PDA

View Full Version : GT4 restrictors and balancing request



Jussi Viljami Karjalainen
23-01-2016, 19:17
Thought I'd post this sooner rather than later so that SMS has time to think about it:

I have basically just one major request for the GT4 class: Could you open up the restrictor settings on all of the GT4 cars? Currently the ones where you can't adjust them are the Aston Martin Rapide S Hydrogen Hybrid and most importantly the Ginetta G55 GT4.

The GT4 class is unbalanced, the Aston Vantage and the Ginetta G55 are easily the fastest cars in the lineup, while the BMW and Ford are quite well balanced with each other, the Aston Rapide is severely lagging, and from what I've heard (though I haven't tested fully) the Toyota is behind as well.

I understand that at this late you don't want to be doing too much to the balancing because of the amount of testing required, but if you at least opened up the option to restrict the engine performance of the G55 GT4 (the Aston Vantage can already be restricted, though possibly the minimum restrictor size could go down a bit) we could do it ourselves and have a more even playing field for the various cars.

To sum up this thread and my other pet peeve thread w.r.t. the GT4 class, major and minor refer to how important/helpful I consider these, not how much work I expect them to be:

Major: Open up the restrictor setting for all GT4 cars so that we can balance them ourselves.

Minor: Extend the minimum restrictor setting downwards for cars that have a narrow range of adjustment (Aston Vantage, Ford Mustang)

Minor: Give the Aston Martin Rapide S Hydrogen Hybrid a turbo like it should have, so that it doesn't lose power at high altitudes so badly. I've noticed that the car is a lot more competitive at low altitude than at high altitude.

Minor: Give the Aston Martin Rapide S Hydrogen Hybrid more power? Everywhere I've seen it it's been listed as having at least 550 bhp, even the in-game info says 560 bhp, yet in-game the car actually only produces 516 bhp at most (Mojave) and only 472 bhp on the Nürburgring. This is a big gap between claimed and actual output.

bobfromaccounting
26-02-2016, 18:21
Just posting in here because this needs to be brought up as well. Since the GT3 balance thread has a lot of attention. GT4's really need to be balanced because 2 cars render all the others useless.

bradleyland
26-02-2016, 18:29
These sound like very reasonable suggestions. I support them as well.

Jussi Viljami Karjalainen
26-02-2016, 18:38
Yeah, at the very very least opening up restrictors for all GT4 cars and having fairly extended ranges on them would allow us to balance them ourselves, for what little that would amount to (there's no way to control it but it'd at least make it POSSIBLE).

seb02
26-02-2016, 19:39
Just posting in here because this needs to be brought up as well. Since the GT3 balance thread has a lot of attention. GT4's really need to be balanced because 2 cars render all the others useless.

Agree with you

Jussi Viljami Karjalainen
26-02-2016, 21:29
So since this was brought up I might as well post the comparison board for the GT4s as well:

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1638/25255724306_57162bd075_o.png

The rows on the bottom are:

Fastest/slowest split: The difference between the fastest and slowest car on that track.
Average: Average lap time for that track.
Average (-Rapide -86): Average without the Rapide and the 86, so the 4 fastest cars.
Fastest/slowest split -Rapi -86: The difference between the fastest and slowest car on that track without the Rapide and the 86.
Rapide gap: How far behind the fastest time the Rapide is.
86 gap: How far behind the fastest time the 86 is.

The same caveats apply here as in the GT3 thread, and these times are based on even less of an effort than the GT3 times (because GT4 isn't as popular as GT3).

If anyone can improve the current WRs for the Rapide and 86 on any of these tracks, please do give it a go, and report here so I can change the times. Also if on the consoles any cars have better results I'd be very interested in knowing (I unfortunately don't have access to console leaderboards myself).

Personally I don't think the 86 is THAT slow compared to the others, but it is on the slower side. I think the GT-86 and the Rapide suffer MASSIVELY from lack of effort on the leaderboards.

bobfromaccounting
26-02-2016, 21:57
I just set the second fastest time in the 86 earlier this week at Nurburgring GP @ 2:07:725.

