ios-person md-notifications md-help-circle

Profile

Guest
medal 0
Posts: 21
Post Likes: 3765

Notifications

No Unread Notifications

Rejected
Disable Bots

warning

This thread is closed. Threads older than 6 weeks are closed automatically. To continue this discussion, create a new thread.

Gustavo Heiden Super Mod
3 years 129 days ago

Sometimes I see great cars that would be able to achieve much better result if their races weren't affected by the poor AI choices.

So, I think this thread should be aimed to fix a potential flaw in the use of autoboost (or autoKERS), rather than ask to disable it, which is already rejected.

Also, in order to favour people that are racing online we could ask for a more challenging tyre management, so who is racing in a fixed push (bots) won't be able to get maximum in terms of race pace.

CenSy Tan
3 years 129 days ago (Last edited by CenSy Tan 3 years 129 days ago)

I made a new league, initially it was a clusterf*** of bots in Rookie but now only two are left and very soon there will be none. Too many inactives in Rookie though, and only one seems to be active at the moment.

Also, I am not frequently active, so I don't achieve well. Git, you have to realise that people have lives other than iGP. Besides, if you can't overtake inactives, then you should really be reading these posts:

2020 Version Tutorial
In my opinion best tutorial, can someone translate into English please?

As for Paul, I started with a 2-day league for 14 bots. Then, many new players available only on weekends joined the league, even if activity is low. It's going well so far. So yes, there is demand for 2-car 2-day leagues for Pro, and the filter has impacts.

B18 Harry
3 years 128 days ago

CenSy

I made a new league, initially it was a clusterf*** of bots in Rookie but now only two are left and very soon there will be none. Too many inactives in Rookie though, and only one seems to be active at the moment.

Also, I am not frequently active, so I don't achieve well. Git, you have to realise that people have lives other than iGP. Besides, if you can't overtake inactives, then you should really be reading these posts:

2020 Version Tutorial
In my opinion best tutorial, can someone translate into English please?

As for Paul, I started with a 2-day league for 14 bots. Then, many new players available only on weekends joined the league, even if activity is low. It's going well so far. So yes, there is demand for 2-car 2-day leagues for Pro, and the filter has impacts.

Please for the love of god, read what the actual complaint is. Everyone that has disagreed with this, hasn’t actually understood what the complaint was.

It’s not that we can’t overtake Bots!

It’s the problems they cause with their auto kersing (usually on lap 3), when they end up causing people to lose seconds to title rivals or causing them to use kers to get past them.

I don’t know how I can make it any simpler, though I’ll await for the usual “well if you can’t beat an inactive” or “you need to use them to your advantage”

Kevin Bissell Super Mod
3 years 128 days ago

It's a bit of a waste of time continuing this debate because, as somebody pointed out days ago, it has been rejected. As a side note, the original post has received one up vote and 21 down votes which also gives us an indication of the popularity of the suggestion.

Maybe it's time to agree to differ and move on.

B18 Harry
3 years 128 days ago

Kevin

It's a bit of a waste of time continuing this debate because, as somebody pointed out days ago, it has been rejected. As a side note, the original post has received one up vote and 21 down votes which also gives us an indication of the popularity of the suggestion.

Maybe it's time to agree to differ and move on.

Even though, if you’ve actually read the comments, the people disagreeing with it don’t actually understand what the suggestion was or the reasons for it.

I’m just surprised you actually commented on it, but as you did, do you now want to give a reason why it was rejected?

Timothy Barry
3 years 128 days ago

To paraphrase Kevin.

If nobody wants this to happen, it will not happen.
It is the downvotes in your original proposal that got it rejected, Git...

Chris 'Iceman' Tones
3 years 128 days ago

Kevin

It's a bit of a waste of time continuing this debate because, as somebody pointed out days ago, it has been rejected. As a side note, the original post has received one up vote and 21 down votes which also gives us an indication of the popularity of the suggestion.

Maybe it's time to agree to differ and move on.

I actually agreed with him Kevin and he's right when he says most simply didn't get what he was talking about, and i expanded on the issue as well. There's simply no need for the AI managed cars to willynilly boost on lap 3, which they do all the time and totally no need for lapped AI to boost away from you near the end of the race when you need the DRS to close the gap to a rival, even to your other car, or when you are trying to make a gap/break away. You have to use up boost and often you don't even get DRS once you have reacted to it. There's nothing to gain for lapped AI running about by themselves in doing this.

B18 Harry
3 years 128 days ago

Timothy

To paraphrase Kevin.

If nobody wants this to happen, it will not happen.
It is the downvotes in your original proposal that got it rejected, Git...

Yet you commented several times on this post, and didn’t seem to understand firstly what the suggestion was, and then the reasons for it.

Asking the reason for it being rejected is quite reasonable as other suggestions get rejected when they have more likes than dislikes (I won’t get into the fuel effecting qualifying dispute)

Kevin Bissell Super Mod
3 years 128 days ago

Moaning

I’m just surprised you actually commented on it, but as you did, do you now want to give a reason why it was rejected?

