

As a last statement, the PP system is broken ;-) Or at very least must be fine tuned by room owners to equalise out the discrepancies ;-) And then it is up to you whether or not you chose to race a "dog" or not ;-) e.g the Hudson ;-)

Ok let me see if I got this right, are you saying the PP system is broken? I think you weren't clear enough

 

[TT92]

Ok let me see if I got this right, are you saying the PP system is broken? I think you weren't clear enough

I am accused of being rather vague all the time, unfortunately ;-)

 

[Voodoovaj]

First up. The PP system is broken.

Secondly. The PP system is broken.

THAT is an understatement, although it doesn't seem as bad if you stick to similar drive trains.

This is something that I would love to see in the "things you would like to see" thread

It REALLY needs to be able to account for cars that are outliers even if it has to add some points for extra usage. We know they have the ability to mine that data from their servers (because it's decade old tech to do so by now).

Also, there MUST be deal in place with some manufacturers to get a PP boost. For instance, Ferrari all seem to be 10-25pp underrated.

 

[TT92]

THAT is an understatement, although it doesn't seem as bad if you stick to similar drive trains.

Note: all my comments below refer to standard - unmodified cars. Tuned cars are another subject altogether ;-)

But you still get stand out cars that need to be banned. e.g Take 4x4 500-580PP the TK ZZII is a runaway and so needs to be banned. We do that by setting minimum weight of 1001Kgs. As one of my very good friends says "It is a Japanese wet dream" :-)) We also ban non-production cars. If it was not readily available for sale then it does not run. That also wipes a lot of prototypes and concepts out. And then we have US muscle cars all nobbled with useless top speeds.

It REALLY needs to be able to account for cars that are outliers even if it has to add some points for extra usage. We know they have the ability to mine that data from their servers (because it's decade old tech to do so by now).

I do not know how much relevant information could be gathered due people banning and/or having gentlemen's agreements in place so certain cars are not used. A very good idea though and should provide interesting data.

Also, there MUST be deal in place with some manufacturers to get a PP boost. For instance, Ferrari all seem to be 10-25pp underrated.

Not to mention the Corvettes :-( It is good to see in GT6 the Nissans in general and the GTR R34s in particular have been scaled back ;-) Dare I say, possibly too much. The GTR Black Edition in GT5 was one of my "go to" cars and now in GT6 it has all the appeal of a shopping trolley ;-)

Anyway the point is the PP system is imperfect but to give PD some credit it must be very difficult to balance all the cars and of course we would all love to know what the formula is that they use. Then we would have some understanding of why it can get some cars sooooo wrong. That is at both ends of the spectrum. Like why isn't the Veyron competitive in any class? Surely the real ones do not drive this bad?

Then you go to a different track and it can all change again ;-)

And when the "Gentlemen's agreements" fail there is always the kick Button ;-)

 

[Voodoovaj]

In my opinion, there are so few outliers that it's worth giving a designer a few days to turn the PP up on those cars.

Ferrari (all except the 599)
Ford Focus RS
Shelby Series One
GT300 RX7
Mazda (pretty much all of them)
Tommy Kaira ZZII
Toyota 2000 GT
Toyota MR2's
Honda (and Spoon)....pretty much all of them except for the CR-Z and Insight
I agree on the 06 Z06 and ZR1, I'd also toss in the 69 Z/28

If these cars all got a 5-15 PP rating increase, it would help level the field.

I'd reserve the 15PP bump for the FXX, ZZII, and the Honda HSV.

Just my two cents

 

[Anomaly]

Has anybody mentioned that the PP system is broken?

 

[CraigHyphenO]

Has anybody mentioned that the PP system is broken?

If not: I think the PP system might be a bit broken.