This is actually why I bumped this thread. Since the league I'm in might switch to GT4's ( not soon), would like to get some proper balance in there.

bobfromaccounting
26-02-2016, 23:02
Got the GT-86 @ Monza down to 1:57:055. 1:56's are very possible

I think the biggest issue with this car is you want to stay out of 6th gear as much as possible. It's an overdrive like all other GT4's but this one REALLY kills the motor.

Also, the base tune on this is completely backwards. Springs and damper settings are much stiffer in the rear when this has a little front weight bias.

Jussi Viljami Karjalainen
26-02-2016, 23:24
Yeah, the default ain't great on it. Here's a setup that alleviates some of the most obvious bad tendencies of the GT-86:

http://projectcarssetups.eu/#/viewsetup/26675743

The springs actually aren't stiffer at the rear, even though the "number" is higher. The car has a much lower motion ratio at the rear than the front (0.95:1 at the front, 0.73:1 at the rear), so the nominal spring rate needs to be higher at the rear to give the same effect as the front springs. With the default springs of 84 N/mm front and 107 N/mm rear the front spring frequency is actually 6% higher, and when measured at the wheel (with motion ratio factored in) the spring rates are 75.8 N/mm at the front and 57 N/mm at the rear.

poirqc
27-02-2016, 01:18
I really like the GT4 class. I wish there was more public lobbys with the class!

Jussi Viljami Karjalainen
27-02-2016, 18:16
On the subject of the Toyota GT4 car, many of those "records" are thinner than paper. I just tried it quickly in Free Practice @ Dubai GP and after a few laps I got down to low 2:06 level instead of the 2:10 that the leaderboards show. The car can definitely easily go 2:05.XXX with a bit of effort, so just on that track alone it's around 5 seconds quicker than the record would have you think. That would put it close to the Mustang's current record. The GT-86 is I think a bit slower than the Mustang and the BMW, but not by massive amounts. The default setup is horrid though for fast driving.

hkraft300
28-02-2016, 02:27
As much as balancing brings good racing in a game, should the real cars be kept to its RL spec?
Maybe only the fictional cars, if need be, get BoP'd?
This does apply to the GT3 class too where, as you've found Jussi, the Aston GTE and Ginetta are underperforming and should be aligned more closely to its RL performance.
That said: very minor performance adjustments to the cars wouldn't detract from the simulation aspect.
These aren't classes I spend a lot of time in but they're hugely popular. Hopefully before patch support wraps up for this title, Casey & co may have a spare moment to throw in the adjustments to bridge the gaps a little bit :)

azidahaka
28-02-2016, 10:11
I'm running a gt4 championship on GTplanet, and our findings after the 5 rounds we had and countless tests and tiame trialling is that:

Ginetta is the fastest with a margin of around 0.3 secs over
Aston that has on average another 0.5-0.6 over the
vantage/mustang/m3

This on average, there's some twisty tracks where actually the Ginetta's are up to 2 seconds or more faster than the "second tier" cars.

What i would do to balance out?

1) take 10hps from ginetta or take off it's very advantageous DF ability
2) rework the Aston Hybrid gearing for it's very very BAD and makes it really slow... I'm pretty sure that good gearing would make it half a second faster on all tracks.
3) giving some decend brakes to the Mustang; it's the only car that has that bad brakes and makes it way slower due to this.
4) can't spot exactly what is wrong with m3 maybe missing some front df?

graveltrap
28-02-2016, 10:29
GT4 is being used for this months ESL stuff, I wonder if they track car choice and a theme has developed...

Jussi Viljami Karjalainen
28-02-2016, 14:19
Gave the Toyota GT-86 GT4 a try on Bathurst as well, very quickly did a 2:14.866 in free practice, putting it ahead of the current Mustang record, second only to the Ginetta and Aston. The GT-86 so far looks like it's very competitive with the Mustang and M3 GT4, especially at slightly higher altitudes. EDIT: Also tried the M3 GT4 there quickly, on my 3rd lap I did 2:15.482, with plenty of room for improvement.

I'll also preface by saying that currently the M3 GT4 is probably the point where GT4 should be, speedwise. The lap times with it are faster than real life GT4 times, but we also have access to better tyres (most GT4 series are limited to a single compound that's at best as good as our GT4 Hard compound) and GT4 isn't exactly known for having super high level drivers IRL. The Ginetta and Aston times are just blatantly too fast for GT4 IMO.