All I said was it's maybe time to agree to differ and move on. Nothing controversial in this but unfortunately it doesn't stop you continuing the argument and even questioning why I bothered to comment. Mark, you've chosen a really appropriate manager name.

As I've tried to explain on a number of occasions before, Moderators are simply gamers just like everyone else. We are not staff and have very little insight into the developers thought processes or Jack's vision for the future of the game. This post would have been rejected by iGP staff, I don't know why it was rejected, so you'll be waiting a long time if you're expecting me to explain the reason.

I won't say whether or not I agree with the suggestion, all I will say is that IMO most of the people who commented on this thread absolutely understand the suggestion and the reason for it. But just turning off AI boost for non-attending managers (note I said "non-attending" and not "inactive") won't stop the complaints. Next it will be cars that are not set up being lapped and affecting the outcome of the race by giving people lucky backmarker DRS.

I imagine the downvoters have learned to live with it and some actually use the fact that AI is very predictable to their advantage.

B18 Harry
3 years 128 days ago

I’m not criticising you, just how things are approached in general. iGP encourage the forum but then don’t give reasons for why things are rejected. Someone’s obviously had the time to click the reject button, so a quick sentence explaining it wouldn’t be too much to ask.
I’d have to disagree with you on that one, as a lot of the comments were about not being able to overtake “non-attending” racers or like you just said, using them to your advantage. That in itself shows that you’re not completely understanding it.
The non-set ups getting lapped can be annoying, but at least they usually get booted after a few races, and you can actually plan for catching them on push levels (as long as they don’t randomly kers away).
There’s just no need for the non-attenders to get kers, it doesn’t really effect their race outcome, and could cause them to lose drs as much as it could make them get it.
You say it won’t stop the complaints, but it will for the issue they’re complaining about. That’s like saying we’re never going to improve anything as people will complain about something else.

CenSy Tan
3 years 128 days ago

Put it into more detail on the next post perhaps?

Slo Bro
3 years 128 days ago

Moaning

I’m not criticising you, just how things are approached in general. iGP encourage the forum but then don’t give reasons for why things are rejected. Someone’s obviously had the time to click the reject button, so a quick sentence explaining it wouldn’t be too much to ask.
I’d have to disagree with you on that one, as a lot of the comments were about not being able to overtake “non-attending” racers or like you just said, using them to your advantage. That in itself shows that you’re not completely understanding it.
The non-set ups getting lapped can be annoying, but at least they usually get booted after a few races, and you can actually plan for catching them on push levels (as long as they don’t randomly kers away).
There’s just no need for the non-attenders to get kers, it doesn’t really effect their race outcome, and could cause them to lose drs as much as it could make them get it.
You say it won’t stop the complaints, but it will for the issue they’re complaining about. That’s like saying we’re never going to improve anything as people will complain about something else.

I read your post, understand what you want, but i don’t want that option. I’m a host and i wouldn’t turn ai kers off.

You just cant keep going in cirkels with the same idea, we’ll just keep saying no.

So let’s agree to disagree as i said a few posts ago

B18 Harry
3 years 127 days ago

Why do you disagree with it so much, if as a host you wouldn’t turn it off, it would literally have no effect on you?

It took you a long time to understand what the suggestion was, though I’m not convinced you actually do understand the frustration, as you seem to think the non-attending racers are competitive. If you have a league that has a lot of non attending racers and you believe that the automatic kers helps, you as a host could leave it as it is. For competitive leagues, the non attending racers aren’t really competitive and won’t score points, however they can effect an outcome of a race which in my opinion shouldn’t be the case. I’d rather race results were more on the drivers.

Self Help
3 years 127 days ago

Alan

These bots are ruining races, they need to be disabled when their manager isn't online, and then enabled when they enter the race.
The bot/A.I. KERS on lap 3 is an absolute joke, for example tonight's race, I qualified badly in 6th, I passed two bots in 2 laps to get up to 4th, and then on lap 3, they Auto-KERS'd past me and I dropped back into position 6. These cars were so slow and I lost 2.5s in the next 2 laps, and my race was over, the top 3 were out of sight.
Our league is so competitive that any use of KERS early on and basically you have lost the race.
Its ok if you are high up in qualifying, but for the rest its wrecking peoples races.
Can we at least add an option for the league owner to able or disable bot/A.I. KERS?

I agree we should disable kers bot. Or at least improve it. But disabling bot AI would be awful for managers who can’t stay online or we should like add a league option so that managers get to choose if they want Kers AI in their leagues or not

Frank Thomas Moderator
3 years 127 days ago

Well, contradictory posts don't help to understand what someone's thinking. Like there's either a problem with overtaking or not. With a statement, quite a bold one in this game, not to have problems with it is not making it easier to see a source of frustration in bots, because if that's the case then bot boosts by, gets overtaken again, end of story.