 

[Polsixe]

Ok let me see if I got this right, are you saying the PP system is broken? I think you weren't clear enough

It's not "broken", it is what it is, mainly a measure of power/weight ratio. @TT92 is correct in most of his post but is incorrect in expecting the same performance from the same PP. Not all 500PP cars for example can or will be equal on the track which is why the GSX ends up being the best at that bracket, there has to be a first among equals. Most 500pp cars however, will be very close in performance.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Anyway the point is the PP system is imperfect but to give PD some credit it must be very difficult to balance all the cars and of course we would all love to know what the formula is that they use. Then we would have some understanding of why it can get some cars sooooo wrong. That is at both ends of the spectrum. Like why isn't the Veyron competitive in any class? Surely the real ones do not drive this bad?

Bring your fully tuned Enzo, I'll bring the Veyron, we'll slap on some Comfort Softs and have a go at the 'Ring. Most people race the Veyron on unrealistic tires that negate it's inherent advantages and negate the inherent disadvantages of other cars, namely traction. I ran a Hybrid Veyron in GT5 that was fully stock but with a much less powerful engine to get it into 600PP rooms without the engine limiter and it was a beast on Comforts and Sports tires, very competitive. Bring traction into play and it's a whole different ballgame. Witness @sparkytooth 's TT board for Laguna on Comfort Hards and the Veyron is number one overall so far.

But I do agree, as imperfect as the PP system is, it still does a reasonable job of providing decent racing outside of the obvious outliers. I think the issue most people have with it is that it does have some major flaws and in 4 years PD has never taken any steps to improve or tweak it to make it better, outside of that one ludicrous failed experiment in adjusting the PP of some FR's a while ago. There are a number of what I think are fairly simple ways to improve the system, but they require a willingness on PD's part to make it work and I just don't think it's a high priority for them, given it's not much different than it was 4 years ago, other than dropping aero from the calculation, a mistake IMO.

 

[FS7]

To me it makes no sense why adding certain upgrades doesn't affect PP. Installing custom suspension improves handling, and installing custom transmission improves acceleration & top speed, therefore there should be an increase in PP when installing those parts. That's how it works in Forza 4 & Shift 2.

 

[Anomaly]

To me it makes no sense why adding certain upgrades doesn't affect PP. Installing custom suspension improves handling, and installing custom transmission improves acceleration & top speed, therefore there should be an increase in PP when installing those parts. That's how it works in Forza 4 & Shift 2.

You are 100% correct, but as has been said... PP is broken. Cars of similar PP ratings SHOULD perform about the same. Anything that makes a car perform better should raise the PP. Neither of these are the case.

 

[TT92]

Bring your fully tuned Enzo, I'll bring the Veyron, we'll slap on some Comfort Softs and have a go at the 'Ring. Most people race the Veyron on unrealistic tires that negate it's inherent advantages and negate the inherent disadvantages of other cars, namely traction. I ran a Hybrid Veyron in GT5 that was fully stock but with a much less powerful engine to get it into 600PP rooms without the engine limiter and it was a beast on Comforts and Sports tires, very competitive. Bring traction into play and it's a whole different ballgame. Witness @sparkytooth 's TT board for Laguna on Comfort Hards and the Veyron is number one overall so far.

View attachment 284969


But I do agree, as imperfect as the PP system is, it still does a reasonable job of providing decent racing outside of the obvious outliers. I think the issue most people have with it is that it does have some major flaws and in 4 years PD has never taken any steps to improve or tweak it to make it better, outside of that one ludicrous failed experiment in adjusting the PP of some FR's a while ago. There are a number of what I think are fairly simple ways to improve the system, but they require a willingness on PD's part to make it work and I just don't think it's a high priority for them, given it's not much different than it was 4 years ago, other than dropping aero from the calculation, a mistake IMO.

You obviously missed the bit where I specifically mentioned standard cars and said when tuned it does change again, as it does for different tracks.

Also why would you bring into the discussion hacked cars (Hybrids)???? As they have nothing to do with the PP system at all. I may as well say a 35,000HP Honda Civic at 400PP would blow it away for all the sense it makes.

For the record I do not hack (hybrid) and believe anyone that does should get their console banned if caught using hacked cars online.

And I still maintain I do not believe a real Veyron would drive as bad as this example in the game does.

