Update 2.10 - Major PP changes

[Johnnypenso]

It's not too bad, I'm sure they will fix it again in the future once somebody has mentioned it to them again.

This must be the joke of the day. The PP system was "mentioned" to PD 1 million times over the last 2 years and this is what they came up with. I don't think the word "fix" translates into Japanese...lol

 

[iainoflo85]

This must be the joke of the day. The PP system was "mentioned" to PD 1 million times over the last 2 years and this is what they came up with. I don't think the word "fix" translates into Japanese...lol

Yes, I agree - they decided to change it this way, so there will be no convincing them to change it back (at least not anytime soon) and even then only some of the numerous cars that have been PP culled will be raised slightly. So get used to it folks, it's going to be around for a while, I reckon.

 

[NjLowrider]

It is fun to watch a v8 vantage pass me 100mph faster on a straight, then spend the rest of the track trying to get by him, while he understeers and fishtails around the whole circuit.

I'm ok with the overpowered FR cars getting the boost, because you gotta work for the win on most tracks.

The problems I have is with cars like the RUF 3400, which was pretty dominant before ,now getting less pp.

 

[Voodoovaj]

I have a test track and then saved various versions of it for different PP levels. This is what I used for tuning rather than using a premade track. I did this for two reasons. 1, I am a bit of an organization freak and 2, I can better compare times across cars at the different PP levels.

With the new changes, I've seen that most of the changed cars didn't become dominant in their new category, but they became simply competitive.

However (I've found so far that), the 3400s, the Speed 12, Nismo 350 Ztune, and the Nissan 370 have become VERY good cars. Now, granted, each of the cars listed needed quite a bit of time to get their tunes right, but still, they are going to be tough cars to beat.

All that being said, in the past couple days I have seen more variation in the races and the races are a little more interesting. So, I'm thinking it's not all that bad.

 

[parabulla]

I'm yet to have found the (hopefully) right measure to take for mygranturismo.net database about all this, do we have an idea of the number of cars affected? I didn't see much (after checking a few Premium cars), but have no idea of the % of all cars (+1100).

It's funny you mention this, that's the first thought I had about the new PP system.

"That's really gonna make alot of work for that site."

 

[GTP_CargoRatt]

With my current problems here, https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=272107, the fact that they are forcing SRF on in the Seasonals now, and this ridiculus PP adjustment....all these factors really put an end to GT5 for me. With the SRF being forced on, that right there makes it too much of an arcade racer for me. And now you have this PP system that is pretty much out of wack, in my opinion, just makes a game I onced loved into a game I am really starting to dispise. Sorry, but those 3 things combined have really put me off and very seriously thinking of shelving the game in favor of other driving/racing games. GT5 as pretty much run its course for me. Time to put it away I'm affraid.

 

[VolkswagenX]

That way it will be more like prologue where driver skill and a whole host of tuning elements will win a race and not just the car you drive. I trust PD and they like to keep us guessing which n my opinion makes it fun. Kaz is a genius and to think he'd implant such a massive change without an inability to regulate it would surprise me to say the least. Every update people have complained and after a few weeks they see the benefit. I don't think this is any different.

Genius? It's not people seeing the benefit. It's the GT community finding ways to make something bad Workable! Credit should go to the community...

 

[alonsof1fan91]

That way it will be more like prologue where driver skill and a whole host of tuning elements will win a race and not just the car you drive.

The Clio/Elise/Amuse tuned dominated 600-750PP rooms back then... Prolouges online gaming was totallly inbalanced.

You basicly had no chance in a Ferrari F430 against a Clio lol

 

[dazdilly75]

The Clio/Elise/Amuse tuned dominated 600-750PP rooms back then... Prolouges online gaming was totallly inbalanced.

You basicly had no chance in a Ferrari F430 against a Clio lol

Yeah I agree that there were a handful of cars which dominated those races in prologue but with the amount of cars available in GT5 this wont be such a problem if they were to implement a similar system for adding tyres to the pp level.

