Suggested

Car setups

One thing this game is absolutely begging for is more car setup parameters.

This would absolutely make the racing much more interesting, particularly in wet/dry race situations.

Such as Craig? Suggest

Front/Rear wing angle ( high med low )
Front/Rear tyre pressure ( high med low )
Ride height ( high med low )
Gear Ratios ( high med low )
Front/Rear Brake bias ( fore/mid/aft )
Ballast ( fore/mid/aft )

everyone would then need more practice laps, but I do think gear ratios and tire pressure should be added.. like higher pressure means better straight speed but lower pressure means better cornering. likewise, gears for acceleration, or speed, or the middle of both, etc, but it should be numbered not high/med/low, and as I say would need more practice laps, and ideal setups could exist in varying setups.. ie, there may be 3 diff setups that are ideal per track..

I agree with these 3, but i think "adding these" would change so much in the game that it would be easier to write a completely new igp manager...

And if u mean "balance" instead of "ballast" i agree with 4.
Ballast is for losers who have no business being in the division they are in.
Ride height is already a setting and (i think) Tyre pressure is coherent to tyre type. Hards are called hards because they are hard
Softs are called softs because they are soft....

This game works mostly for its simplicity.... Bo is right, this many changes would mean a full revamping of the game. 

Bo, you made two mistakes there.

Ballast is used to balance a cars weight in reality.

Also, all tyres can be pressured differently. If a Tyre is HARD, it can still have a pressure of 18 (which afaik, is quite low), or much higher, like 26+, they are still hard COMPOUNDS, but in reality.. lower pressures means more of the tyres are on the track, which means better cornering (perhaps better traction too?), with higher pressures, less of the tyre is on the ground, so less friction, which i beleive = more speed? not sure on that, but Tyre Pressures are different from Tyre Compounds.

I do agree, these changes would require a major revamp, but, suggestions are for the future, so surely saying "this might require a lot of effort someday" would rule out 99% of suggestions...?

Personally i feel suggestions is about giving designers of the game ideas, which the community may like, and which they can then think about if they wish to implement, so saying an idea is bad because "it might take a lot to implement" is silly.

As a player, ideas should be liked/disliked based off how good they are.
For devs, im sure its more about desire to implement vs time required, but neither of that is our concern as players surely.. all players want is a good game to become better. (so to downvote an idea because it would "take too long" is wrong, no?)

just my POV, and this message is spam, so i apologise for that, I just disagree when people say "oh this idea sucks because apples are green and the sky is blue". Constructive criticism is helpful, stating that ideas take a lot of time to implement so we shouldent suggest anything is just adding 2+2 and getting 5 in my opinion..

So Stu, thanx for your threatening hatemail in my inbox.
Tho im not going to change due to you either misinterpreting or simply not appreciating criticism.
Im really sorry u cant take a hit and u want everyone to tell u lies and how great your ideas are.
I just prefer u keep ur threats out my inbox and turn it into constructive criticism like (i hope) u tried to do here....
That said....


Ok. Thnx. I thought compounds were automatically coherent to higher and lower pressures.
Couldnt really find anything on it so ill accept you are right on the subject. (For now)

I know weights are used in racing to create offset balances, but since ballast is already used in this game as a term.....
I said change ballast to balance n i agree.

Im not downtalking any idea due to time it might take to reprogram.
I thought i was clear but u misinterpret (again)
I am totally onboard for the 3 (4) points i took out.
The other two, mwah or nah.

But i understand from your threat in my inbox you were not out to construct anything here, Stu. Just out to get me.
Goodluck with that.

Heheheh, if you were playing circa 2014 before building an app and redesigning the game was even a thought... :)

Search the internet hard enough and you may find some posts with screenshots.

I love how you reply to me, and only me :) I must be so special in your heart. I only reply and post here because i want the game to be better, not deal with petty people like you, but you respond, i just wish you responded constructivly rather than insultingly, even when i am responding with a similar reply.. at least i am still adding to the conversation at large (or trying to).. you just go "no, this sucks" in a rather sarcastic way. (ie,, like "thats so great, like everything else you say").. you dont add to the conversation about the idea.


