I'd like to get back to where all this started, BTB Sweden - Limbo overbig penalty time compared to other stages. That's the reason I brought this whole thing up. Other stages you get about 3-8 min penalty. Limbo was over 10 minutes. There might be something to adjust if you guys decide to keep current system. There ain't nothing wrong with nowadays rules in my opinion.. I'd keep driving here with those rules. Again I thank everyone who has time and talent to organise all this.
RDRC Season 4 Rules discussion
- Thread starter Rick Bamford
- Start date
- Status
Tero Leppanen
Cloudy-
My opinion is that these current rules works just fine, only thing I would change is as Olli said, Penalty should be similar in all stages. So if I retire in stage 1 and some other guy (who were driving same pace as I was) retires in stage 2, I get let´s say 6 mins penalty and that other guy gets 15 mins. Good competition gone between us two even though we both retired 1 stage. Just my opinion 
And that's one of the reasons why penalty should be relatively high. Maybe I'm weird, but for me rallying, apart from the specific driving style, is about promoting fighting will like that:
About the current system - as it's already been said it's already insufficent, as slower FWD cars in bad conditions come really close to DNF times, and this needs to be improved. Personally I'm already considering overall retirement after a big mistake in RDRC rally and my system of loop-based retirements has already been explained; I would suggest not going under +10min/stage penalty as well.
interesting discussion here, my point, as one of the really slow guys who is here for the fun and only has about 60 mins to prepare for the whole event the night before: keep it all as it is, we are a huge crowd, it's great fun, workload for admins seems to be such that they don't drop dead (well not yet), everybody donate 1€ for every post you've written in this thread to race department
First, let me start off by saying I really like the S3 rules, I think the officiating team has done a great job of creating a system where everyone has a niche to fight for points in, not just the top guys. I think that is reflected in the participation we are getting, and I don't see any places that need major rule changes.
The two places that have given me some heartburn are team points and retirement rules, neither of which have a clear cut solution, both have strong pros and cons.
Regarding retirements:
The currently rules are a very liberal form of FIA superally rules. The objective for this in the WRC is to attract and retain competitors, just like in the RDRC analog. The manufacturers spend insane amounts of money on these programs and have very limited testing opportunities. The drivers have very limited time to practice in their cars, and this is why you will see the WRC teams at regional rallies at the start of the season. Superally makes it so when a team goes out on day one, they still have development time on the car and seat time for the driver, they do not lose this vital practice time. The fans and sponsors get to see the cars carry on, and the top teams continue to get press coverage.
Being able to crash out on a stage and continue on adds a lot of accessibility to the RDRC, and lowers the difficulty considerably. However we do not need the practice or development time, we car run a stage and work on car setups whenever we want.
If superally attracts competitors, then it has a lot of value. However, nothing makes me roll my eyes more than getting beat on a rally by someone who completely destroyed their car to the point of not being able to finish a stage. That is not rally to me, we have turned it into a string of time trials where one stage has very little bearing on the next stages. In fact I can see situations where it would be more advantageous to just retire on the stage you took damage on and come back with a fresh car, losing less time than if you were to push on thru 3 more stages to service with a broken car.
The current rules encourage and even require a driving style where you are 100% at all times. This puts the slower drivers at a real disadvantage since they are forced to push all the time instead of driving within their limits and ensuring they finish without crashing. There are no scenarios where being conservative is the correct strategy when someone that is faster than you can totally destroy their car, yet finish above you in the overall classification.
That being said, there is plenty of opportunity for people that want proper traditional rally in the Rallyesim rallies. They are multiday, and retirement from a stage means retirement from a leg. With that in mind, I think there is room for a softer ruleset as the people that want a harder ruleset have an outlet for that already.
So I am in support of DNF stage = DNF rally, but not at the expense of participation.
The two places that have given me some heartburn are team points and retirement rules, neither of which have a clear cut solution, both have strong pros and cons.
Regarding retirements:
The currently rules are a very liberal form of FIA superally rules. The objective for this in the WRC is to attract and retain competitors, just like in the RDRC analog. The manufacturers spend insane amounts of money on these programs and have very limited testing opportunities. The drivers have very limited time to practice in their cars, and this is why you will see the WRC teams at regional rallies at the start of the season. Superally makes it so when a team goes out on day one, they still have development time on the car and seat time for the driver, they do not lose this vital practice time. The fans and sponsors get to see the cars carry on, and the top teams continue to get press coverage.
Being able to crash out on a stage and continue on adds a lot of accessibility to the RDRC, and lowers the difficulty considerably. However we do not need the practice or development time, we car run a stage and work on car setups whenever we want.