As much as balancing brings good racing in a game, should the real cars be kept to its RL spec?
Maybe only the fictional cars, if need be, get BoP'd?I do agree that real cars should be kep to RL spec, especially in cases where the performance is regulated by the series rules. So if for example F1 was to come in, I'd want the Mercedes cars to be clearly superior to everything else.

But GT4, like GT3, is a series where they do balance of performance on the real cars as well to keep them matched up.

I just did some testing with the GT4 cars, specifically aero testing. I noticed that none of them with the exception of G55 GT4 produce much more than 50-80 kg of DF @ 200 km/h (based on telemetry data), so their downforce is mostly just removing the lift.

The G55 GT4 on the other hand can easily (when need be) produce 200 kg of DF @ 200 km/h, and even with minimum settings required to prevent high speed aero oversteer (0/2, you get a lot of aero oversteer at high speeds with 0/0 and 0/1) it's producing around 160-180 kg. This is a huge huge huge advantage for the car.

So the only car with effective DF is the Ginetta, and that advantage is about 3-4 fold. It really doesn't have that much drag either while producing this amount of DF, it required around 155-160 bhp to hold steady at 200 km/h, which is almost the same as the V8 Vantage GT4 that doesn't produce any usable DF (slight lift at the front). It is a smaller car though. I didn't measure every car right now, but the M3 and 86 had the lowest drag of the tested cars, requiring about 140 bhp to hold 200 km/h.

I've measured the power output at low and high altitudes and made this power to weight chart:

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1656/25319312236_5de174dc6d_o.png

There we can see that the cars with the highest power to weight ratio are the V8 Vantage GT4 and Mustang Boss 302R1, by a clear margin. In the past I've tested the Aston with the restrictor set to minimum, and it made the car hit quite close to the M3 and Mustang times, and looking at the chart the power to weight ratio at that setting is very close to the Rapide and M3 GT4. The lowest power to weight belongs to the Ginetta, it has only a bit more power than the GT-86 but weights 85 kg more. So it is at a power disadvantage, but has massive downforce and the drag isn't any worse than in the V8 Vantage GT4. The M3 and GT-86 have the lowest drag and the M3 also has decent power output (419 hp at low altitude), and the GT-86 doesn't lose power at altitude which gives it an advantage at tracks like Bathurst. It is however the lowest power car overall. The Boss and the V8 Vantage have the highest power to weight at low altitudes. The Rapide has the most power by far (80 hp more than the Aston at low altitude) but it's also 345-620 kg heavier than the competition.

I also measured the top speeds with default brake and radiator settings, but lowered DF (minimal if it was feasible, slight rear DF if the tail became very unstable at high speeds). I got roughly the following results:


Aston Martin Rapide S: 307 km/h
Aston Martin V8 Vantage GT4: 294 km/h*
Aston Martin V8 Vantage Rest: 290 km/h
BMW M3 GT4: 304 km/h*
Ford Mustang Boss 302R1: 296 km/h
Ginetta G55 GT4: 275 km/h
Toyota GT-86 Rocket Bunny GT4: 288 km/h

* denotes "gearing limited".

This fits the drag and power figures quite well. The Ginetta has higher drag than the M3 and GT-86 as well as only about as much power as the GT-86 so the top speed is lower (though if you shut all of the intakes it can go 285 km/h or so). The Aston has a lot more power than the Ginetta with roughly the same drag, so it goes faster, though it runs out of gear before it can reach its true Vmax. It'd probably get to 300 km/h if gearing wasn't an issue. The M3 has very low drag and good power so it can get over 300 km/h. The Rapide has tons of power but it's big, so while it's the fastest it's not much faster than the M3 GT4. The Toyota has about the same power as the Ginetta but less drag so it gets a higher top speed. The Mustang looks to be the drag monster of the lineup, it has a lot of power (second only to the Rapide) but starts hitting aero limitations at 296 km/h. It accelerates quickly though, due to the power.