Then bots are for many just another part of the challenge and suggestions like this is seen as just another request to dumb down the game. The point of view here is simply: If you don't want to deal with the field then get Pole.

But then people have different views, from looking for something like rallying directly against competition, and outside influences most unwelcome, up to something like GT with tracks filled to the brim with, including much slower, cars and tackling with them being just part of the game and finally the ones more looking for exitement than meticulous execution of race plans.

My first reaction was against the suggestion, however to cater for those different views an option like this does make sense (Am not nearly rich enough to pay for running this game on my own after all ;-) ) and it's more convenient than a host trying to establish a 'no botting' rule. Once a manager was online it disables boost already for the remainder of the race, so the basic functionality is in the race sim even and missing is a selection for hosts to enable that toggle per default.

However in the long run I'd also rather prefer a better boost use by the AI. Also an option for hosts to disqualify not set up cars and custom points tables including setting a number of strikes would be nice.

B18 Harry
3 years 127 days ago

I don’t know what league you’re in or how close it is, however what I have repeatedly said, is the kers wastage/time lost waiting for drs to overtake the non-attending racers is what is annoying and can cause people to lose racers/valuable points. Qualifying behind them is different, as that is just part of racing.
Sweeping comments of “just get pole” is a bit ridiculous with how qualifying times are worked out.

Timothy Barry
3 years 127 days ago

Moaning

I don’t know what league you’re in or how close it is, however what I have repeatedly said, is the kers wastage/time lost waiting for drs to overtake the non-attending racers is what is annoying and can cause people to lose racers/valuable points. Qualifying behind them is different, as that is just part of racing.
Sweeping comments of “just get pole” is a bit ridiculous with how qualifying times are worked out.

My final advice, seeing that this matter has been officially closed for weeks...

Find a way to deal with this situation so that it comes to your advantage. It is all that you can do now.

Use your moaning energy to come up with personal, in game plans to use these teams. Not pointlessly moan to everybody about it. Thanks for doing this in advance, as this is becoming annoying...

B18 Harry
3 years 127 days ago

Timothy

Moaning

I don’t know what league you’re in or how close it is, however what I have repeatedly said, is the kers wastage/time lost waiting for drs to overtake the non-attending racers is what is annoying and can cause people to lose racers/valuable points. Qualifying behind them is different, as that is just part of racing.
Sweeping comments of “just get pole” is a bit ridiculous with how qualifying times are worked out.

My final advice, seeing that this matter has been officially closed for weeks...

Find a way to deal with this situation so that it comes to your advantage. It is all that you can do now.

Use your moaning energy to come up with personal, in game plans to use these teams. Not pointlessly moan to everybody about it. Thanks for doing this in advance, as this is becoming annoying...

Thanks your amazing insight, I feel so much better now you’ve said that. “Use your moaning energy to come up with personal, in game plans to use these teams” - obviously this is some next level sh*t, as to me it literally makes no sense, but I’m sure you know what you’re on about.

Here’s a novel idea though, you don’t like what I put, feel free to ignore. Crazy I know, but you don’t actually have to reply. You do realise this isn’t your personal inbox?

Slo Bro
3 years 127 days ago

Moaning

Why do you disagree with it so much, if as a host you wouldn’t turn it off, it would literally have no effect on you?

It took you a long time to understand what the suggestion was, though I’m not convinced you actually do understand the frustration, as you seem to think the non-attending racers are competitive. If you have a league that has a lot of non attending racers and you believe that the automatic kers helps, you as a host could leave it as it is. For competitive leagues, the non attending racers aren’t really competitive and won’t score points, however they can effect an outcome of a race which in my opinion shouldn’t be the case. I’d rather race results were more on the drivers

Why cant you accept i disagree? You think i didnt understand just because i don’t agree?

Well here’s a crazy idea: i fully understand and still i disagree. And if you don’t like that, feel free to ignore

B18 Harry
3 years 127 days ago

Slo

Moaning

Why do you disagree with it so much, if as a host you wouldn’t turn it off, it would literally have no effect on you?

It took you a long time to understand what the suggestion was, though I’m not convinced you actually do understand the frustration, as you seem to think the non-attending racers are competitive. If you have a league that has a lot of non attending racers and you believe that the automatic kers helps, you as a host could leave it as it is. For competitive leagues, the non attending racers aren’t really competitive and won’t score points, however they can effect an outcome of a race which in my opinion shouldn’t be the case. I’d rather race results were more on the drivers

Why cant you accept i disagree? You think i didnt understand just because i don’t agree?

Well here’s a crazy idea: i fully understand and still i disagree. And if you don’t like that, feel free to ignore

Not at all, I asked why did you disagree so much if you are a host and could enable/disable it anyway. That statement itself pretty much says I accept you disagree, just enquiring to the reasons why.

The understanding part was separate, I even put it in a different paragraph. I thought I explained it quite well the reasons why I didn’t think you understood the frustration. I also had a look at your league and saw that it wasn’t that competitive, as in a close title battle.

You must be logged in to post a reply.