If superally attracts competitors, then it has a lot of value. However, nothing makes me roll my eyes more than getting beat on a rally by someone who completely destroyed their car to the point of not being able to finish a stage. That is not rally to me, we have turned it into a string of time trials where one stage has very little bearing on the next stages. In fact I can see situations where it would be more advantageous to just retire on the stage you took damage on and come back with a fresh car, losing less time than if you were to push on thru 3 more stages to service with a broken car.
The current rules encourage and even require a driving style where you are 100% at all times. This puts the slower drivers at a real disadvantage since they are forced to push all the time instead of driving within their limits and ensuring they finish without crashing. There are no scenarios where being conservative is the correct strategy when someone that is faster than you can totally destroy their car, yet finish above you in the overall classification.
That being said, there is plenty of opportunity for people that want proper traditional rally in the Rallyesim rallies. They are multiday, and retirement from a stage means retirement from a leg. With that in mind, I think there is room for a softer ruleset as the people that want a harder ruleset have an outlet for that already.
So I am in support of DNF stage = DNF rally, but not at the expense of participation.
Erik Tveit
I can haz cookie?
For the DNF thingy.
Take the slowest driver times and add 10 minutes to it. Harsh yes, but that's rally.
Take the slowest driver times and add 10 minutes to it. Harsh yes, but that's rally.
Warren Dawes
Premium
I'll take a slightly different view of things.
Instead of trying to manipulate the current (and in-game) Rules in an attempt to more heavily penalise DNF's vs those who manage to finish, how about increasing the risk of getting a DNF.
ie. use Realistic Damage.
This will make the aggressive risk taking drivers have a higher likelihood of getting DNF's. It increases the chances for the skilled or more careful drivers. It allows all drivers the chance to continue in the rally, rather than beeing DQ'd for a DNF. It means we could keep using the in-game rules (something I much prefer, externally manipulated rules always leads to arguments at some point). It should also be considered to be more close to Realism. It will have even more impact with Cumulative damage.
I think people are getting carried away with thinking that people with DNF's finishing high up is some kind of normality here. I have seen very little evidence to support this, usually drivers with even one DNF finish well down the list. So, drivers with a DNF ARE penalised now, why get so draconian that we remove them from the Round? BTW, not all DNF's are caused by careless drivers trashing their cars.
The recent example with the J cars finishing close to the penalty time does raise an issue that probably wasn't built into the in-game rules. The penalty times for Stages was no doubt designed to the WRC cars, so there is a case for adjustment due to us using much slower J cars. This becomes exaggerated on the long stages like Joux Plane or Noiker. Therefore some adaption of Lukasz' idea of more severe DNF times has merit. I wouldn't go to extreme levels, but something like an additional 3 to 6 mins added to existing times. Preferably something that everyone knows up front, not based on other drivers times which wouldn't be known until after the final results are published.
So my suggestion summarised:
Realistic Damage / Cumulative Damage / Review current default Stage Penalty times to match the slower cars (at least for the longer Stages).
Instead of trying to manipulate the current (and in-game) Rules in an attempt to more heavily penalise DNF's vs those who manage to finish, how about increasing the risk of getting a DNF.
ie. use Realistic Damage.
This will make the aggressive risk taking drivers have a higher likelihood of getting DNF's. It increases the chances for the skilled or more careful drivers. It allows all drivers the chance to continue in the rally, rather than beeing DQ'd for a DNF. It means we could keep using the in-game rules (something I much prefer, externally manipulated rules always leads to arguments at some point). It should also be considered to be more close to Realism. It will have even more impact with Cumulative damage.
I think people are getting carried away with thinking that people with DNF's finishing high up is some kind of normality here. I have seen very little evidence to support this, usually drivers with even one DNF finish well down the list. So, drivers with a DNF ARE penalised now, why get so draconian that we remove them from the Round? BTW, not all DNF's are caused by careless drivers trashing their cars.
The recent example with the J cars finishing close to the penalty time does raise an issue that probably wasn't built into the in-game rules. The penalty times for Stages was no doubt designed to the WRC cars, so there is a case for adjustment due to us using much slower J cars. This becomes exaggerated on the long stages like Joux Plane or Noiker. Therefore some adaption of Lukasz' idea of more severe DNF times has merit. I wouldn't go to extreme levels, but something like an additional 3 to 6 mins added to existing times. Preferably something that everyone knows up front, not based on other drivers times which wouldn't be known until after the final results are published.
So my suggestion summarised:
Realistic Damage / Cumulative Damage / Review current default Stage Penalty times to match the slower cars (at least for the longer Stages).