And don't even get me started on aero either. Yes, a major mistake >:-(

So basically we all agree that the PP system is in need of being "tweaked" (at very least) and are just not picking around the edges a little bit ;-)

 

[Aussie_HSV]

Yes, the aero one is a little weird.
Perhaps they decided that downforce vs speed vs track was kind of swings and round-abouts so they let it be.
And I guess I can see some logic in that.
But bang on a flat floor and the PP boost is rather large, probably to the point of being disproportionately so.

 

[Johnnypenso]

You obviously missed the bit where I specifically mentioned standard cars and said when tuned it does change again, as it does for different tracks.

Also why would you bring into the discussion hacked cars (Hybrids)???? As they have nothing to do with the PP system at all. I may as well say a 35,000HP Honda Civic at 400PP would blow it away for all the sense it makes.

For the record I do not hack (hybrid) and believe anyone that does should get their console banned if caught using hacked cars online.

And I still maintain I do not believe a real Veyron would drive as bad as this example in the game does.

And don't even get me started on aero either. Yes, a major mistake >:-(

So basically we all agree that the PP system is in need of being "tweaked" (at very least) and are just not picking around the edges a little bit ;-)

I brought up hybrids because with a smaller engine, like 750 hp, and no other changes to the car, it became a competitive 600PP car. And contrary to public opinion, the PP system was fully intact in GT5 when hybriding, unless you put massive HP on the car, which is not what I'm talking about here. To get the stock car into a 600PP room, you have to detune the engine massively, which just killed the HP and made it uncompetitive. Point being, the chassis is fine and actually handles very well for it's weight, and is very competitive in it's PP range, if it's on the stock tires. It is killed however by both the massive detuning needed to get it down to 600PP and by the use of RS tires, which negate it's traction advantage. In short, there's nothing wrong with the car, IMO of course. It handles like it should and it's competitive in the right environment.

 

[TT92]

I brought up hybrids because with a smaller engine, like 750 hp, and no other changes to the car, it became a competitive 600PP car. And contrary to public opinion, the PP system was fully intact in GT5 when hybriding, unless you put massive HP on the car, which is not what I'm talking about here. To get the stock car into a 600PP room, you have to detune the engine massively, which just killed the HP and made it uncompetitive. Point being, the chassis is fine and actually handles very well for it's weight, and is very competitive in it's PP range, if it's on the stock tires. It is killed however by both the massive detuning needed to get it down to 600PP and by the use of RS tires, which negate it's traction advantage. In short, there's nothing wrong with the car, IMO of course. It handles like it should and it's competitive in the right environment.

So let's see if I got this right?

The Veyron is great when you put it on rubbish tyres and by hacking put a less HP engine in it to cheat the PP system and then run it with non 4WD cars so it has a traction advantage.

Got you. I now understand your point totally ;-) The PP system only works when running hacked cars.

So now understand my point. With un-tuned cars, as they are presented in GT6, the PP system is broken or at very least requires tweaking for it to work effectively. e.g some cars need to be actively culled from the classes like the Tommy Kiara ZZII.

Or have PD tweak the PP system and lower it for the Veyron and slightly raise it for the ZZII because it is broken ;-)

Now I am sure that you (or some one else) will want to raise some obscure, vague point just for the sake of argument here but really guys, the system does not work the way that it should. Yes, it comes close a lot of the time but it is not reliable without a knowledgeable room host interested in levelling the playing field.

 

[Johnnypenso]

So let's see if I got this right?

The Veyron is great when you put it on rubbish tyres and by hacking put a less HP engine in it to cheat the PP system and then run it with non 4WD cars so it has a traction advantage.

Got you. I now understand your point totally ;-) The PP system only works when running hacked cars.

So now understand my point. With un-tuned cars, as they are presented in GT6, the PP system is broken or at very least requires tweaking for it to work effectively. e.g some cars need to be actively culled from the classes like the Tommy Kiara ZZII.

