ios-personmd-notifications md-help-circle

Profile

  • Guest
    medal 0
  • Posts: 21
  • Post Likes: 3761

Notifications

  • No Unread Notifications

Official
ADVANCE NOTICE: Car development & Setup changes - coming soon

md-lock
This topic has been closed by the moderator José Trujillo
angle-double-left ios-arrow-back 1 2 3 4 ios-arrow-forward angle-double-right
medal 6674 FOUNDER & WEB DEV
104 days ago (Last edited by Jack Basford 104 days ago)
This is an advance notice of changes scheduled to arrive with a future update.

Alongside the next app update release will come some major revisions to the way car development and car setup works in iGP Manager. Values will be scaled by tier, to prevent “maxed out” car designs and to increase the challenge of car setup in Elite.

The new ranges will be as follows:

Rookie
  • 50 Design cap (no change)
  • 1-20 Setup value range (was 1-50)

Pro
  • 100 Design cap (was 80)
  • 1-50 Setup value range (no change)

Elite
  • 200 Design cap (was 100)
  • 1-100 Setup value range (was 1-50)

As a result of these changes, all lap records will be reset when the update is released. For the initial release, a design of 200 points will be identical to the old maximum rating of 100. This means the gap between teams in all tiers in performance will effectively be halved, increasing closeness of the racing across all tiers and reducing the gap across the field.

To counter the halving of the performance gap, we may make several modifications to the scaling of the impacts before the release. We are able to adjust these impacts quickly if necessary, and will be monitoring feedback closely after release as well.
md-quotelink
medal 9012
104 days ago
What does setup value range mean?
md-quotelink
medal 6674 FOUNDER & WEB DEV
104 days ago
Ben
What does setup value range mean?

Ride height and wing level. I just noticed typos in my post, thanks to you bringing my attention to this! I have corrected the values now.
md-quotelink
medal 9943
104 days ago
I think there is a contradiction in what you are going to do.

You increase the challenge of car setup increasing the design cap and then you halve the challenge of car set up scaling 1-100 performance in the 1-200 range. So, I hope you will adjust the scaling of the impacts to have the performace differences at least like now.

md-quotelink
medal 9593
104 days ago

Jack
Ben
What does setup value range mean?

Ride height and wing level. I just noticed typos in my post, thanks to you bringing my attention to this! I have corrected the values now.


Im curious into what will this change? As I don’t think I have set up my car to be any higher then 28 and that was in Monaco 

md-quotelink
medal 6674 FOUNDER & WEB DEV
104 days ago
Jim

Im curious into what will this change? As I don’t think I have set up my car to be any higher then 28 and that was in Monaco

It will get harder to hit the perfect setup manually, so it should be more of a challenge for Pro and Elite managers. I have been told that they find it predictably easy to hit the ideal setup without any effort right now, so the changes will be aimed at increasing the challenge.

Joao
I think there is a contradiction in what you are going to do.

You increase the challenge of car setup increasing the design cap and then you halve the challenge of car set up scaling 1-100 performance in the 1-200 range. So, I hope you will adjust the scaling of the impacts to have the performace differences at least like now.


Sorry, I don't understand your meaning.
md-quotelink
medal 9593
104 days ago

Jack
Jim

Im curious into what will this change? As I don’t think I have set up my car to be any higher then 28 and that was in Monaco

It will get harder to hit the perfect setup manually, so it should be more of a challenge for Pro and Elite managers. I have been told that they find it predictably easy to hit the ideal setup without any effort right now, so the changes will be aimed at increasing the challenge.

Joao
I think there is a contradiction in what you are going to do.

You increase the challenge of car setup increasing the design cap and then you halve the challenge of car set up scaling 1-100 performance in the 1-200 range. So, I hope you will adjust the scaling of the impacts to have the performace differences at least like now.


Sorry, I don't understand your meaning.

It’s predictably easy to hit the idea setup because it doesn’t change season to season 


Italy is firm 12/1 and it has been that every single season 
Monaco soft 22/20 I could list all the tracks 

md-quotelink
medal 9943
104 days ago

Jack
I think there is a contradiction in what you are going to do.

You increase the challenge of car setup increasing the design cap and then you halve the challenge of car set up scaling 1-100 performance in the 1-200 range. So, I hope you will adjust the scaling of the impacts to have the performace differences at least like now.


Sorry, I don't understand your meaning.



Sorry, maybe it's my english.

By changing the maximum design to 200, the importance of car development increases but halving the performance gap reduces its impact and therefore car development is less relevant than now.

I mean, the players want the development to have more importance to try to avoid the random qualification and you make, by halving the performance gap, the qualification even more random than now.
md-quotelink
medal 8517
104 days ago
So will the setups still be the same from season to season on track to track or change every season because I’m ok with making a document of all the setups if it is the same every season 
md-quotelink
medal 10000
104 days ago
Thanks for all your effort to make this game even better, but I think you went in the wrong direction this time. 