[Retracted, post had little value for topic subject.]
Ok, the realistic damage and penalty times/DNF rules we will continue to debate I am sure. But here are a few of the other things I have been thinking of for season 4.
- Introducing a Historic class or RWD class.
- Changing the cars for the Rookie and J-RDRC classes.
- Having the final stage of the rally worth 1, 2 and 3 extra points for each car class (Powerstage)
- Introducing a Historic class or RWD class.
- Changing the cars for the Rookie and J-RDRC classes.
- Having the final stage of the rally worth 1, 2 and 3 extra points for each car class (Powerstage)
@Rick:
first idea - no interest, would split the field up too much
second idea - haven't followed that part of the tournie closely, so no comment
third idea - like it! (not that i would ever score points, lol)
first idea - no interest, would split the field up too much
second idea - haven't followed that part of the tournie closely, so no comment
third idea - like it! (not that i would ever score points, lol)
As interesting as it sounds it might be hard to pull of. I like RWD cars in RBR, but in practice those cars don't stand a fighting chance when pitted against any other class (they tend to be beaten even by A5 cars on gravel/snow), thus it would become a totally separate championship. And personally I'd rather try to fight with the fastest guys in a bit more competitive Production cars - that might cause RWD class become underrepresented and unimportant.
We could however create a semi-championship using every second club event between the RDRC seasons, 3-4 rounds at most. That'd still be fresh, we could use different car each time and it would be more fun that super-serious, which goes well with those slide-happy cars
.Depends on what you have planned. They're not broken now, but I might be oblivious to some problems
.Nice touch. I'm in for these kind of incentives, that's why I suggested Polish/Czech-inspired scoring system.
Warren Dawes
Premium
I reckon this could be popular (as a separate class), even if they aren't competitive with some other car classes.
I also think there might be scope here, maybe cars with a bit more grunt.
Depends what you decide with the DNF rule. There may be only a small number of cars still elligible by that Stage.
I like the Historic class, and would most likely join it, but 5-6 classes is a tad too much, no?
Also agreed with Lukasz, Historics would be totally on their own. Might work better as a mini Rally Club series.
Also agreed with Lukasz, Historics would be totally on their own. Might work better as a mini Rally Club series.
- I wouldn't have any interest in the Historic Car Classes
- Yes, I think that something needs to be done wrt the mix of graded drivers and the J Class cars. If you start with
Junior class car whilst others are running Production Cars then it might mean that don't have the ability to compete
fairly with the Production cars for a Grade 3 win. I'm not sure that mixing driver grades with car classes works, perhaps
two car classes and no driver grade award categories - at least whilst newly qualified grade 2 drivers are allowed
to remain with grade 3 drivers. - A super special stage with extra points would be fine but you might want to make it optional or with no retirement or
time penalties.
I know the RWD cars wouldn't be competitive with the others. It would allow those that enjoy the cars but want to be part of the championship to run for therir own championship. I think having a seperate championship running another week would take to much away from the Rallyclub.
This brings me to another point though. There have been a few people that have said "why don't we have a seperate class for the A2 cars instead of making them run with the A1 cars". The only reason we included the A2 cars was to give grade 2 drivers the chance to run a WRC car if thats what they really wanted. But doing that would mean that they understand they will not be competitive against the outright guys. It's their choice. The same would be for a RWD class. If you run in this you will not be running for outright, your choice. I've allowed enough selection in car classes for each grade to give something to everyone, each driver needs to think about what they want from the championship and drive the car that will give them that.
The reason we have the overlap between classes and grdaes is so that a driver moving grade doesn't have to change cars (If they have spent time skinning a car it means they can still use it). Maybe if we make the grade move immediate rather than allowing drivers to remain in the lower grade and take their grade points (maybe 50% of them) to the new grade. I was also thinking of dropping the participation element out of the grade moves and making it purely based on performance. I think mixing the car classes and driver grades works well.
This brings me to another point though. There have been a few people that have said "why don't we have a seperate class for the A2 cars instead of making them run with the A1 cars". The only reason we included the A2 cars was to give grade 2 drivers the chance to run a WRC car if thats what they really wanted. But doing that would mean that they understand they will not be competitive against the outright guys. It's their choice. The same would be for a RWD class. If you run in this you will not be running for outright, your choice. I've allowed enough selection in car classes for each grade to give something to everyone, each driver needs to think about what they want from the championship and drive the car that will give them that.
The reason we have the overlap between classes and grdaes is so that a driver moving grade doesn't have to change cars (If they have spent time skinning a car it means they can still use it). Maybe if we make the grade move immediate rather than allowing drivers to remain in the lower grade and take their grade points (maybe 50% of them) to the new grade. I was also thinking of dropping the participation element out of the grade moves and making it purely based on performance. I think mixing the car classes and driver grades works well.