You will always have cars which will dominate but if you have more choice then it can't be a bad thing.

 

[ItsHim]

With my current problems here, https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=272107, t With the SRF being forced on, that right there makes it too much of an arcade racer for me. .

When I look at the top 10 replays of any TT especially on the Nordschleife, it's one big travesty.

PD put cones in the corners for the GT Academy, but ever since the first replays from GT4 surfaced on YouTube, it's been the same story.

Now I stay well clear of any TT related thread - just can't stand the drama. SRF on or off doesn't make the slightest difference - it's a travesty.

Maybe PD fixes this kerb riding and outright grass cutting in future GT games, but since GT4 it's been the same.

So blaming SRF forced to on is a bit too much blame on one tiny inconvenience.

Really, one can punch so many holes in the sim aspect of GT, SRF doesn't really make any difference.

Ultimately it's those players who just cannot stand coming second and throw etiquette out of the window. Treat it as a sim, you'll get a sim. Treat it as a game, you'll end up getting another video game.

 

[Tired Tyres]

Just run stock or tune to BHP and weigh with specified tyres and downforce limited. Ignore PP.

 

[GTP_CargoRatt]

When I look at the top 10 replays of any TT especially on the Nordschleife, it's one big travesty.

PD put cones in the corners for the GT Academy, but ever since the first replays from GT4 surfaced on YouTube, it's been the same story.

Now I stay well clear of any TT related thread - just can't stand the drama. SRF on or off doesn't make the slightest difference - it's a travesty.

Maybe PD fixes this kerb riding and outright grass cutting in future GT games, but since GT4 it's been the same.

So blaming SRF forced to on is a bit too much blame on one tiny inconvenience.

Really, one can punch so many holes in the sim aspect of GT, SRF doesn't really make any difference.

Ultimately it's those players who just cannot stand coming second and throw etiquette out of the window. Treat it as a sim, you'll get a sim. Treat it as a game, you'll end up getting another video game.

I wholeheartedly agree with you on the corner cutting, I can't stand that either. I was not blaming SRF alone, I was just stating that with it being forced on now, that is just another thing, among many, that is really turning me away from GT5.

 

[llNovall]

The other day, I ran an NSX-r and a C63 AMG at Rome Circuit on racing Soft tires at 500pp. The C63 killed the NSXR by 2 seconds/lap with my tunes, but I believe with the right tune and a better driver, the NSXR can over come these higher powered cars if at the least make it a very close race.
So today I tried these 2 cars and a few more at the same 500pp at Rome on Sport Hard tires. The results shown below were very interesting.
Rome: 500pp/ sport hard tires/ tuning allowed/tire wear "on"/real grip.
NSX-R- 1:17.064 (329hp/257tq/1051kg/3.14pw)
C63 - 1:17.053 (547hp/516tq/1048kg/2.53pw)
'07 M3- 1:17.880 (413hp/310tq/1342kg/3.19pw)
'00 Camaro SS- 1:18.043 (604hp/604tq/1269kg/2.06pw)
RX-8- 1:17.507 (377hp/264tq/1085kg/2.83pw)
'06 ZO6 33% detune- 1:17.714 (354hp/452tq/1178kg/3.27pw)
'05 Subaru STI- 1:19.354 (333hp/357tq/1152kg/3.40pw)

As you can see, the times overall are very close excluding the Subaru (I am terrible at tuning on AWD cars, so a better tune could make up some of this defecit) even though the weights and hp were very lopsided. PP system has always been used as an equalizer from one car to the next, and now it seems to be a bit more dialed in to help the heavier cars be more competeitve especially on sport tires by being afforded more power. I too have noticed a much larger variety of cars being used in online rooms and much better/closer race finishes. Also, it seems that driver skill and technique are more important than it used to be. With that said, when a PP restriction is set, some cars need the extra power to make up for the lack of cornering ability and speed that the lighter, lower powered cars are capable of. The NSXR's, CSL's, etc seemed before to cover up and help mediocre drivers seem faster than they were, and when used by skilled drivers were simply unbeatable with any other cars than the speed cars themselves. While, the heavier cars are drastically faster on the straights, they are very difficult to manage in the corners and don't forgive as easy as the NSX on m3. Again, with a good driver who understands throttle control and smooth steering, and using a good tune, the cornering speeds achieved can and will make up for the overall speed defecit especially on a winding track. Thats my 2 cents.