Or have PD tweak the PP system and lower it for the Veyron and slightly raise it for the ZZII because it is broken ;-)

Now I am sure that you (or some one else) will want to raise some obscure, vague point just for the sake of argument here but really guys, the system does not work the way that it should. Yes, it comes close a lot of the time but it is not reliable without a knowledgeable room host interested in levelling the playing field.

You're right, my mistake, the Veyron is rubbish. Carry on:tup:

 

[TT92]

You're right, my mistake, the Veyron is rubbish. Carry on:tup:

You still don't get it. All I have said is the current PP system does not do it any favours and it is severely penalised to the point of not being competitive.

 

[Johnnypenso]

You still don't get it. All I have said is the current PP system does not do it any favours and it is severely penalised to the point of not being competitive.

Already sold, don't buy it back:tup:

 

[Voodoovaj]

You are 100% correct, but as has been said... PP is broken. Cars of similar PP ratings SHOULD perform about the same. Anything that makes a car perform better should raise the PP. Neither of these are the case.

I agree that there should be a bump in PP when you add the upgrades. Also, the PP increase should be skewed a little more than it currently is for weight reduction and power to weight increases. I don't mind the removal of the down force addition because it does even out from track to track.

I think one of the big flaws that wasn't corrected properly is when the tires were taken out of the equation. It seems that the cars are rated with their stock tires, but a tire change doesn't affect their rating.

@Johnnypenso is correct though is saying that certain cars perform better under certain restrictions.

 

[TT92]

I agree that there should be a bump in PP when you add the upgrades. Also, the PP increase should be skewed a little more than it currently is for weight reduction and power to weight increases. I don't mind the removal of the down force addition because it does even out from track to track.

I think one of the big flaws that wasn't corrected properly is when the tires were taken out of the equation. It seems that the cars are rated with their stock tires, but a tire change doesn't affect their rating.

@Johnnypenso is correct though is saying that certain cars perform better under certain restrictions.

This is why it would be nice if PD actually told us how their PP calculations are done. Once we knew exactly how they did it then we would at least understand why it is so wrong.

You are concerned about tyres. So my next question is: Why then does the game not take into account whether or not aids are used. Why shouldn't TC, SRF ABS etc alter a cars PP either? Just as a AWD will have an advantage in low traction conditions then any other car using the above will as well (theoretically).

I personally consider all aids off (ABS @1 Allowable) and the same tyres used on all cars to be a playing field leveller. Most AWD get a hefty traction penalty as it is (excluding the ZZII)

 

[Pootis]

This is why it would be nice if PD actually told us how their PP calculations are done. Once we knew exactly how they did it then we would at least understand why it is so wrong.

You are concerned about tyres. So my next question is: Why then does the game not take into account whether or not aids are used. Why shouldn't TC, SRF ABS etc alter a cars PP either? Just as a AWD will have an advantage in low traction conditions then any other car using the above will as well (theoretically).

I personally consider all aids off (ABS @1 Allowable) and the same tyres used on all cars to be a playing field leveller. Most AWD get a hefty traction penalty as it is (excluding the ZZII)

This is the closest answer from the official site from here: http://www.gran-turismo.com/us/gt6/manual/#!/managecars/pp

PP is determined by an overall analysis of the factors that affect a car's racing performance, such as engine power and weight.

It's dumb how adding a spoiler doesn't affect PP in GT6 but it did in GT5.

 

[Johnnypenso]

This is why it would be nice if PD actually told us how their PP calculations are done. Once we knew exactly how they did it then we would at least understand why it is so wrong.

You are concerned about tyres. So my next question is: Why then does the game not take into account whether or not aids are used. Why shouldn't TC, SRF ABS etc alter a cars PP either? Just as a AWD will have an advantage in low traction conditions then any other car using the above will as well (theoretically).

