Unfair time penalties and invisible walls.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Wity
  • 18 comments
  • 1,200 views
W

Wity

(Banned)
Messages
108
I've got two replays in pal x-port format that I request the Judges to rule upon before we kick off properly. To whom though do I send them?

The first is the Autum ring short two lap race round number 2 The replay will show that on three occassions when I had my nose or more than, in front of the A.I. they touched me thus according to the rules I would have 3 seconds penalty applied. These touches in reality were no harder than a 10 year olds punch and were all the fault of the AI not me and they gave me no advantage whatsoever. In any real life race minor contact such as 'rubbing' happens and only gets punished if it gives an advantage. The rules on paper looked fair and covered all but now having tried this race I dont believe they are. To run this race without contact means dont bother trying to go fast and overtake, which is hardly what racing is all about.

All it needs to be put right is rewording of the rules so that penalties only apply if you hit the ai or are given a boost by the ai hitting you. Touches like these three ought to be give a green flag.

The second is a replay of the Suby at Cathedral Rocks, Would judges please how many times if any an invisible wall is touched.
 
As far as where to send them and what the rules are, Duke can address that when he becomes back online (probably tomorrow.)
EDIT/ Just re-read the rules about the "Review Committee" and found it's Duke plus all Team Managers. So you can send the replays to any Team Manager who has a PAL version. I'm NTSC.

RE: Invisible walls: They haven't been defined yet. The rules say something about the Review Committee determining them. If/when they are identified, any touches would be treated the same as touching a normal wall.

EDIT2/ The invisible wall answer above probably isn't what you were asking. Did you mean to ask:
Wity
The second is a replay of the Suby at Cathedral Rocks, Would judges please (tell me) how many times if any an invisible wall is touched.
Click to expand...
If that's the case, I guess this is our duty. :)
 
Hmm...sure would have been nice to identify any invisable walls or other problem areas before racing commenced.
 
As far as Cathedral Rocks is concerned invisible walls cover most of the track, but they are pretty hard to identify from a replay. It's only when you've ran a hotlap a considerable number of times round there pushing it to the limit that you get a feel for them which is why I would like the judges to see how many is in this perticular replay.
Sounds like I want to judge the judges I know but that's not the case I want the judges to be aware of where they are and what to look for. I thought it was 100% clean at first so I guess would many others especially if they have not ran the hotlap themselves.
 
Wity
The first is the Autum ring short two lap race round number 2 The replay will show that on three occassions when I had my nose or more than, in front of the A.I. they touched me thus according to the rules I would have 3 seconds penalty applied. These touches in reality were no harder than a 10 year olds punch and were all the fault of the AI not me and they gave me no advantage whatsoever. In any real life race minor contact such as 'rubbing' happens and only gets punished if it gives an advantage. The rules on paper looked fair and covered all but now having tried this race I dont believe they are. To run this race without contact means dont bother trying to go fast and overtake, which is hardly what racing is all about.
Click to expand...

We've been over this argument a few million times already in OLR racing, so I'm guessing you've been out of it for a while.

The general consensus has typically been that OLR racing has very little to do with real life racing, in that you can try again. And again. And then again, and then a few million times more. Typically, the AI drives the exact same path in each of these million times. So not touching the AI means determining the fastest route around them, for which you have more than ample opportunity.

Weigh this against the horribly childish discussions of 'is not / is too' a touch to your advantage or disadvantage, and touching AI in serious OLR competitions should be a complete and utter non-issue: None Allowed.

The only reason that we sometimes don't issue a complete DNF is that if someone really screwed up and missed it while reviewing his run, he and his team won't feel as bad - usually countless hours were spent and a DNF looks worse than +1sec or +3sec. But that's really the ONLY reason.

(Of course, maybe I've been out of it myself and everything changed for GT4, but I think - and hope - not)
 
Yep I've not bothered with GT much since the early days of GT3 I've been into pc racing instead and your right it does show. I'm looking through different eyes when I look at a race nowadays.

Sony's GT series are games that off line racers have developed rules for that make it equal for all at a cost of simulating real racing wheras with many a pc game modders have been able to make the games more of a real life race simulation by editing tracks and the grip on grass for example so shortcutting if either impossible or costly. Damage effecting handling and being visually identifyable is a feature of most pc games so the "rubbing" in on or off line contests has remained allowable.

I was frustrated with this run because I was trying to race not trying to be 100% clean first then fast.

...and touching AI in serious OLR competitions should be a complete and utter non-issue: None Allowed.
Click to expand...

I disagee with that though, 100% touch free was only ever introduced to stop the wallbangers exploting the games faults when others drove as they would for real and was meant for hotlapping only. Methinks the community has took it too far by making races the same when simply they could say "if your nose is in front at the time of contact then your ok. This race goes quite a way in proving that would be the better option.
 
Arwin wrote -
Typically, the AI drives the exact same path in each of these million times. So not touching the AI means determining the fastest route around them, for which you have more than ample opportunity.
Click to expand...

I'm not too sure about this. I agree that we have to work within the limitations that PD have provided us with, but saying that the AI take exactly the same path a million times is not what i would agree with. It is nigh on impossible sometimes to correctly judge the AI sometimes (especially when you are close and are in the process of passing them). And even when you do manage to avoid thier stupidity you still have em trying to ram you up the arse.