So far, I like the new PP adjustment, especially on sport tires. It definately allows a much more variety on the grid while still allowing a close race. Thats my take so far.

 

[R34EVO9]

I was just doing a test at Laguna seca with my s2000 r1 @500pp and my premium 370 @ 500pp. the r1 was about a second and a half faster before and now they lap about .200 off diffrenece between there lap times ... The z did start to fall off after about lap 7 nd couldn't lap about as fast .

 

[Wild Cobra Z28]

Well, I don't know what to think of these PP changes. Really wrecks my data bases that they have changed.

Anyway, I just found this thread a several minutes ago, and skimmed about the forts 60 posts. Most of my set cars in the garage are still at their PP set by the power limiter. My Shelby GT350R now at 435PP. I think I last raced it in the Seasonal Even 500PP World Classic car series. It was a 455PP car when I bought it online. I have it upgraded with ECU, Intake, Racing Air, Sport Exhaust, Sport catalytic, and Supercharger. Power level to 95.1%. I'm pretty sure it was at 500PP before the change.

My higher power cars appear to have remained at 600PP, 650PP, 700PP, etc.

My Mazda Roadster RS (NC) '07 is now at 373PP with a 91% Power Limiter. Itt has the ECU and Sport Exhaust. I bought it in August, probably for a Special event as well, but don't know what I set it to. I'm guessing I set it up for a 400PP event. It had 394 PP with oil change new, and now has 366PP set to normal at 63.6km. Looks like it lost 30PP.

The Lexus 300 GS 300 '00 I recently bought online dropped from 438 to 408PP.

are the cars slower than before or did just the PP decrease?

I'm guessing that there is no change in the cars performance. I'm guessing this allows lower power cars to compete better in PP limited events, but I haven't tested that yet. Since power to weight ratios haven't changes, unless they changed the game physics too, I think they just adjusted the car ratings.

Light cars vs. heavy cars can only compete well on courses with lots of curves. The previous PP ratings were misleading because of top speed differences.

I think PD is trying to bridge the gap between MR and FR .

I don't think it's a drivetrain issue. I think it's more a weight issue.

My TVR Tuscan Speed 6 ’00 (RM) went from 562PP to 555PP.

 

[Grand Prix]

Here's an idea:

Maybe if lobby hosts set the tire restriction to something lower than Racing Soft, high-powered cars wouldn't dominate so much.

 

[JvM]

Don't be rediculous.

Waiting for an R5 (racing super extra soft) DLC.

 

[llNovall]

Here's an idea:

Maybe if lobby hosts set the tire restriction to something lower than Racing Soft, high-powered cars wouldn't dominate so much.

Exactly!!

 

[cb125tdc]

hi guys, tbh i think what kaz and the crew have done is a good thing,

lets face it, we were stuck in our ways we had our go to cars, and we loved it,

but now kaz has tweaked some stuff and gave us a new challege, more tuning and development work, more tunes to make, hidden gems to find,

i for one am glad that cars like the carlton and the tom chaser are making an appearence online, and not just for drifting.

i think in the end
im happy with it..... although anyone noticed understeer problems,
or cars that want to flip.

was in a room tonight, and my r34 nurb which was fine before the update, now lifts the inside wheels, on hard conering. and a lot of other cars i have had to tweak to limit understeer

oh anyone noticed seasonals seem to be a bit easyer now?

 

[Wild Cobra Z28]

I have been recording the data. I added an entry for the used car lot "PP2". Attached is a snippet of my excel file with before and after PP's for my 3rd online ID.