1st changing the ideal setup as described is an one-off change where all players will eventually find the ideal setup in the future as fast as now. They may to spend a couple of tokens on the ideal setup perhaps, but it is essentially just a process of shifting from point A to point B.  

2ndly I agree with Joao's post about halving the performance of each DP assigned. I think it will diminish car design or shifting it from all being more equal at the start of the season to a bigger difference in the end. I also think that research should be re-evaluated in light of this, because it will make lower lvl teams even more competitive, while higher lvl teams have a research disadvantage and now DP account for even less. And I think it voids the purpose of the game if a lvl 12 may beat a lvl 20 in the future. 

Well that are my thoughts on the proposed update and how I understand they will affect the future gameplay. If I misunderstood sth please feel free to correct me.
md-quotelink
medal 9709
104 days ago
Agreed, unless set up each year differs we will end up in same place and the car development will just give those with better CDs more advantage.
Qualifying is still a complete lottery.

Really needed a change in car setup (instead of just ride height and wing maybe have 3 attributes etc)

Good to see some effort to change the area that really needs updating but I feel this is just change for the sake of change

Also find it always hilarious that my driver with less experience has been faster than the ones with 20 experience for the last 5 seasons (with exact some stats), maybe another area to look at
md-quotelink
medal 6546
104 days ago
This is a very well balanced game as it is, no need to change design in my opinion. In my league every season is different in terms of winners, which is very good. Setup is no challenge but it isn’t designed to be that. Could you not add supplier bonus system or something like that to make it harder to get the best design? Make suppliers upgrade or downgrade after some races?
md-quotelink
medal 6674 FOUNDER & WEB DEV
104 days ago (Last edited by Jack Basford 104 days ago)
Joao
I mean, the players want the development to have more importance to try to avoid the random qualification and you make, by halving the performance gap, the qualification even more random than now.

I fully understand this concern. We will look at rebalancing impacts before and after the update as well. It will give us the perfect opportunity to focus on it. That said, I don't fully agree with the assessment, at least when it comes to Elite people are reaching 100 in design, in all key areas, well before the end of the season. It's literally impossible for it to be any closer than this, and it's a big part of the "lottery" of qualifying. The new scale and update will guarantee that everyone has a different design level, therefore there will actually be more difference toward the end of a season, not less, even when factoring in smaller performance gaps between levels.

Perhaps I should give more context as to why this change is being made as well. With the update will also come the option for custom season lengths (15-22 races). Unless we make this change, the problem I described above would get even worse, in a league with 22 races around a third of the entire season would be spent with all cars with identical / maxed out designs. By switching to the scale of 1-200 in design nobody will hit maximum performance even by the end of the season.

I can see from some of the replies that people think changing these values is all we planned for the update. Actually, these changes are a footnote on the update. This is not even a fraction of what is coming! It's just the part we need to warn you about in advance. :)

For anyone surprised by this change - I put it to a poll on Twitter some weeks ago, and the overwhelming majority voted to increase the design cap to 200. We're trying to give as much notice as possible. We asked first if people wanted it, they said yes, now we're helping everyone to plan in advance and voice their opinions so we can address them and make it go smoothly.
md-quotelink
medal 7994
104 days ago (Last edited by Lai Yong Liang 104 days ago)
Hi Sir Jack Basford, It's actually not possible for elite teams to reached 200 design caps in all "Big 4" Acceleration, Braking, Downforce & Handling in just 15 races. So I think iGP Manager development team should focus on others parts like adding pit crew staff & tyres suppliers variation. 
1) New Staff: Pit Crews Manager

Something like the real F1 where the pit crews boxing time might affect the race of the team. Right now the pit time is pretty much standardised for all teams, it might be great if different teams have different pitting time due to the skills and different level of the pit crews.

2) Tyres Supplier Varation

Example:

2 Choose 1 for durability (A or B):

A. Goodyear could offer significant SS & S durability, but at a sacrifice for speed.

B. Bridgestone could offer significant M & H durability, but at a sacrifice for speed.

2 Choose 1 for speed (C or D):

C. Pirelli could offer significant SS & S speed, but at a sacrifice for durability.

D. Dunlop could offer significant M & H speed, but at a sacrifice for durability.

2 Choose 1 for wet weather tyre (E or F):

E. Michelin could offer significant wet weather tyre (Inter & Wet) speed, but at a sacrifice for durability.

F. Yokohama could offer significant wet weather tyre (Inter & Wet) durability, but at a sacrifice for speed.

So we can choose 3 supplies in all six for significant speed or durability.




md-quotelink
medal 9706
104 days ago
In my opinion, and I think I may have mentioned this in the previous post discussing the next priority (so apologies if anyone is reading my thoughts again!) the ideal set up should be removed, and replaced with a range of car set ups that can work (I still remember the 2010 Italian Grand Prix, whereby McLaren ran Button and Hamilton on vastly different downforce/wing set ups, and yet the net lap times produced were identical!)