Its a hard call and both Wity and Arwin have valid points. But in the end i'm not too sure where my thoughs lay (100% totally clean with NO touches of anykind, or something a bit more friendly to us with regard to AI mistakes and not realistically our own). But i know that whatever the BC5 admins run with then thats what i'll accept and i hope everyone else will to.
 
Wity
Methinks the community has took it too far by making races the same when simply they could say "if your nose is in front at the time of contact then your ok. This race goes quite a way in proving that would be the better option.
Click to expand...

No, because say that I am losing the rear of my car on the inside of a turn, but am fortunate enough to just 'happen' to have an AI car not giving me enough space while a faster car is clearly overtaking him. Am I using him to go faster, or is this just an incident?

To prevent such endless discussion, a 100% clean was introduced. I think that if you talk to anyone who has sustained a serious competition involving AI over a longer period of time, you will find him or her in favor of 100% clean racing. It is just too hard to judge contact in AI races, and the few races that have contact except the long one (which has different rules anyway) are extremely short.

@GT3Mich: that's right. After that, I've just about only done some GT4 and some LAN parties. No more competitions. Hence my comment. And as for the finalising of the BC, nor did anyone else. Everything was out there. Nobody cared enough, apparently. I definitely had something better to do. Sounds harsh, but my life was falling to pieces and so was I. I ended up having to run the BC pretty much all by myself, and had put way too much time into it already, getting a decent set of rules out, getting the results out fast, and so on. I personally think I did a pretty decent job right until the end, but by then I was thoroughly through with it. I am sorry, I should not have allowed myself to get into a position where I had to do it by myself, but that's how it ended up. Everything is still out there, you can still calculate the end results if you want to. I have no regrets and would have done the same. I finally found my Soulmate, I am in the process of moving to a different part of the country, I'll be changing my jobs, and I'll be starting a family.

@Rypien: I tried all the races with AI in this BC and given the same group of cars, they behave the exact same way each and every time. Is that different in your version?
 
I think that the rules of advantageous and allowable contact as written here are reasonably clear in interpretation. The penalty system was written to avoid making the multi-car rounds be solely focused on finding the ideal route around mobile chicanes I'd prefer the focus be more on actual racing, to the extent possible given the AI. Therefore the rules as they are:
  • Anything clearly advantageous - rearending an AI car under braking, getting bump drafted by AI under acceleration - is strictly forbidden.
  • Anything major that would lead to putting the damaged car in the garage is forbidden, and criteria are given for judging that.
  • Anything where the Driver does not try to avoid the AI (IE, the nose of the Driver's car is the point of impact) is forbidden, and criteria are given for judging that.
So overall the intent is clear, guidelines are given for judging that intent, and "rubbing is racing" - within reason - is allowed. This is, after all, supposed to be fun. We are not Soviet Olympic gymnasts here. It's a game, and if it's not enjoyable, there's no point in playing it.

For what it's worth, "BC5 Administration" is me. I realize I'm in the eye of the proverbial hurricane, of course.
 
Duke wrote -
This is, after all, supposed to be fun. We are not Soviet Olympic gymnasts here. It's a game, and if it's not enjoyable, there's no point in playing it
Click to expand...

True words mate. Now where did i put my joypad and beer. Time to hit the track and enjoy the game 👍

But i know that whatever the BC5 admins run with then thats what i'll accept and i hope everyone else will to.
Click to expand...

Did i say that :)
 
Ah the fun of BC's, now i know why you guys keep coming back for your 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th!!.
:lol:

Personally im with the 100% clean rule for 3 lappers or less, otherwise I'm with Duke's rules for the longer races.
 
Arwin... I see your point mate, fair enough. 100% clean for repeated attempt races of shortish duration and additional time penalties such as Duke's probably is the only arguement free way to hold such a competition. Pity though that the majority of them are hotlap competitions which are so damn boring. Now had you all voted for the oneshot option maybe there would have been a proper race involved.

Looks like I'll settle for GT4 for ghost chasing and rFactor for proper racing.

.... but by then I was thoroughly through with it.
Click to expand...

Hey Duke, told yah no one ever wants to admin a 2nd go lol
 
Wity wrote -
Pity though that the majority of them are hotlap competitions which are so damn boring
Click to expand...

Speak for yourself, horses for courses i guess. I like hotlaps for GT and with time comparisions we do offline i do class is as a good enjoyable form of racing. Always keen to bag GT Wity, and i can't count the number of times you have said 'im not going to play GT anymore and it sucks etc....'. But you can't seem to put series away eh? Must be something that brings you back .......

As far as Catherdral Rocks is concerned, i just want to make sure that on the 'road' section of the course, that guys are running within the white lines/ripples. I'm just concerned with the entry into the second sector where you are taking a right hander just before the split marker. There is a large paved area on the right that could provide a big time advantage if cut. I'm sure guys are keeping two wheels on the tarmac, but just wanted to check.

cheers
 
The rally rules state that all track areas may be used as long as no walls are touched, so I'd presume that's how most drivers are racing it.
 
Yes, while I agree with Rypien that should probably be run that way within the letter of the rules, I think that for simplicity's sake we will consider ALL portions of Cathedral Rocks to be allowable, since it is a rally track.
 
Thanks for the quick reply guys. Looks like as long as wall touches are not part of the run that all else is ok. I'll pass it on to our team 👍
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back