I will continue to add to the "PP2" column as I play the game. At some point, I will have most or all of the PP changes.

Wow...

I just finished going through the New car lot and comparing it with previous data. I made an excel file, and also saved to CSV format. The columns are PP before, PP with the update, difference, and car. I only listed the cars with a changed value of "advertised" PP. You can copy the below data into notepad, save, then change the extension from .txt to .csv, then load the csv file into excel. You can also paste the text strait into excel and use the "text to column" option.

Data:

PP,PP2,diff,Car
494,473,-21,Alfa Romeo GIULIA TZ2 carrozzata da ZAGATO CN.AR750106 ’65
532,484,-48,Amuse NISMO 380RS Super Leggera
505,484,-21,Aston Martin DB9 Coupe ’06
521,508,-13,Aston Martin V12 Vantage '10
593,534,-59,BLITZ DUNLOP ER34 SKYLINE ’07
456,450,-6,BMW 135i Coupe ’07
458,445,-13,BMW Concept 1 Series tii ’07
488,482,-6,BMW M3 Coupe ’07
513,507,-6,BMW M5 ’08
420,368,-52,BMW Z4 ’03
630,568,-62,Chevrolet 2010 Dale Earnhardt Jr. #88 IMPALA ’10
630,568,-62,Chevrolet 2010 Jeff Gordon #24 IMPALA ’10
630,568,-62,Chevrolet 2010 Jimmie Johnson #48 IMPALA ’10
630,568,-62,Chevrolet 2010 Juan Montoya #42 IMPALA ’10
630,568,-62,Chevrolet 2010 Tony Stewart #14 IMPALA ’10
630,568,-62,Chevrolet 2011 Dale Earnhardt Jr. #88 IMPALA ’11
630,568,-62,Chevrolet 2011 Jeff Gordon #24 IMPALA ’11
630,568,-62,Chevrolet 2011 Jimmie Johnson #48 IMPALA ’11
630,568,-62,Chevrolet 2011 Juan Montoya #42 IMPALA ’11
631,569,-62,Chevrolet 2011 Tony Stewart #14 IMPALA ’11
451,398,-53,Chevrolet Camaro Z28 ’69
456,403,-53,Chevrolet Corvette Convertible (C3) ’69
506,475,-31,Chevrolet Corvette Z06 (C5) ’04
542,528,-14,Chevrolet Corvette Z06 (C6) ’06
490,483,-7,Dodge Challenger R/T ’70
490,438,-52,Dodge Challenger SRT8 '08
588,532,-56,Dodge Challenger SRT8 TC
579,572,-7,Dodge Viper SRT10 ACR ’08
522,520,-2,Ferrari F40 ’92
630,568,-62,Ford 2010 AJ Allmendinger #43 FORD FUSION
630,568,-62,Ford 2010 Carl Edwards #99 FORD FUSION
630,568,-62,Ford 2011 AJ Allmendinger #43 FORD FUSION
630,568,-62,Ford 2011 Carl Edwards #99 FORD FUSION
453,423,-30,Ford Mustang Mach 1 ’71
443,390,-53,Ford Mustang V8 GT Coupe Premium ’07
500,471,-29,Gran Turismo Gran Turismo 350Z RS
470,469,-1,Gran Turismo PDI RACING KART 100
470,469,-1,Gran Turismo RACING KART 100
391,390,-1,Gran Turismo RACING KART Jr.
544,521,-23,Grand Touring Garage 1970 Ford Mustang Trans-Cammer
553,510,-43,High End Performance G37
424,418,-6,Honda S2000 ’06
590,583,-7,Honda Weider HSV-010 '11
459,420,-39,Infiniti Coupe Concept ’06
447,407,-40,Infiniti G35 Coupe ’06
459,452,-7,Isuzu 4200R Concept ’89
442,402,-40,Jaguar XK Coupe Luxury ’07
