iRacing... help... must... resist!

I sure had to pay for ALL my stuff in Boot Camp, other than clothes

In fact, they made me throw all the **** away I brought with me, then go
re-buy it again LOL

-Larry

"Andrew MacPherson" > wrote in message
ddress_disguised...
> (Larry) wrote:
>
>> Every soldier goes through Boot Camp
>
> Yes, but they don't have to pay for the 'pleasure'. :->
>
> Andrew McP
>

I just spent a horrible weekend at Atlanta in the SilverCrown. I know the
feeling

-Larry

"hoover" > wrote in message
e...

> Right now I'm suffering from a bit of simracing "disillusionment" or
> whatever one would like to call it, so maybe it's not exactly fair to
> assess iR at the moment ;-)
>
> All the best,
>
> Uwe

Actually, you get penalized if 1/2 the car goes off the track.

And that is all I will say about that

-Larry

"Wingwong Woo" > wrote in message
news:_6onk.69166$nD.62767@pd7urf1no...
> "Larry" > wrote in
> :
>
>> A tip about the grass. Below a certain speed, the off penalties will
>> not appear so if you know you have to go off course, get your speed
>> down.
>>
>> I don't remember if it's 30mph or 10 mph, but one of those will negate
>> off-penalties.
>>
>> -Larry
>
> Whats' the point of penalizing for going on the grass? Isn't the loss of
> time enough of a penalty? They don't get penalized for touching the grass
> in real racing.

> implementing any rules via software can seem an easy thing
> at first glance but when you think about all the contingencies that should ideally be covered it becomes a nightmare.

That doesn't excuse doing nothing at all. At least the predecessor,
NR2003 tried to implement some type of rules.

One obvious thing would be no penalty for avoiding or having contact
with one or more cars that were well below the normal speed for a
particular section of track.

Something strange is happening. I thought when I got to the Skippy I'd
enjoy myself more... be racing with people who'd come through the ranks a
little and could be trusted to race sensibly. Instead I've had three
races and in every race my SR has gone down due to...

Well, I guess it could be me. After all, if you see a lot of accidents,
chances are you're the problem, not them. ;-)

But I've had offs because drivers spun in front of me running before the
can walk. I've had collisions because drivers have spun off and been
impatient when passing me again... exhibiting 'I have the right of way
because I'm faster' type behaviour. I've had collisions when I slow down
to be lapped and they collect me with a nice little x4 for my trouble,
despite me being well over on one side of the track. And I've just --
going against the grain -- nearly had some fun!

Found a guy who was a little bit slower than me, but every time we were
getting into some kind of nip & tuck racing groove, either a recovering
spinner or lapping hotshot would put their oar in.

Anyway, that's racing I guess. But it's a real change from the Solstice
racing I had, where it was easy to be slow and considerate. My Skippy
experience so far is turning me off rather than on. I can get racing this
dodgy on any LFS server at any time of say for free! :-)

I suspect the trick will be to hang on for long enough to get put into
the dunce's league with all the other slow-pokes. At this rate though, I
may not make it that far.

Andrew McP

"jeffareid" > wrote in message
...
>> implementing any rules via software can seem an easy thing
>> at first glance but when you think about all the contingencies that
>> should ideally be covered it becomes a nightmare.
>
> That doesn't excuse doing nothing at all. At least the predecessor,
> NR2003 tried to implement some type of rules.
>
> One obvious thing would be no penalty for avoiding or having contact
> with one or more cars that were well below the normal speed for a
> particular section of track.
>

Ok. Obvious is it? What about easy to implement? How does the program
know that someone did not deliberately run into them?

>> One obvious thing would be no penalty for avoiding or having contact
>> with one or more cars that were well below the normal speed for a
>> particular section of track.

> Ok. Obvious is it? What about easy to implement? How does the program know that someone did not deliberately run into
> them?

If a car is on the track going well below the normal speed, than any
contact is the slow car drivers fault, by definition. It's better than
having any contact be both drivers fault. With a damage system, why would
any player deliberately crash into another player, especially when the
"other" player is going very slow?

As far as deliberate wrecking goes, a service should include track
monitors or at least replay reviews (for complaints about wreckers).

jeffareid wrote:
>>> One obvious thing would be no penalty for avoiding or having contact
>>> with one or more cars that were well below the normal speed for a
>>> particular section of track.
>
>> Ok. Obvious is it? What about easy to implement? How does the program know that someone did not deliberately run into
>> them?
>
> If a car is on the track going well below the normal speed, than any
> contact is the slow car drivers fault, by definition. It's better than
> having any contact be both drivers fault. With a damage system, why would
> any player deliberately crash into another player, especially when the
> "other" player is going very slow?
>
> As far as deliberate wrecking goes, a service should include track
> monitors or at least replay reviews (for complaints about wreckers).

Hmm, I'm sure, iRacing would have to think about their budget.

One guy per race just watching! Who's gonna pay?
10 complaints (just guessing) per race! Who's gonna check and who's paying?

When I did a little SCCA racing in San Diego, every racer had to stand as a
corner marshal for at least one session

-Larry

"Ronald Stoehr" > wrote in message
...
> jeffareid wrote:
>>>> One obvious thing would be no penalty for avoiding or having contact
>>>> with one or more cars that were well below the normal speed for a
>>>> particular section of track.
>>
>>> Ok. Obvious is it? What about easy to implement? How does the program
>>> know that someone did not deliberately run into them?
>>
>> If a car is on the track going well below the normal speed, than any
>> contact is the slow car drivers fault, by definition. It's better than
>> having any contact be both drivers fault. With a damage system, why would
>> any player deliberately crash into another player, especially when the
>> "other" player is going very slow?
>>
>> As far as deliberate wrecking goes, a service should include track
>> monitors or at least replay reviews (for complaints about wreckers).
>
> Hmm, I'm sure, iRacing would have to think about their budget.
>
> One guy per race just watching! Who's gonna pay?
> 10 complaints (just guessing) per race! Who's gonna check and who's
> paying?

"jeffareid" > wrote in message
...
>>> One obvious thing would be no penalty for avoiding or having contact
>>> with one or more cars that were well below the normal speed for a
>>> particular section of track.
>
>> Ok. Obvious is it? What about easy to implement? How does the program
>> know that someone did not deliberately run into them?
>
> If a car is on the track going well below the normal speed, than any
> contact is the slow car drivers fault, by definition. It's better than
> having any contact be both drivers fault. With a damage system, why would
> any player deliberately crash into another player, especially when the
> "other" player is going very slow?
>

For fun. They like to wreck others.