Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Dirt Track Racer (Pro I)
 
Posts: 122
Joined: 09 Sep 2014, 9:06 am

Post 17 Jan 2015, 10:31 am

My thoughts:
I played the 3M version which had no dice, period). Also the Avalon Hill version, which introduced the chance table, testing brakes, etc.
I'm strongly in favor of leaving start speed as one of the design elements of the car.
I'm in favor of retaining the current build table.
It might be interesting to try pitting rules -- or perhaps we should wait until Doug S. puts out a polished rule?
In terms of schedule, 3 races per year seems to make sense, then call it a season and crown a champ. I like Doug's system of having "Formula 1" and "Formula 2". Perhaps the Redscape racing league could try that format? By the way, what are the season scoring rules in place now?
I also will happily race no matter what you do with the rules, Mike (but more happily if start speed is retained).
Cheers from New Jersey,
User avatar
Truck Series Driver (Pro II)
 
Posts: 22
Joined: 11 Apr 2014, 6:13 am

Post 18 Jan 2015, 8:02 am

kidegan wrote:here is build chart that was in use for tournament play before current build chart. no start speed acc is start speed. acc 20,40,60(0,1,2) dec 20,40 ,60(0,1,2) top speed 120,140,160,180,200(franklin the rocket always has ts of 200)(-1,0,1,2,3) wear 4,5,6,7,8 (-1,0,1,2,3)


This doesn't look like the build table I'm familiar with where you picked 8 points. How many points were allowed in this table?

kidegan wrote:everyone starts with same amount of skill that is up to gm. i used one -3 and 6 -1


I'm not a big fan of the idea of everyone starting with the same skill. Why remove that as a decision point?

kidegan wrote:under these builds... the bidding for start grid was much more lively... under current chart,unless you have 100 ss there is no reason to bid for 1st or second row,so guys with 100 ss are only ones bidding on pole,so they get pole much cheaper than what should be paid.


I disagree with that. In the current system, a race-from-the-front car can be very fragile, and need to hit certain lines to maintain their lead. That can cause very fierce bidding for the pole. In the last 5 years, I've regularly seen bids for pole go for anywhere from 8-11. The last time I raced Monaco the top three bids were 13, 11, and 10.5. You never got bidding like that under the old system.

kidegan wrote:under these builds, the pack did not spread out so fast... a person could still win from front, but it also seemed cars could "come out of clouds " and win (with out crashes assisting)... there was still break aways,but it seemed like a lot more battling, now if you start slow after a few turns you could be back 15+ spaces


Again, I just have to disagree. You seem to be saying that starting so far back leaves you no chance of winning unless there are crashes. And I just don't agree with that. In fact, Rando all this year has been running a race-from-the-back with full wear strategy that's been paying off well for him. He won a race at WBC this year doing just that, and then got 2nd place in the finals doing it again. Also, I just won the Circuit of the Americas in Doug's league with that strategy.

-----------

All that said, I'm fine with trying Kidegan's suggestion of removing start speed altogether and making it part of Acceleration. He's right in the sense that bidding will have a more profound effect on who the winner is, even if I disagree with his other arguments.

The real problem with doing this though is that we have don't have a good idea of what else we'll need to change. Any changes we make to our league will invariably mean that the next several races will be nothing but testing how well we did. Sometimes that's fun, sometimes not so much (like when we screwed up and by the third race everyone figured out that 80/80/full wear was the only way to win).
User avatar
Rally Racer (Pro III)
 
Posts: 5121
Joined: 08 Apr 2002, 9:45 am

Post 19 Jan 2015, 8:54 am

By the way, I am very happy with the current set-up and if we change nothing, that's perfectly fine. Being new to the hobby, I am deferring to the more experience players regards what constitutes the ideal rules set (within the PBEM boundaries).