As long as there is a FWD car available to me in Grade 2, I am fine with this. I do think the S1600 cars are a perfect fit for J-RDRC, but I would definitely compete in a lower horsepower car as well.
To be honest R3 and S1600 are really approaching the limits of how much power can be put thru a FWD car and maintain driveability. The FWD cars that get up into the 250-300hp are hard to control without really precise throttle control. In poor conditions it gets even worse.
My thoughts exactly. S1600 cars are very fast, and adding grunt to Junior cars would be counter-intuitive. The only change I can think about is taking away some power in Rookies, i.e. changing down a class or so.
As for the class progression: although it is hard to "win" a Grade the system is actually very balanced if you ask me; it allows you to progress through grade while staying in the same car (especially if you aim at J-RDRC cars from the beginning). Personally I don't like the grade classification (for me it is great as an "internal" tool for putting people in the correct category and tracking their progress, not a points classification), but the Grades themselves are spot on right now.
I won't vote against RWD cars, but despite being a big fan I can assure you that personally I won't make the switch; mostly because I'd like to see if I'm improving pitted against the fastest production drivers, if I tend to crash less and all; RWD is more of a toy and we don't have enough "pros" to spread around all the classes yet. Also the "mini-champ" for RWD is something that could be organized between RDRC seasons to avoid taking away from the club, just like Senad understood it. There were similar series organized in the GTL club if I'm not mistaken.
As for the class progression: although it is hard to "win" a Grade the system is actually very balanced if you ask me; it allows you to progress through grade while staying in the same car (especially if you aim at J-RDRC cars from the beginning). Personally I don't like the grade classification (for me it is great as an "internal" tool for putting people in the correct category and tracking their progress, not a points classification), but the Grades themselves are spot on right now.
I won't vote against RWD cars, but despite being a big fan I can assure you that personally I won't make the switch; mostly because I'd like to see if I'm improving pitted against the fastest production drivers, if I tend to crash less and all; RWD is more of a toy and we don't have enough "pros" to spread around all the classes yet
. Also the "mini-champ" for RWD is something that could be organized between RDRC seasons to avoid taking away from the club, just like Senad understood it. There were similar series organized in the GTL club if I'm not mistaken.
WRC Academy have a system whereby each stage win earns the driver a point. Perhaps this could be used for the respective groups (A1, A2 etc.) and not overall, or vice versa. Just a thought, that's how Breen won the WRC Academy with no points between them. Encourages people to go faster rather than settling very early on.
I ike the idea with Group H championship in between the seasons.
Short rallies 6-8 stages.
I was thinking just this when I was out walking today
Hopefully RSRBR 2012 will bring some more old cars to us.
Short rallies 6-8 stages.
I was thinking just this when I was out walking today
Hopefully RSRBR 2012 will bring some more old cars to us.
- Status
Latest News
-
F1 Manager 2024’s New Mentality System, Pitbox Order DetailedAlongside being able to create a custom team, drivers can now be poached, races can be simulated...- Thomas Harrison-Lord
- Updated:
- 2 min read
-
Gran Turismo 7’s Next Update Includes Škoda’s Vision GTAn electric concept marks Škoda’s debut within Gran Turismo, and it will be joined by Honda’s...
- Thomas Harrison-Lord
- Updated:
- 2 min read
-
How The BTCC and Motorsport Games ReunitedIn a surprise move last week, official BTCC content will once again be present within rFactor 2...
- Thomas Harrison-Lord
- Updated:
- 5 min read
-
Sponsored MOZA Racing & Lamborghini Redefine Racing Boundaries with The Real Race Super Trofeo 2024MOZA Racing proudly announces its collaboration with Lamborghini for the launch of The Real Race...- OverTake.gg
- Updated:
- 6 min read
-
Forza Horizon 5 Apex Allstars Update Adds Five New Race Cars, Plus Yet More DLCA new Apex Allstars Festival Playlist kicks off this Thursday in Forza Horizon 5, joined by a...
- Thomas Harrison-Lord
- Updated:
- 3 min read
-
F1 24's Updated Car Performance and Handling ExplainedWhile we haven’t tested it yet, on paper it sounds like significant changes have been made to...
- Thomas Harrison-Lord
- Updated:
- 3 min read
-
Tim Jarschel Wins 2024 DTM Esports Pro championshipCombining searing pace with consistency, Jarschel took home the title despite a charge from...
- Thomas Harrison-Lord
- Updated:
- 3 min read