As for my PM to you.. telling you to be to the point and cut out the insulting you add into your posts.. i would hardly call that hatemail..

As for threatening, you read my words how you wish, i read yours how i wish.. personally i think you need a timeout like a toddler because you cant get over the fact i told you to back off being aggressive and insulting towards me.

As for my message, i believe the actual wording was.. "i warn you... if you dont stop getting aggressive at me, i can also be petty, and i can be a lot more pettier than you".. it was me trying to get you to stop, because i know if i get annoyed, i wont stop, and ill be even worse than you are.

Apologies to all the other people reading this, i did try to sort it out in private, but bo doesnt play privately, he has to throw his toys out of the pram in public.

RE:- not downtalking ideas.. if you go back to your "great" ideas reply... you suggested everything i say, is a bad idea.

IF you dont like an idea of anyone.. i will say it again.. give constructive criticism.. ie.. "i dont like this idea, because this..."

I could respond to every post you ever wrote and say "great" words man ...but then i would be like you replying to every "suggestion" ive either replied to or made myself.. that is not criticism, either positive, or negative.. in fact its a very polite way of trolling someone imho.

Regarding tire pressures.. please use the link below to view an example of how tire pressures change a tire in real life.

http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/webprojects2003/hancock/pressure.html


As you can see in the diagram, in a higher pressure tire, the edges lift off the ground, in lower pressure, the tire edges are more flatter to the ground, exactly as i stated in my post. I hope that absolves your confusion.

I like this game for its rather simple approach. 
We all need to take what we read here with a grain of salt.... 

This is a rather simple or complex game to play pending on your ability to make sense of all the clutter. From league chat to forums like this one, everyone has an opinion and/or pov... 
If you feel the need to always correct....do so in a respectful manner or at the very least the way you would be receptive if you were the one being corrected.  

I've been playing this game for a few months now, and have yet to find a guide that fully covers every aspect the devs may be thinking as they go along adding updates and/or patches. The fact they find the need to do so it says they are ok being wrong and twice as ok at making it right. 

I raced for over 13 years from hit to pass to National stock....The development aspect has completely change for the good of the industry. One thing I can tell you is the only bad information/lead out there is the one you don't do your due diligence prior to executing/testing it. So, be mindful of what you read and twice as mindful of what you write. We all want the same thing; to improve the game by thinking out loud through these forums. "When you think out loud you detect and explore ideas and concepts which are either unknown, or as yet unexplored".

Thanks for reading. 

i in a way agree, making it less simple for most people would be desired, but at the same time, isnt it going to be the challenge of something new that would keep people playing?

I can go win other offline motor racing management sims after 2 seasons, win every race with my eyes close, but i get bored, i play iGP because its a challange.

perhaps in order to keep the simplicity, how about this.

if there was more complex settings added in, you could spend 20% of your drivers energy "tweaking the car", this will give youj an 75% correct setup (with the more "complex bits" being 100%, and the others being 50% correct).

Then if its just before the race, you can spend 2 coins making his energy 100% again, and do your practice laps to get the wings/susp/ride height correct (which will still take 3/4 runs)

As for the "3 coin ideal setup", you can pay for that and get all "100% correct" for your driver.

But the key thing about this would be, a player who learns what works, would be able to change the setup slightly, and make themselves better at cornering, or better at straight line speed, etc, so paying for setup help (either stamina, or by coins) would help the less able, and those who wish to tweak it manually, might get more performance, or less performance out of their car, or maybe even better in some situations, compared to others.

I should add, while im writing what i am writing, i am also thinking that is truly way too complex, still it would sound like fun to play, if the complexity was an "optional extra" for the hardcore winners to give themselves an extra challenge that has some risk, but also some reward..

Agreed. 


I would add a way to be able make minor set up changes in the pits as well. Especially if/and when crashes are introduced.