Fun fact: The last time I'd tested these cars the Mustang had 418 bhp at low altitude and 381 bhp at high altitude, which made it very good to drive with the M3 GT4. Now it has 446 bhp at low altitude and 410 bhp at high altitude, so it probably outpaces the M3 quite nicely in the right hands right now. The restrictor does allow you to reduce the power down to previous levels though.

So, current thoughts:

-The Ginetta has massive downforce advantage with relatively low drag penalty (low DF settings, high DF settings don't provide much more DF but raise the drag dramatically). I don't know if it'd be better to restrict the engine or maybe hurt the downforce, but damn that DF at those drag levels is a massive advantage. Possibly it should have more drag? Or possibly it should get less DF at low settings compared to high settings (the difference is very small currently), the drag impact of high DF settings is huge but the DF impact isn't. Regardless something needs to happen.

-The Aston needs a power cut, to current minimum restrictor levels or even slightly below. It currently produces 437 bhp at low altitudes with max restrictor size, and 419 bhp with minimum. The minimum already puts it much closer to the M3 and Mustang lap times, but possibly could go a bit lower still? Aston advertises the car as having "over 400 horsepower", so something in the 408-413 bhp range could work (giving it a power to weight ratio of 281-285 bhp/ton, close to the M3 GT4).

-The Mustang possibly needs a slight power cut. Or possibly a reduction in available gearing options. In some real life series it does run with more power than the M3 GT4, but but it's also limited to 3.73:1 final drive (longest option in-game), hurting the speed via gearing. I'm not 100% sure about the current situation regarding the M3 and Mustang but there might be a slight advantage to the Mustang, if you can tame it.

-The GT-86 isn't far from where it should be, it's really a quite capable car, the default setup is against it though in a really bad way. Perhaps a wee bit more power?

-The Rapide... Harder to say. Maybe 550 bhp would be a good thing, maybe not. Putting a turbo on it like the real car has so that it always produced the same power no matter the altitude would help, definitely.


I'm running a gt4 championship on GTplanet, and our findings after the 5 rounds we had and countless tests and tiame trialling is that:

Ginetta is the fastest with a margin of around 0.3 secs over
Aston that has on average another 0.5-0.6 over the
vantage/mustang/m3

This on average, there's some twisty tracks where actually the Ginetta's are up to 2 seconds or more faster than the "second tier" cars.

What i would do to balance out?

1) take 10hps from ginetta or take off it's very advantageous DF ability
2) rework the Aston Hybrid gearing for it's very very BAD and makes it really slow... I'm pretty sure that good gearing would make it half a second faster on all tracks.
3) giving some decend brakes to the Mustang; it's the only car that has that bad brakes and makes it way slower due to this.
4) can't spot exactly what is wrong with m3 maybe missing some front df?I think you meant "rapide/mustang/m3", not "vantage"?

Great to hear that you've been doing your own testing, though I have slightly different impressions myself.

I agree with 1) in the DF section, it should have a DF advantage compared to the others but the current one is very overwhelming. Though I do love it a LOT like this. I think personally I'd love to leave it as is but open up the restrictor so that it can be slowed down with that... =)

Don't agree with 2), the real car uses a 6 speed H-gate manual from a road car so the ratios should reflect that. It seems to be more down on power compared to the real thing than anything else, it's always quoted as having 550 bhp (in-game info even claims 560 bhp) and having a turbo, currently it produces at best 517 bhp and doesn't have a turbo.

As for 3) The Mustang is roughly where it should be IMO, it's already quicker than real life times.

And finally 4), the M3 requires a lot of suspension work to get it usable and on some tracks it really suffers from the road car gearing. That gearing is homologated though so there's no changing that. I think the M3 really should be the standard to which the others are tuned around, since it's closest to the real life lap times currently (considering tyre and driving style differences between sim and RL).

azidahaka
28-02-2016, 14:41
Great to hear that you've been doing your own testing, though I have slightly different impressions myself.

I agree with 1) in the DF section, it should have a DF advantage compared to the others but the current one is very overwhelming. Though I do love it a LOT like this. I think personally I'd love to leave it as is but open up the restrictor so that it can be slowed down with that... =)

Don't agree with 2), the real car uses a 6 speed H-gate manual from a road car so the ratios should reflect that. It seems to be more down on power compared to the real thing than anything else, it's always quoted as having 550 bhp (in-game info even claims 560 bhp) and having a turbo, currently it produces at best 517 bhp and doesn't have a turbo.