Good point on the pit rules - see what Doug ends up with and take it from there. I'm leaning towards leaving them out for now. I think I'd like another year of experience with the current set-up before making major changes.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1611
Joined: 12 Jul 2001, 3:11 pm

Post 19 Jan 2015, 10:04 am

Rando wrote:My thoughts:
I played the 3M version which had no dice, period). Also the Avalon Hill version, which introduced the chance table, testing brakes, etc.
I'm strongly in favor of leaving start speed as one of the design elements of the car.
I'm in favor of retaining the current build table.
It might be interesting to try pitting rules -- or perhaps we should wait until Doug S. puts out a polished rule?
In terms of schedule, 3 races per year seems to make sense, then call it a season and crown a champ. I like Doug's system of having "Formula 1" and "Formula 2". Perhaps the Redscape racing league could try that format? By the way, what are the season scoring rules in place now?
I also will happily race no matter what you do with the rules, Mike (but more happily if start speed is retained).
Cheers from New Jersey,


I'm with Rando on the build table and the pitting rules. Would like to see the polished rules from Doug before we try them here. My preference, at least with the Grand Prix circuits, would be to use relatively stable rules - not a testing ground.

And I think we're headed toward Formula 1/Formula 2 with the Senior and Junior Circuit discussion. There may be more to the Formula 1/2 than I realize (the last race on COTA is the only one of his races that I have participated in).

Kal
User avatar
Rally Racer (Pro III)
 
Posts: 5121
Joined: 08 Apr 2002, 9:45 am

Post 19 Jan 2015, 1:46 pm

Kal wrote:And I think we're headed toward Formula 1/Formula 2 with the Senior and Junior Circuit discussion. There may be more to the Formula 1/2 than I realize (the last race on COTA is the only one of his races that I have participated in).

I think Doug promotes/relegates after each race with only one or two drivers shifting? We'll do it after every 3 races (a season) with half the field moving.
User avatar
Dirt Track Racer (Pro I)
 
Posts: 122
Joined: 09 Sep 2014, 9:06 am

Post 19 Jan 2015, 2:06 pm

SLOTerp wrote:
Kal wrote:And I think we're headed toward Formula 1/Formula 2 with the Senior and Junior Circuit discussion. There may be more to the Formula 1/2 than I realize (the last race on COTA is the only one of his races that I have participated in).

I think Doug promotes/relegates after each race with only one or two drivers shifting? We'll do it after every 3 races (a season) with half the field moving.



Doug does it seasonally, with only 3 drivers promoted / demoted from F1. More change in F2 because you have promotions up to F1 and also demotions down to F3.
User avatar
Truck Series Driver (Pro II)
 
Posts: 22
Joined: 11 Apr 2014, 6:13 am

Post 20 Jan 2015, 7:01 am

Rando wrote:
SLOTerp wrote:
Kal wrote:And I think we're headed toward Formula 1/Formula 2 with the Senior and Junior Circuit discussion. There may be more to the Formula 1/2 than I realize (the last race on COTA is the only one of his races that I have participated in).

I think Doug promotes/relegates after each race with only one or two drivers shifting? We'll do it after every 3 races (a season) with half the field moving.


Doug does it seasonally, with only 3 drivers promoted / demoted from F1. More change in F2 because you have promotions up to F1 and also demotions down to F3.


Doug's current system:

4) Promotion and Relegation: Reminders and updates based on the upcoming expansion.

After this race:
Bottom driver from F2 will drop to F3.
Bottom 3 drivers from F3 will drop to F4 (this is a one-time mass migration to seed F4, assuming stable numbers only one 1 driver will drop from F3 to F4 after race 2)

After this season (we are in race 1/3)
* Bottom 3 drivers will drop from F1 to F2.
* Top 3 drivers will move up from F2 to F1.
* Bottom 2 drivers will drop from F2 to F3.
* Top 2 drivers will move up from F3 to F2.
* Bottom 2 drivers will drop from F3 to F4.
* Top 2 drivers will move up from F4 to F3.