512,469,-43,Jaguar XKR Coupe ’10
580,573,-7,Lexus BANDAI DIREZZA SC430 ’06
589,583,-6,Lexus DENSO DUNLOP SARD SC430 ’08
583,576,-7,Lexus ENEOS SC430 ’08
510,469,-41,Lexus IS F ’07
573,550,-23,Lexus IS F Racing Concept ’08
589,583,-6,Lexus PETRONAS TOM’S SC430 ’08
520,489,-31,Lexus Weds Sport IS350 ’08
434,428,-6,Mazda éfini RX-7 Type R (FD) ’91
358,312,-46,Mazda Eunos Roadster (NA Special Package) ’89
351,302,-49,Mazda Eunos Roadster J-Limited (NA) ’91
391,394,3,Mazda Roadster RS (NC) ’07
477,439,-38,Mazda Roadster TC
407,354,-53,Mazda RX-7 GT-X (FC) ’90
466,460,-6,Mazda RX-7 Spirit R Type A (FD) ’02
588,581,-7,Mazda RX-7 TC
429,423,-6,Mazda RX-8 Type S ’07
402,346,-56,Mercedes-Benz 300 SL Coupe ’54
500,457,-43,Mercedes-Benz C 63 AMG ’08
509,503,-6,Mercedes-Benz SL 55 AMG (R230) ’02
595,588,-7,Nissan Calsonic IMPUL GT-R (SUPER GT) ’08
462,432,-30,Nissan Fairlady Z (Z34) ’08
440,399,-41,Nissan Fairlady Z 300ZX TT 2seater (Z32) ’89
456,426,-30,Nissan Fairlady Z Version S (Z33) ’07
542,547,5,Nissan GT-R GT Academy '12
592,585,-7,Nissan MOTUL AUTECH GT-R ’08
392,341,-51,Nissan SILVIA K’s Dia Selection (S13) ’90
433,380,-53,Nissan SILVIA spec-R AERO (S15) ’02
458,419,-39,Nissan SKYLINE Coupe 370GT Type SP ’07
450,421,-29,Nissan SKYLINE Sedan 350GT Type SP ’06
587,580,-7,Nissan WOODONE ADVAN Clarion GT-R ’08
595,588,-7,Nissan XANAVI NISMO GT-R ’08
609,602,-7,Nissan XANAVI NISMO Z ’06
595,588,-7,Nissan YellowHat YMS TOMICA GT-R ’08
697,690,-7,Peugeot 908 HDi FAP – Team Oreca Matmut ’10
697,690,-7,Peugeot 908 HDi FAP – Team Peugeot Total ’10
517,510,-7,RE Amemiya Amemiya AsparaDrink RX7 ’06
406,379,-27,Scion FR-S '12
406,379,-27,Subaru BRZ S '12
326,319,-7,Suzuki Cappuccino (EA11R) ’91
339,333,-6,Suzuki Cappuccino (EA21R) ’95
630,568,-62,Toyota 2010 Brian Vickers #83 CAMRY
630,568,-62,Toyota 2010 Denny Hamlin #11 CAMRY
630,568,-62,Toyota 2010 Joey Logano #20 CAMRY
630,568,-62,Toyota 2010 Kyle Busch #18 CAMRY
630,568,-62,Toyota 2011 Brian Vickers #83 CAMRY
630,568,-62,Toyota 2011 Denny Hamlin #11 CAMRY
630,568,-62,Toyota 2011 Joey Logano #20 CAMRY
630,568,-62,Toyota 2011 Kyle Busch #18 CAMRY
406,379,-27,Toyota 86 GT '12
591,568,-23,Toyota Castrol TOM’S SUPRA ’97
437,425,-12,Toyota FT-86 Concept ’09
476,463,-13,Toyota FT-86 G SPORTS Concept ’10
402,375,-27,Toyota FT-86 II Concept ’11
429,374,-55,Toyota SUPRA 3.0GT Turbo A ’88
579,547,-32,Toyota YellowHat YMS Supra ’05
498,491,-7,TVR Tamora ’02
501,494,-7,TVR Tuscan Speed 6 ’00
219,254,35,Volkswagen 1200 '66
227,224,-3,Volkswagen Kubelwagen typ82 ’44
215,211,-4,Volkswagen typ2(T1) SambaBus ’62

 

[JohnScoonsBeard]

Does the difference in pp (version 2.09 vs 2.10) stay the same for the cars when fully modded?