As for 3) The Mustang is roughly where it should be IMO, it's already quicker than real life times.

And finally 4), the M3 requires a lot of suspension work to get it usable and on some tracks it really suffers from the road car gearing. That gearing is homologated though so there's no changing that. I think the M3 really should be the standard to which the others are tuned around, since it's closest to the real life lap times currently (considering tyre and driving style differences between sim and RL).

My were suggestions for a quick balancing out, not claiming they would get closer to Real Life performance, just to clarify it...

I think that those changes would make all the cars really closer, but i'm aware that it wouldn't be closer to real life.

So if The Mustang is where it should be the problem lies in the faster/slower cars.

I'm glad you had the same conclusions as me about Ginetta's crazy aero advantage.

concerning 2) i didn't know the cars was that much crazy lower on power from RL and not fitted with the turbo... Probably those 30+hps would make the gearing work way better and give it some better start from standing and usable powerband.

All in all our conclusions seems the same, i just took an "ingame quickfix" approach while you looked at Real life datas. Stunning the issues are more or less the same.

Kudos to you :) i wonder is anyone at SMS is gonna read this and the gt3 threads and think about the BOF issues.

in any case, TUP jussi.

Jussi Viljami Karjalainen
28-02-2016, 17:29
I've been driving the Rapide S, M3 and GT-86 a bit today, setting up a baseline setup and doing about 3-5 laps in Free Practice on some of the circuits where these cars have seemed particularly slow compared to the fastest ones. Most of those times have been very easy to improve with just a quick try (usually within 3-4 laps of starting I've managed to improve the record significantly), and the perceived differences between the cars are narrowing down. I've updated the spreadsheet with my quick test results (none of these are to be considered proper "fastest laps", they're just the result of me going out for a few laps, nothing more).

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1671/24984190449_b321446aeb_o.png

The times I've made are in bold.

EDIT: Also tried the Aston V8 Vantage GT4 with the minimum restrictor a couple of times, setting it up like that gets it very close to the performance level of the Mustang/M3.

seb02
28-02-2016, 18:12
I've been driving the Rapide S, M3 and GT-86 a bit today, setting up a baseline setup and doing about 3-5 laps in Free Practice on some of the circuits where these cars have seemed particularly slow compared to the fastest ones. Most of those times have been very easy to improve with just a quick try (usually within 3-4 laps of starting I've managed to improve the record significantly), and the perceived differences between the cars are narrowing down. I've updated the spreadsheet with my quick test results (none of these are to be considered proper "fastest laps", they're just the result of me going out for a few laps, nothing more).

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1671/24984190449_b321446aeb_o.png

The times I've made are in bold.

EDIT: Also tried the Aston V8 Vantage GT4 with the minimum restrictor a couple of times, setting it up like that gets it very close to the performance level of the Mustang/M3.

Toyota gt86 seems to be very less competitive than others. I hope SMS read this thread

Jussi Viljami Karjalainen
28-02-2016, 18:28
Toyota gt86 seems to be very less competitive than others. I hope SMS read this threadI'd say it's only slightly behind the M3 and Mustang. Behind, but not by much. And at some high altitude tracks like Bathurst it probably can go faster.

The biggest single issue with GT4 is that G55 and Vantage are faster than they should be.

seb02
28-02-2016, 18:31
I'd say it's only slightly behind the M3 and Mustang. Behind, but not by much. And at some high altitude tracks like Bathurst it probably can go faster.

The biggest single issue with GT4 is that G55 and Vantage are faster than they should be.

There are big gap between the fastest and Toyota :
+5 sec on Monza
+7 sec on Monaco...

bobfromaccounting
28-02-2016, 19:51
Yes, but you are looking at it the wrong way. The Toyota is only slightly slower than the M3, 302R1, and Rapide. It's not that big of a deal. It's just that the Vantage and G55 are too fast.

seb02
28-02-2016, 20:02
Ok thanks

Jussi Viljami Karjalainen
28-02-2016, 20:21
There are big gap between the fastest and Toyota :
+5 sec on Monza
+7 sec on Monaco...