The number of drivers who move at the end of the season is set to 25% of the lower field.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1611
Joined: 12 Jul 2001, 3:11 pm

Post 28 Jan 2015, 7:44 am

I think we should head to Asia for Season 2. Marina Bay looks like it could be a fun one.
User avatar
Rally Racer (Pro III)
 
Posts: 5121
Joined: 08 Apr 2002, 9:45 am

Post 28 Jan 2015, 10:07 am

Done...

We just have to select three from the following choices:

Suzuka: http://lucidphoenix.com/sc/tracks/Suzuka.pdf
Marina Bay: http://lucidphoenix.com/sc/tracks/Singapore.pdf
New Delhi: http://lucidphoenix.com/sc/tracks/newDheli.pdf
Sepang: http://lucidphoenix.com/sc/tracks/Sepang.pdf
Shanghai: http://lucidphoenix.com/sc/tracks/Shanghai.pdf
Yeongam: http://lucidphoenix.com/sc/tracks/Yeongam.pdf
Instanbul: http://lucidphoenix.com/sc/tracks/Istanbul.pdf

Maybe I'll set up a poll to see where that takes us.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 6523
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 28 Jan 2015, 10:32 am

I like Singapore! That 1 lane 40 space would be deadly...
User avatar
Rally Racer (Pro III)
 
Posts: 5121
Joined: 08 Apr 2002, 9:45 am

Post 28 Jan 2015, 10:45 am

Poll is set... vote away!
User avatar
Rally Racer (Pro III)
 
Posts: 5121
Joined: 08 Apr 2002, 9:45 am

Post 29 Jan 2015, 7:40 pm

Season two rebranding underway!

The overall league name: Redscape Formula Racing.

A season will be designated as a Grand Prix or GP with numerical suffix. GP2 is coming up.

GP1 (current season) consists of only one circuit, or league. GP2 will have two circuits, C1 (senior) and C2 (junior).

The Montreal race does not belong to a circuit. We have it listed as an exhibition - seems fine to me.

Got all that?!

A big thanks to Kal for coming up with the names. So, when you see a reference to RFR GP2 C2, you can thank him :tsk:
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1611
Joined: 12 Jul 2001, 3:11 pm

Post 29 Jan 2015, 8:49 pm

SLOTerp wrote:A big thanks to Kal for coming up with the names. So, when you see a reference to RFR GP2 C2, you can thank him :tsk:


"You're mocking me, aren't you?" :wantsome:
Dirt Track Racer (Pro I)
 
Posts: 31
Joined: 09 Sep 2014, 4:41 pm

Post 14 Feb 2015, 3:50 pm

ALL,

I had a thought on start speed that might be interesting. First, I haven't fully vetted this idea myself, but I thought I would throw it out here for discussion.

Make start speed and additive to the acceleration. The values could be something like this (-20/0/+20/+40), this would be applied to your acceleration. I think this approach would warrant a change to the restart rule after a spin and this change to acceleration would be applied on restarts.

As and example your car could be (-20,60,60,180,8(24),12x1,1x3). This car will go slow out of the blocks but gains wear points for later in the race. Or if you want to run up front, then you could build a car with (+20,80,40,160,7(21), 12x1, 1x3). This car would jump out of the blocks and be able to take some risks on the corners with a high restart speed.

Again, I haven't fully vetted this idea, but it feels like it might be an interesting option.
User avatar
Rally Racer (Pro III)
 
Posts: 5121
Joined: 08 Apr 2002, 9:45 am

Post 18 Feb 2015, 12:30 pm

Tim, I really can't respond to your idea with any authority. This is still pretty new to me (less than a year under my belt) so I think the more experienced racers would be better able to address it.

Having said that, there is one thing you could most definitely do - run an experimental race with your proposed set-up. You, or anyone, is welcome to use these forums from which to RM a race. While you may not get a large field, you'd probably get one big enough to ascertain the pros & cons of the set-up.