 

[Wild Cobra Z28]

Does the difference in pp (version 2.09 vs 2.10) stay the same for the cars when fully modded?

I don't know. Maybe someone else does. I had started compiling how many PP each mod adds. PP seems to be cumulative with mods, with rounding errors of course.

It seems to me that most PP additions will remain the same. For example, an oil change (+5%) still adds 7PP to most cars. I expect all mods will retain the same additive PP.

I just started my primary ID, and buying cars back. I lost a few days because of the error, i reloaded a prior save thinking my file was messed up. Looking at the Volkswagen Golf I GTI '76 that I just repurchased, the PP's increases of it are the same. I then looked at the Nissan SKYLINE Sedan 350GT-8 ’02, which decreased by 21PP with the update. The ECU upgrade went from 8 to 7 PP as did the SemiRacing exhaust upgrade. The Racing exhaust went from 11 to 10PP. In this case, I think the power increase is the same and that it is just rounding errors in computing the PP.

People shouldn't be too concerned about the PP changes in my opinion. Reducing a car's PP didn't reduce its performance. Only its performance rating. If you have a PP limited race, and like a car that was reduce, then that means you can now add more perforce to the car for that race!

 

[Chrunch Houston]

If you host check here.

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=272340

I have banned FR cars from ny room,

 

[Zuel]

I have been recording the data. I added an entry for the used car lot "PP2". Attached is a snippet of my excel file with before and after PP's for my 3rd online ID.

I will continue to add to the "PP2" column as I play the game. At some point, I will have most or all of the PP changes.

GREAT WORK!!

Wow...

I just finished going through the New car lot and comparing it with previous data. I made an excel file, and also saved to CSV format. The columns are PP before, PP with the update, difference, and car. I only listed the cars with a changed value of "advertised" PP. You can copy the below data into notepad, save, then change the extension from .txt to .csv, then load the csv file into excel. You can also paste the text strait into excel and use the "text to column" option.

SNIP

NICE!!!

I don't know. Maybe someone else does. I had started compiling how many PP each mod adds. PP seems to be cumulative with mods, with rounding errors of course.

It seems to me that most PP additions will remain the same. For example, an oil change (+5%) still adds 7PP to most cars. I expect all mods will retain the same additive PP.

I just started my primary ID, and buying cars back. I lost a few days because of the error, i reloaded a prior save thinking my file was messed up. Looking at the Volkswagen Golf I GTI '76 that I just repurchased, the PP's increases of it are the same. I then looked at the Nissan SKYLINE Sedan 350GT-8 ’02, which decreased by 21PP with the update. The ECU upgrade went from 8 to 7 PP as did the SemiRacing exhaust upgrade. The Racing exhaust went from 11 to 10PP. In this case, I think the power increase is the same and that it is just rounding errors in computing the PP.

People shouldn't be too concerned about the PP changes in my opinion. Reducing a car's PP didn't reduce its performance. Only its performance rating. If you have a PP limited race, and like a car that was reduce, then that means you can now add more perforce to the car for that race!

People are up in arms because the pp system changed which was a great thing to be done. Also their up in arms that the pp system mad FR cars faster, before I got on I must point out a few things that are being done. 1ST.Some of us is adding parts maxing out the cars!!!!! 2nd. Using the power limiter to bring that car to a desired pp number, as in lowering the power of a stage 3 motor to meet a pp number. Instead of crying about this or that try changing the way you build your cars, as in power adders. The pp system has changed everything and the reason why it was changed was because of us. We asked for it from the jump. When the first edition of GT 5 came out and people cried “WHY DON’T WE HAVE THE POWER LIMITER from GT 5P!!!”