Yes, but you are looking at it the wrong way. The Toyota is only slightly slower than the M3, 302R1, and Rapide. It's not that big of a deal. It's just that the Vantage and G55 are too fast.Yeah, the point I was trying to show with that update was that with just a few laps, each car using the same baseline setup for all tracks (so no track specific tuning), I took out a total of 23.471 seconds out of 9 lap times (an average improvement of 2.608 seconds per lap time). And if you'd tune the car for the track a bit better and practice until you got it right, there'd be a lot of room for improvement on all of them. I have full confidence that the Monza lap time could be improved significantly, getting it closer to the M3 and Mustang level within just a few laps.

The current GT-86 and Rapide times, as well as some of the M3 GT4 times, aren't good representations of the cars' capabilities, but from what I can see so far the situation is that the M3 and Mustang are quite nicely balanced, and the GT-86 and Rapide S are slightly behind them (though on some tracks the GT-86 has demonstrated the capability of being significantly quicker due to retaining the power level). Between the Rapide and the GT-86, for me at least the GT-86 showed more potential on most tracks.

The real issue is indeed that the Aston Vantage and Ginetta are too fast (compared to the others as well as to real life) and make the other cars obsolete if people are allowed to freely pick the cars. The Aston Vantage is easy enough to slow down closer to the others, set it to use minimum restrictor and it's quite close to the M3/Mustang level already. And since Aston claims it produces "over 400 hp" I think something like 410-415 hp still fits (min restrictor gives you 419 hp at the Test Track), instead of the current 437 hp, which is "nearly 440 hp". The Ginetta's lack of a restrictor option means it can't be balanced to the other cars though, other than by making a bad setup...

So currently it's possible to make a "reasonable" race with 5 different GT4 cars if you can trust people to set the Aston Vantage to minimum restrictor. Those 5 are reasonably capable of running with each other, the Rapide and GT-86 lagging slightly.

The Ginetta's DF and drag really weird me out in some ways, between 0/2 DF and 2/6 DF the amount of downforce generated doesn't seem to change all that much, but the drag increases dramatically, at 0/2 you need a bit under 160 hp to keep 200 km/h steady, with 2/6 you need almost 200 hp. The higher settings seem more like an air brake than properly usable DF settings. Makes me wonder if the low end settings are producing too much DF...

APR193
29-02-2016, 13:41
Regarding the Ginetta, is it possible that it is not running to GT4 spec? Visually it isn't actually the GT4 car, its the supercup car with a much higher rear wing and larger front splitter. Now I haven't looked at lap time differences etc etc between the GT4 and supercup version in real life, but is it possible that the version in game is running to supercup levels of aero rather than GT4 spec? Given that the Ginetta is massively better than any other GT4 car through corners (from personal experience/what the ai are capable of), its possible?

Doge
29-02-2016, 17:41
I am not sure you can trust most of these LB times, not even the ones from popular cars like the Ginetta. The only circuit of the ones in the chart we raced in a recent league (Ginetta @ Oschersleben) had faster quali times than that, even if the lap was a bit messy.

Also I remember lapping the Ginetta and the Mustang around Donington National and the gap was around 1 second. No way adding 2 hairpins to complete the GP version will take the gap to 3+ seconds.

Anyway, I like this restrictor idea. I wouldn´t want you guys to stop chasing fidelity to the real cars to make them perform the same. The way you mention (playing with the restrictor if someone wants a close grid) is no doubt the way to go.

Jussi Viljami Karjalainen
29-02-2016, 18:17
Regarding the Ginetta, is it possible that it is not running to GT4 spec? Visually it isn't actually the GT4 car, its the supercup car with a much higher rear wing and larger front splitter. Now I haven't looked at lap time differences etc etc between the GT4 and supercup version in real life, but is it possible that the version in game is running to supercup levels of aero rather than GT4 spec? Given that the Ginetta is massively better than any other GT4 car through corners (from personal experience/what the ai are capable of), its possible?I guess it could be, but if so then Ginetta messed up when sending the CAD data. The car shouldn't be to that spec anyways.

Looking at what I see when searching for G55 GT4 and looking at Ginetta's own page for the car I have a hard time seeing wings other than that big and high mounted one, with that large splitter.