This removal of the ideal set up would also counter the inevitable: optimum set up found, and then pasted on the internet for future races, removing the challenge altogether.

Another tweak, that will likely have to be made in light of the higher Design Caps, is that the Suppliers effects will have to increase accordingly. As the Suppliers currently stand, I personally feel that the effect's could be stronger, adding more of a challenge to the seasoned and upcoming players. I think they may have to be tripled from current values (so Murk would become +30 ACC/-18 FE, effectively +15 ACC/-9 FE in today's money :P)

And lastly, 'Gear Ratios' as an extra parameter would really keep the challenge of car set up going for seasons on end! Again, no ideal set up for 'Gear Ratios', instead a range of set ups which can produce competitive lap times. Do you choose higher gear ratio for higher top speeds, to overtake down the long straights? Or do you go for lower gear ratios for a more optimum lap time, but potentially be a sitting duck down the long straights in the race?

And of course, a net car stats display to show the resultant base stats! 3 main car base stats: 'Top Speed', '0 - 200 kph' and 'Cornering G' ;-)
md-quotelink
medal 6674 FOUNDER & WEB DEV
104 days ago
Peter
As the Suppliers currently stand, I personally feel that the effect's could be stronger, adding more of a challenge to the seasoned and upcoming players. I think they may have to be tripled from current values

What about making them a percentage instead? Tripling hard-coded values will make Rookie a bit silly, as they'd hit max designs quickly.

Peter

a range of set ups which can produce competitive lap times.

That's already the intention of the current system, based on the driver levels. The problem many people encounter is within a league they all have roughly the same level, especially at your level Peter, I bet you all have 20 stats on everything, so the setups become flat and stop changing. The range of change is also quite small when the setup scale of 1-50 is in place, meaning there is little variation.

Other than making it completely random, I'm not sure if there is a way to make it different every season for every driver, but we've tried to make the values somewhat realistic in terms of simulation. Do we throw that out of the window too? There are other factors we could implement to a greater degree, such as track temperature, to impact setups. Off the top of my head, there aren't many other things we could incorporate to make it unpredictable while keeping it somewhat realistic.
md-quotelink
medal 7576
104 days ago
Hi Jack, is the goal of this installation only to retrieve data for fuel and tire wear, or does it affect the ranking round or race? Even if I save my quick lap settings, I cannot save the quick lap setting when I receive the settings with the token! Do the slopes on the actual track also apply to the game? I have a lot of questions. Excitedly waiting for the update :) thank u
md-quotelink
medal 6546
104 days ago (Last edited by You Dog 104 days ago)
Other factors you could implement: track temperature, air temp and its effect on engine degredation, effect of acceleration, fuel load and driver weight on tracks like Belgium (uphill and downhill) supplier upgrades, driver weight actually having an impact, bigger effect of cooling on engine degredation, driver mental health, drivers having favourite tracks, i can name some more if you want to.

Some things like driver weight, cooling, already exist, to no effect today, tweak those 
md-quotelink
medal 10000
104 days ago (Last edited by Johnny Cooper 104 days ago)
I'm all for a higher design cap. I'm just against halving the effect each point has. I know that this will be a bigger effort to create (code), but it would mean we could keep the present balance of what a design point is worth. We will probably also have a bit slower car at the start of the season and a slightly faster one when everything is maxed out, if you want to balance it around the present lap times, but 1 DP would still be worth 1 DP. 
Another point Jack mentioned in a post is concerning tyre temperatures. This would be indeed a valuable addition if tyre overheating would cost more in lap time and maybe even tyre degradation. Because as it is now, you can push softs halfway in the read without a serious enough penalty imo. 
md-quotelink
medal 9706
104 days ago
Jack
Peter

a range of set ups which can produce competitive lap times.

That's already the intention of the current system, based on the driver levels. The problem many people encounter is within a league they all have roughly the same level, especially at your level Peter, I bet you all have 20 stats on everything, so the setups become flat and stop changing. The range of change is also quite small when the setup scale of 1-50 is in place, meaning there is little variation.


The current range, through the set up parameters, does not penalise the wrong set up enough though. I have just run a few test laps to highlight this:


Firm 1/1 still gets very competitive lap times. In reality, it should be c. +7.00s/lap with that Monza-esque set up.

With more of a penalty in place for the wrong set ups, and implementing a range of set ups that can be competitive (for example, the range at Monaco could be 22/20 to 32/30 for usable set ups (within 0.200s/lap of the peak) and with that said peak falling somewhere in that range, but most importantly, the 'ideal set up' message should not show up) managers would then have to analyse Practice times carefully, as they do with lap time telemetry in real life.

The peak set up, should also not fall exactly in the middle of the ideal set up range (it would then be far too easy to work out) but rather somewhere in the range, that only the iGP DEVs will know ;)
md-quotelink
angle-double-left ios-arrow-back 1 2 3 4 ios-arrow-forward angle-double-right

You must be logged in to post a reply.