Kaz unlocked the limiter, and then everyone went nuts. Lower the power more torque means more speed. Right... Wrong. The reason why the pp system was refined was because of the stage 3 junkies and I call them. Which I was a part of, not anymore due to I see how the pp system really work. If some of you took the time to rethink the way you add parts tom see what will make the car perform the best then you should get the best out of that car. Adding a stage to every car is not the way to go anymore. It’s been that way since the 2.06 update and this update reinforces that. I have runed almost every FR in my garage and I had no one crying about its too fast. Due to I don’t have a flipping STAGE 3 MOTOR MOD ON EVERY CAR!!! If you try step tuning the motor and seeing which stage motor mod works best at 100% power. If not people are still going to complain or we’ll find another way around.

REMEMBER WE’RE THE ONE’S THAT CAUSED THE PP CHANGE NOT PD OR KAZ!! DUE TO THE WAY WE TUNED OUR CARS BEFORE AND NOW CAUSED THIS CHANGE!! SO STOP COMPLAINING DEAL WITH IT!! YOU WANTED A SIM YOU GOT IT!!

Does the difference in pp (version 2.09 vs 2.10) stay the same for the cars when fully modded?

No..

 

[MonGnoM]

are the cars slower than before or is it just the pp what changed?

 

[J91patriz]

GREAT WORK!!


NICE!!!



People are up in arms because the pp system changed which was a great thing to be done. Also their up in arms that the pp system mad FR cars faster, before I got on I must point out a few things that are being done. 1ST.Some of us is adding parts maxing out the cars!!!!! 2nd. Using the power limiter to bring that car to a desired pp number, as in lowering the power of a stage 3 motor to meet a pp number. Instead of crying about this or that try changing the way you build your cars, as in power adders. The pp system has changed everything and the reason why it was changed was because of us. We asked for it from the jump. When the first edition of GT 5 came out and people cried “WHY DON’T WE HAVE THE POWER LIMITER from GT 5P!!!”

Kaz unlocked the limiter, and then everyone went nuts. Lower the power more torque means more speed. Right... Wrong. The reason why the pp system was refined was because of the stage 3 junkies and I call them. Which I was a part of, not anymore due to I see how the pp system really work. If some of you took the time to rethink the way you add parts tom see what will make the car perform the best then you should get the best out of that car. Adding a stage to every car is not the way to go anymore. It’s been that way since the 2.06 update and this update reinforces that. I have runed almost every FR in my garage and I had no one crying about its too fast. Due to I don’t have a flipping STAGE 3 MOTOR MOD ON EVERY CAR!!! If you try step tuning the motor and seeing which stage motor mod works best at 100% power. If not people are still going to complain or we’ll find another way around.

REMEMBER WE’RE THE ONE’S THAT CAUSED THE PP CHANGE NOT PD OR KAZ!! DUE TO THE WAY WE TUNED OUR CARS BEFORE AND NOW CAUSED THIS CHANGE!! SO STOP COMPLAINING DEAL WITH IT!! YOU WANTED A SIM YOU GOT IT!!

And a pp overhaul was indeed necessary. I haven't tested the new system yet, so obviously I can't judge the outcome of the changes that have been implemented.
I wasn't concerned about the full tune mode, but it seems hilarious people were looking to find a way to went nuts on their cars and then simply apply the power limiter. But that's simply the fast way for tuning so it does not come as a surprise.
But my reason for calling for a substantial modification of the system was to balance cars that can be reasonably classified in the same group. I didn't find acceptable having (especially at 550 pp) cars with similar characteristics in terms of their structure and handling but with great differences in terms of power or weight.

 

[Spagetti69]

REMEMBER WE’RE THE ONE’S THAT CAUSED THE PP CHANGE NOT PD OR KAZ!! DUE TO THE WAY WE TUNED OUR CARS BEFORE AND NOW CAUSED THIS CHANGE!! SO STOP COMPLAINING DEAL WITH IT!! YOU WANTED A SIM YOU GOT IT!!

