Do you think every great track needs some "special feature" to be great?

[Ghoults]

(First of all sorry for maybe putting this thread on wrong forum. It is not all about making tracks but still has something to do with that topic)

By special feature I mean a special corner, straight or some other feature of a track which makes the track stand out and unique. Like Laguna seca has the corkscrew, Mosport has the Moss corners, Nordschleife has the caroussels and the length, Spa has Eau Rouge. Or the Circuit de la Sarthe has the long straight or Sebring has the bumpiness.

And by greatness I really mean the fun and challenge factors, not the greatness of the sporting event tied to that race track.

Do you see that every track needs some kind of special corner or other feature which makes it different? Can a track be a great track without having an individual thing or two to make it memorable? Would Laguna seca be what it is without the corkscrew. Could the corkscrew make an unknown track better? And really should a fictional track have a special corner or straight of some kind to make it stand out from the rest?

What do say? Can a race track be a great track just by having a good flow to it without necessarily having any special corner(s) or places?

 

[tre]

Personally I think it just produces a bad driving experience. Tilke-Fuji is one of my most hated tracks alongside Shanghai, which is also designed by the master of disaster...

 

[woochoo]

I think that you are all missing the point. Monaco, Spa and Monza would no longer be great if every circuit was designed to be exactly like them, with duplicates of their corners. Variety is what makes a race series calendar great.

I agree, but from a theoretical perspective it can be helpful to see what drivers enjoy and then try and translate the contexts of enjoyable bits of road. i think we're just demonstrating tracks we like, or corners we like and putting them together, like a fantasy football team or something.

the best approach, the traditional approach is probably to start with a plot of undulating land and tailor the road to suit, something we can't really do in BTB atm.maybe Piddy might oneday develop a 'random plot of land' tool, with a few characteristics like the current terrain tool, that we can lay track on, then have the road 'boolean' out the under road terrain. i know some guys are interested in doing that with gps data.

a flat track can be great, with some good and imaginative corners and corner sequences they absolutley can. I just like the way elevations really affect apparent characteristic of the car over different parts of the track, but ofcourse an airport track for example probably isn't ever going to have those sorts of elevations, so it better have good corners (top gear test track). take a look at Queensland Raceway in Australia. It's not an airport, its not anything really (no offence to the people who modeled it, only the people who designed it)...
http://rfactorcentral.com/detail.cfm?ID=Queensland Raceway

thanks for the article Eric, it does look pretty good and i'd personally like to nominate myself to not try to build it. Legion looks pretty good too.

 

[Ghoults]

Wasn't this track supposed to have quite a few corners from famous race tracks:
http://www.monticellomotorclub.com/

Or was it some other track. I think it was in top gear in one episode. Can't remember what cars they drove though.

Anyways, I don't really recall myself liking the legion when I tried it many years ago. It just felt a bit artificial to be honest :smirk:

 

[woochoo]

Anyways, I don't really recall myself liking the legion when I tried it many years ago. It just felt a bit artificial to be honest :smirk:

fair enough, i guess once you recognise the piece of road you're driving on it might seem a fraud or like it belongs somewhere else.

 

[Brendon Pywell]

Good question. For me a memorable track needs a unique feature. A memorable race does not.

 

[Ghoults]

fair enough, i guess once you recognise the piece of road you're driving on it might seem a fraud or like it belongs somewhere else.

It was really the lack of flow to it. The corners were great, no doubt about that, but they weren't really connected in the right way. I think I'll have to give it another try though. It's been literally many years since I drove it.

I just looked it and it's available for rfactor as well:
http://www.rfactorcentral.com/detail.cfm?ID=Legion

I think I'll do both just in case.

 

[Ghoults]

I think Legion proves my point about a great being a combination of interesting or even average corners in right order. Legion has great corners but the sum in this case is less than the parts that "went in". It just doesn't flow. Even if every one of those corners are individually great to drive they don't make a great track.

Spa flows pretty well and the eau rouge kinda keeps the momentum and rhytm up by just being there making that straight piece of road less straight. Zandvoort has its unique rhytm with a more "esses"-kind of approach while the sheer length of nordschleife makes it legendary. Road atlanta doesn't really have any special turns but it's still a great track. If you took some zandvoort, some spa and added it to road atlanta would the sum be more than what went it? I'm really starting to think no. Road atlanta doesn't really need a special turn, it already has great turns that make it a great track. But at the same time spa needs eau rouge and laguna seca needs corkscrew.

I don't know really. Maybe the whole question tries to get an answer to question that doesn't have an answer. It surely feels philosphical! Maybe the flow is just about the average corners and the great corner just maginifies that flow. Or maybe the flow is what makes a track nice but a special turns makes it remembered as nice...