I personally consider all aids off (ABS @1 Allowable) and the same tyres used on all cars to be a playing field leveller. Most AWD get a hefty traction penalty as it is (excluding the ZZII)

It's not hard to figure out what's wrong with the PP system as far as I can tell. It undervalues grip and rotation, and overvalues power. All the best performing cars are the ones with higher grip and good rotation, most of the worst performing cars are low grip and often difficult to rotate although that's not always the case. They did fix it somewhat by shifting grip to the tire model for GT6 and away from the chassis, which makes many of the older cars more competitive. If the RX500 were in GT5 for example it wouldn't have nearly the grip it does now, same with the Ferrari 250GT, Dino etc. there's no way they would have been competitive in GT5, only a couple of classic cars were because they lacked grip. Of course now they have unrealistic amounts of grip for their era, but are competitive in PP races.

To fix the system, cars need to be given more PP for grip, and less PP for HP IMO, although fixing the former, will likely fix the latter.

 

[MatskiMonk]

The answer is easy, and parallels real-life, don't turn up with inferior equipment! If you want PP to make everyone as fast no matter which cars, upgrades or tyres they have, you may as well just turn the slow car boost to strong, that should have a similar effect.

 

[Johnnypenso]

The answer is easy, and parallels real-life, don't turn up with inferior equipment! If you want PP to make everyone as fast no matter which cars, upgrades or tyres they have, you may as well just turn the slow car boost to strong, that should have a similar effect.

I think you misunderstand the PP system. It's supposed to make the cars relatively equal on the track, not the drivers.

 

[Voodoovaj]

To fix the system, cars need to be given more PP for grip, and less PP for HP IMO, although fixing the former, will likely fix the latter.

I also have a suspicion that the PP system was not properly over hauled to deal with the new tire model. Many of the standard cars are in the outlier category, which is the cause for this suspicion. It might also be a reason why tire scaling is being withheld; to avoid creating an outlier by increasing tire width.

And, as I have stated above, I firmly believe that there are PP adjustments made in favour of certain manufacturers.

A revision would be nice. Let's face it, GT6 players are essentially beta testing GT7 (same rendering engine, tire model, physics, etc), so they might as well go whole hog and toss gameplay changes at us as well.

 

[TT92]

It's not hard to figure out what's wrong with the PP system as far as I can tell. It undervalues grip and rotation, and overvalues power. All the best performing cars are the ones with higher grip and good rotation, most of the worst performing cars are low grip and often difficult to rotate although that's not always the case. They did fix it somewhat by shifting grip to the tire model for GT6 and away from the chassis, which makes many of the older cars more competitive. If the RX500 were in GT5 for example it wouldn't have nearly the grip it does now, same with the Ferrari 250GT, Dino etc. there's no way they would have been competitive in GT5, only a couple of classic cars were because they lacked grip. Of course now they have unrealistic amounts of grip for their era, but are competitive in PP races.

To fix the system, cars need to be given more PP for grip, and less PP for HP IMO, although fixing the former, will likely fix the latter.

Two exceptions that spring to mind are the Rocket and the Caterham. Two similar cars with similar PP and vastly different performance. Also note all the old US muscle cars with gearboxes too short that make them uncompetitive. I remember once from a shuffle race in GT5 being stuck in a Cobra at High Speed Ring on the rev limiter for the entire race :-( I think I was lapped in 5 :-(

As I said in an earlier post look how they scaled the R35 GTRs back in GT6. They do not understeer so bad now and handle a lot better. Funny how they have grip, now rotate but are slower compared to other cars. I should note here PD also fixed understeer on the Lambos as well.

Another random thought is how camber is of little concern (Note I did not say it does not work, it does sort of work but not in the way we would expect). While on this topic have you noticed the standard suspension settings for most cars now. I would call them radical and also how they are pretty well universally applied.

To fix the system, cars need to be given more PP for grip, and less PP for HP IMO, although fixing the former, will likely fix the latter.

And where you have a car with grip and HP e.g Veyron it then becomes uncompetitive. Also note my examples of the GTRs with massive amounts of grip, reasonable HP and are now slower.

I do think we are all agreed that the PP system is in need of a little tweaking at least and a major overhaul in reality.