Blaming users who are just working within the parameters of the game that PD created doesn't excuse PD IMHO.
Obviously PD aren't intentionally trying to annoy people and want to improve the experience. So they deserve some slack.

However the "Evolution" of the game, if we can call it that is a issue that the users are in no way responsible.

Imagine making changes to your cars ( some irreversible ). Then future patches have a negative effect on your pre patch changes. Quite an annoyance I would imagine.

Just my opinion.

 

[Wild Cobra Z28]

Imagine making changes to your cars ( some irreversible ). Then future patches have a negative effect on your pre patch changes. Quite an annoyance I would imagine.

Just my opinion.

I have very few cars that I have cut weight from, or modded with the NA engine tunes. I like keeping the cars as original as possible. Only a few have weight reductions or NA tunes. This change hasn't hurt me except for correcting the database I have been painstakingly making.

I've been up all night making additions in a second PP column, and finding the difference in cars I know I haven't changed since entering in my database. I will post a bit later, what I have so far, for car PP changes. Some of the changes look rather excessive. The Aston Martin DB7 Vantage Coupe '00 for example has a -56 PP change. The USA Muscle era cars range from about -56 to -59. The NASCARs are at a -61. A surprise is the Lister Storm V12 race car at -64. The Eunos/Miatas are about -49.

 

[Johnnypenso]

And a pp overhaul was indeed necessary. I haven't tested the new system yet, so obviously I can't judge the outcome of the changes that have been implemented.
I wasn't concerned about the full tune mode, but it seems hilarious people were looking to find a way to went nuts on their cars and then simply apply the power limiter. But that's simply the fast way for tuning so it does not come as a surprise.
But my reason for calling for a substantial modification of the system was to balance cars that can be reasonably classified in the same group. I didn't find acceptable having (especially at 550 pp) cars with similar characteristics in terms of their structure and handling but with great differences in terms of power or weight.

I must be missing something. I don't see how anything that worked pre-2.10 won't still work. The parameters of tuniing haven't changed an iota. All that has happened is some FR's got wild boosts in power and are now unbeatable online, at least on RS tires. So if as you said you wanted more balance to cars reasonably in the same group you actually got the opposite of that.

 

[Tornado]

1ST.Some of us is adding parts maxing out the cars!!!!! 2nd. Using the power limiter to bring that car to a desired pp number, as in lowering the power of a stage 3 motor to meet a pp number. Instead of crying about this or that try changing the way you build your cars, as in power adders.

I don't understand how this PP change changes that tuning philosophy!!!!! Especially not when not all of the cars have changed!!!! You can still do that with all of your cars, and for that matter massive usage of the power limiter before this patch already made your car slower than if you tuned them more naturally!!!!

REMEMBER WE’RE THE ONE’S THAT CAUSED THE PP CHANGE NOT PD OR KAZ!! DUE TO THE WAY WE TUNED OUR CARS BEFORE AND NOW CAUSED THIS CHANGE!! SO STOP COMPLAINING DEAL WITH IT!! YOU WANTED A SIM YOU GOT IT!!

I WASN'T AWARE THAT WE WERE THE ONES WHO DESIGNED THE PATCHES!!! I'LL KEEP THAT IN MIND THE NEXT TIME PD MAKE MASSIVE CHANGES TO THE GAME THAT COMPLETELY DISRUPT HOW PEOPLE PLAY IT!!!

I have very few cars that I have cut weight from, or modded with the NA engine tunes. I like keeping the cars as original as possible. Only a few have weight reductions or NA tunes. This change hasn't hurt me except for correcting the database I have been painstakingly making.

I have to imagine that the majority of people weren't that concerned with keeping their cars close to stock however. If not for horsepower adders then probably for weight. I have several hundred cars that were set up for certain PP levels; and now the numbers are all over the map even though the cars drive the same.