 

[Davesta]

I agree, but from a theoretical perspective it can be helpful to see what drivers enjoy and then try and translate the contexts of enjoyable bits of road. i think we're just demonstrating tracks we like, or corners we like and putting them together, like a fantasy football team or something.

I see what you're saying but I just believe that instead of putting all the great corners into one track and creating 'the ultimate circuit' (which theoretically would be great) we should concentrate on making different tracks which are great in their own right.

 

[woochoo]

we should concentrate on making different tracks which are great in their own right.

yep. i wasn't suggesting we force all the players in our fantasy football team to actually play together. just a fanciful notion of the ultimate, which in theory would be great. no need or point, or satisfaction really in actually building it.

so i think we're more or less in agreement.

personally i prefer to re-create existing tracks rather than fantasy tracks anyway, that way if someone says it's rubbish, i can say i didn't design it :embarrassed:

Gjon Camaj:

Ultimately, I expect to see every car, of every paint scheme, from every year driving on every circuit both current and historical, which has ever held an event where an internal combustion engine was used to decide the winner of a race.

so, i'm just doing my bit for rFactor, but on the track side of things, cause i'd be a rubbish car modeler.

 

[Davesta]

yep. i wasn't suggesting we force all the players in our fantasy football team to actually play together. just a fanciful notion of the ultimate, which in theory would be great. no need or point, or satisfaction really in actually building it.

Yep. :good:

Although I prefer fantasy tracks myself. That way if it isn't realistic I can say "well I designed it that way, so I don't care"

 

[woochoo]

Yep. :good:

Although I prefer fantasy tracks myself. That way if it isn't realistic I can say "well I designed it that way, so I don't care"

right on!

 

[spotlamp]

This is a really fascinating topic and one I have particular interest in. I'm a keen track designer and this is my approach to designing tracks.
1. Keep it exciting and try and create several good overtaking places - usually some tight corners at the end of some straights.
2. Elevations give feel to a track, and in particular some nice crests mid-way through a bend!
3. Mix up corners, always have one or two full throttle 4th/5th gear corners and one or two 2nd gear numbers.
4. Add some tricky cambers, not just on camber but off as well.
5. Build in a nice chicane or two and put a fairly high curb hoping AIW line right through the middle of it for entertainment.
6. Add in some very technical corners before long straights that focus on getting the corner just right to nail a good lap time.
7. Drop the odd bump in some crucial parts of the track, either under braking or on the exit when you're on full throttle.
8 Always build tracks with other racers in mind. A good track is not one that you drive around on your own to get a good time, it's one that you have your best races on.

Thanks to the latest version of BTB I'm putting the finishing touches on my best track yet. I'll release it in the next couple of weeks and go back to my very first which I've done the most laps on, just quite rubbish to look at but does have the corkscrew and eua rouge and is very fast to drive on.

H

 

[Alex Kyriak]

right on!

double right on...!

 

[R Soul]

I think it's important that the layout can be remembered. That's not to stay it should be short. The old Nurburgring may be impossible to remember at first, but when you learn to think of it as several shorter tracks (each one admittedly being rather long) you get to the stage where each time you're in a corner, you know what's coming next. With any track you need to know what's coming next so you can prepare for it and drive with confidence. Then it becomes fun.

 

[Emery]

"3. Mix up corners, always have one or two full throttle 4th/5th gear corners and one or two 2nd gear numbers."

Uhm, for which cars? An F1's idea of second gear is in another world compared to an Abarth 1000TC.

 

[Erwin Greven]

Exactly. At my 15 mile track, wich is now for 70% complete, an F1 car can take the esses full trottle, while a Porsche 917 has to lift.

My fastest lap with the BMW F1 is now 5.45 min.

 

[Alex Kyriak]

What is great about places like the Nurburgring, though, is that it is timeless and unique, an absolute set of technical curves and sequences. Absolute in that it doesn't matter what car you're in, it's not tailored to one specific type or series, and yet remains the highest of demanding driving challenges.​

Different cars require different lines and methods, but it's always the Nurburgring - whatever you're in - and crucially, it's always a serious test of your driving skill and of the performance of the car. A weak track will not yield such a variety or diversity of challenge across the board.​

Obviously there's some post-rationalisation here, in that the Nurburgring has become what it is over many years and is the result of a rich history, but for new track makers there are strong lessons to be learned from it's setup, I think, in terms of sequencing, flow and technical challenge. Without trying to sound cliched, but it's one of those unique and timeless tracks; the Tilke era just doesn't enthuse me in the same way (except turn 8 in Istanbul.... which is simply awesome, if only in an F1 car....).​