APR193
29-02-2016, 19:16
Ginetta Supercup
228573
228576

Ginetta GT4 spec (British GT)
228577
228585

Not sure the front splitter is as different as I thought, looks a bit rounder on the GT4 spec car and squarer at the edges and slightly bigger on the supercup car. Rear wing is the noticeable difference. Lower down and a lot narrower on the GT4 spec. The one we have in game (visually at least) is the supercup version, not the car that competes in GT4 races.

EDIT - The attached thumbnail was a picture I added then tried to remove, obviously not successfully. And I have no idea how to now, someone please advise :p

NuNu2
08-05-2016, 10:15
Ok you are all basing this off who can set the car up to do the single most fastest lap, then complaining that cars are unbalanced. Where i do see that some changes need to be made you are not taking into count Tire wear. Races are not won with a single lap. IRL the races are rather long in comparison to what we do in public lobbys. Now if i take the ginetta vs the aston. Yes the ginetta is faster but the aston is better on rubber. So with an hour long race the aston will come out better. If you make the ginetta slower you will only have people complaining that the ginetta needs to have better tires etc.... you see where im going with this?

Jussi Viljami Karjalainen
08-05-2016, 10:32
Ok you are all basing this off who can set the car up to do the single most fastest lap, then complaining that cars are unbalanced. Where i do see that some changes need to be made you are not taking into count Tire wear. Races are not won with a single lap. IRL the races are rather long in comparison to what we do in public lobbys. Now if i take the ginetta vs the aston. Yes the ginetta is faster but the aston is better on rubber. So with an hour long race the aston will come out better. If you make the ginetta slower you will only have people complaining that the ginetta needs to have better tires etc.... you see where im going with this?That's why we're not being exact. The on average ~half a second gap between the Aston and the Ginetta doesn't matter really. That the M3 and Mustang are on average 2 seconds behind those two though does matter a lot, you will never be able to rake in that gap with better tyre wear characteristics.

azidahaka
09-05-2016, 07:36
I run a GT4 serie of 1h races so i tested all cars beforehand, and really, tire wear is basically a non-issue or irrelevant when compared to performance gap in some cars.

Raven403
09-05-2016, 19:12
We had to abandon all hope of doing a GT4 series because the cars are too far apart in performance, so once again, Spec series it is.....such a shame really.

Celestiale
09-05-2016, 22:45
I think all racing series that use balance of performance should also do so in this game..amongst them the GT4.
Otherwise it's not really immersive, seeing always the same cars dominating.. it's ok for a street race with BAC Mono participating, which is more of a track day - but definitely not for a GT race.
There should be either performance weight, or turbo adjustment on how the last race went - shouldn't be too hard to implement?

Jussi Viljami Karjalainen
09-05-2016, 23:01
There is BoPping already done, unfortunately it seems to have been done in batches. The BMW and the Mustang are pretty close to each other and were done at almost the same time, and the Aston and Ginetta likewise. Can't really fathom why the two pairs weren't balanced with each other, it's not like we didn't know about the imbalance.

The only non-naturally aspirated car in GT4 is the Toyota btw., it's supercharged.

And I can easily see it being a ton of work enforcing the BoP. Currently there's no system for adding ballast weights to the car in the code: That would have to be developed and tested extensively to make sure it always works as expected. There is a wastegate and an intake restrictor setting in the setup, but there's no way to enforce them (a lobby host can't limit specific cars to certain setup options), that system would have to be developed and tested extensively to make sure it always works as expected. Then they'd need a whole new UI for actually adjusting these, and that would also need a lot of work designing everything and making sure the functionality is fine, and it'd be a pretty complicated UI too (multiple complications can arise, like do you adjust ballast per driver, per car, per class, or maybe by all of them separately? Do you put harsher restrictors on all cars of a particular model or just for some drivers?). It'd be a huge amount of work to implement user controlled BoPping now, and I really doubt it'd ever come about.

In a closed setting with people you trust the only thing needed though would be opening up the restrictor setting on cars where it's locked (at least the Ginetta G55 GT4 has it locked) and extending the adjustment range on cars where it's limited (Mustang and Vantage mainly). With those two simple changes people who trust each other could come up with their own BoP and use it, the only risk would be that they couldn't enforce it in any way and would have to just rely on each other to follow the rules.

Celestiale
10-05-2016, 02:00
I remember from an online racing series in Assetto Corsa, that it was possible there with a simple modification, to add ballast like it would be (unusable) fuel. There was a simple .ini file us racers had to download before every race, and it simulated some additional, invisible fuel as ballast weight. I know that it's not 100% physical accurate, since the fuel tank is in another (worse) position then ballast, and moves around with G-force, but i don't know to what extent this is modeled in either AC or PC. But anyway, it worked like a charm, so all fine. And it was not some monster coding, it was a few simple lines from the "race director". However i am no expert, and i don't know if this would/could work the same way in Project Cars. But seeing it being so easy to implement in the other game, i can't imagine it would be too hard to do it the same way here.
Anyway, i don't care what so ever which method would be used, to be honest, as long as the result would fit. Myself only using Project Cars for career, i'd just like to see changing performance within a championship. Getting harder for myself to win multiple races, because of decreasing performance, seeing cars (Toyota for example) rise up after their first few bad races etc...would really help the immersion and tension in those championships..

Jussi Viljami Karjalainen
10-05-2016, 02:22
Hacking away quick fixes like that with no guarantee of actual functionality or being able to enforce it in any way is probably quite doable (they can mod cars into the game, I'd guess they could change the weights of the cars too), and even easier for Assetto Corsa that's designed to be modded, but that sort of crude hacking isn't an option for SMS.

Hopefully some modder will make what you're looking for, but making an actual properly implemented, fully functional, in-game usable and host enforceable system is orders of magnitude more work from multiple teams of people (UI, network code, physics, etc.).

Raven403
10-05-2016, 11:26
In a closed setting with people you trust the only thing needed though would be opening up the restrictor setting on cars where it's locked (at least the Ginetta G55 GT4 has it locked) and extending the adjustment range on cars where it's limited (Mustang and Vantage mainly). With those two simple changes people who trust each other could come up with their own BoP and use it, the only risk would be that they couldn't enforce it in any way and would have to just rely on each other to follow the rules.

This is the reason the choices for multi-class racing in our League had been pretty much whittled away to either LMP1 (if you exclude TS040) and GT3. Group 5 has a huge disparity you cant enforce, GT4 is all over the place, LMP900 has 2 of 3 that matter, the Historics aren't even close. I guess you could make an argument for GT1 but that could be it. Its a shame there are all these different classes but the Class system itself is rendered nearly useless by the fact there is no way to enforce a BoP on the cars in class. Makes doing anything other than a Spec series more work than it should be, and spec racing is getting tiresome.

It would be nice to be able to run a Multi car league with a shred of parity the way it should be.

bobfromaccounting
28-05-2016, 17:49
I found something else (that I haven't noticed) when doing testing for GT4. But the GT86 has no adjustable radiator, while all the others have adjustable openings. And if you end up racing on a hot day, two or three laps at race pace in the GT86 water temps will be higher than 100C (which is too hot).

Im just wondering why this choice was made (or if it was a mistake). Because it doesn't make sense that the radiator can't be adjusted on a GT4 car.

Androphonomania
29-05-2016, 04:30
Prior to our GT4 series(short tracks)where licences are given to the drivers i did some testing in equal conditions. I setup every GT4 with jussis calculator and in game to make it and and ingame for my personal taste. I posted a laptime that felt equal at Nüburgring Sprint. My personal limit, not overexceeding track limits.The cars had 30litres of fuel in an online lobby at 10am.


Laptimes, my personal limit (Nürburgring short, online lobby


Rapide 1:32.5
Rocketbunny 1:32.5
Ginetta 1:30.9
Aston GT4 1.30.9
Mustang 1.31.2
BMW M3 1.31.9 (suffers from the bad gearing the 2nd gear is too short)

The licensing system is not final. As the gt4s laptimes are very track dependent.(E.g. Watkins Glen short m3 and mustang i can do a 1.12.1 with both)
For now my favorite would be a 3-way-licensing

Licenses: A (Ginetta and Aston), B (Mustang,M3), C (Rapide, Rocketbunny)

Guess Bop can only be done manually with the drivers.