Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: User defined opponent limits.

  1. #1

    Question User defined opponent limits.

    Has any thought been given to giving the players the option of defining the performance level of the cars they compete against?

    I was in a race recently with a pair of cars with 725 and 685 performance and a pair of cars with 390 and 375 performance.
    The performance of my cars was 500 and 425.

    I think a car with 725 performance should easily beat a car with 500 performance. Likewise a car with 500 should easily beat a car with 390.
    You see it all the time in other races that have multiple classes all competing on the track at the same time. The higher performance cars outclass the lower performance cars. But in Formula One you have the front runners and the guys who are having a bad day. But the Formula One performance is more or less comparable until the guys having a bad day drop back and the guy having a good day can do no wrong.

    If the player could define car performance of opponents to the performance of his own car +/- 50 for example, the best performing car he'd face would be 550 if his car performance was 500. The worst performing car he'd see would be 450. It would eliminate the 725 vs 500 mismatches. It would also eliminate 500 vs 375 mismatches.
    My observation on two cars in the race so far has been a spilt field. Half the cars with performance aimed at the #1 car, half aimed at the #2 car.
    So half the cars in the field would be +/- the #1 car performance. Half the cars would be +/- the #2 car performance. The automatic matching I've observed for the #2 car has been much better than for the #1 car.

    Then players who think they're unbeatable could have no limit and try to beat cars with 725 performance with cars with 375 performance. And you could have a new award category. Greatest gap between winner performance and opponent performance.
    And players with a lower opinion of their skill could set their opponent performance to a more modest range. With a minimum of perhaps +/- 25 to give them some challenge.

    Another obvious player limit is number of boosts. A driver with only 8 boosts could limit opponents to +/- 2 boosts. Instead of facing players with 15 boosts. Maybe a player with only 8 boosts can beat a player with 15 boosts. But throwing a guy into the deep end and telling him swim is rather mean. Letting a guy work on his skills in a shallower part of the pool and try out the deep end when he has a little experience and a little conidence tends to have better results. Players who think they're unbeatable could still have no limits and drive against players with 15 boosts when the have only 8. You could even make it possible for a player with 8 boosts to only face opponents with 15 boosts.

    I'm not sure what +/- I would choose. But I would like to define the performance of my opponent +/- my own performance and +/- my own number of boosts.

    I would also like a little more time to exit out of a race. Sometimes I say enter a race, then realize I haven't changed drivers yet, but get no countdown timer, I just get dumped into the race because the countdown timer was at 0 or 1 when I said enter. Not allowing any more players in when the countdown timer hits 15 or 10 would give a little time to exit the race and fix my driver problem when I realize the problem after saying enter.
    I hope I'm not the only player who just wants to race and goes through the race set up on autopilot, then after entering thinks of something they should have done but forgot, wants to exit but can't. ;-)

  2. #2
    Developer
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    561
    Hi,
    if we would make our matchmaiking as detailled as wished, there would never be a competition against another human driver. However, with the latest update, this total mismatch between PPs will run out because we significantly reduced the high level upgrade performance. There are still some components out there that are totally overpowered but they can't be produced from today on.

    Another thing: if the player would be able to choose his opponent PP there would be no purpose in upgrading his car.

  3. #3
    So, _spc07, you're replying to this proposal by saying that you've reduced the high-level upgrades in order to even-out the field, but you go on to indicate that with the proposed method there would be no reason for upgrades. Seems to me that you've already removed the purpose for upgrading our components since they still cost the same number of stars for less return.

    I think Enzo Swift is on to something, though I don't think the exact method would work. I really believe that you need to do something, algorithm matching opponents, to even out performance of matched vehicles. Even without high level upgrades, you'll have guys running 150PPI over anyone else in a race. Put those guys in their own series! At this point the games has gotten much too skewed to remain interesting. Whenever you start a race, you're already in the hole and just waisting your components, tires and stars invested in upgrades (if applicable) getting your rear-end handed to you by a guy who can use the "oil" action for the whole duration of the race and still win handily.

    You may say that this corresponds with real life F1, where Manor keep going out to get lapped twice by the Silver Arrows, but this isn't real life and you have the tools to give everyone a chance, whilst still respecting the investments that each player has made (everyone with same actions is a VERY bad decision).

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by _spc07 View Post
    ...there would never be a competition against another human driver...
    ...Another thing: if the player would be able to choose his opponent PP there would be no purpose in upgrading his car.
    Thanks for the reply.
    I disagree about finding competition however.
    I occasionally enter a race with my car performance 440 and 390 and find 10 to 14 human vehicles (most, but not all 2 cars per human) and every car in the field is +/- 50 of my car.
    The fast group range 480 to 420. The slow group range 400 to 370. And all the humans have 13 to 15 boosts. So getting a group of humans all in the same class is possible. A large group even. The trouble I find is the rest of the time, most of the time, 1 to 4 cars in the 725 to 600 range get thrown in and outclass the field.
    So when it's 4 of them, the rest of the cars are racing for 5th place.

    I upgrade my car to go faster. I presume other players upgrade their car to go faster. So when I go faster I meet more competition because I face better drivers. You get better components as you go up in level. Maybe I just don't understand how things are supposed to work? I just don't understand the point of grouping cars with performance ranges from 390 to 725. Maybe if I understood that I'd understand what you expect when a 725 is the best in the field and a 390 is the worst in the field. I expect the 725 to finish first or compete with other 700 or better cars for 1st. I expect the 390 to finish last or to compete with other under 400 cars for the last spots. I expect the only time the 725 will see the 390 is when the 725 laps the 390.
    I can understand that there aren't very many cars with performance 700 or better to group together. I think most players get one or two races with a car like that then a few more races in the 700 to 500 range. I think the largest group is clustered around 500 performance, simply because I have more parts available to me that give me a car around 500 performance. It's a combination of the best ordinary parts I can get and the parts I could afford to upgrade that are wearing out. So I can see if you did seperate cars by performance the ones with 700 and over wouldn't see many humans competing with them. But the ones between 450 and 500 would almost always have human competition, and frequently get 20 human cars in a race and no computer cars. I'd like that.
    That's something else that feels like a game not racing. When they go to a new track in Formula One they have all new parts. They don't run a car with parts that were worn down in a previous race. Those parts are being recycled into something else when they get to a new track. I suppose if that mechanic was invisble and and was visibly expressed as an adjustment in race set up it would feel more like Formula One.

    I don't know the name of the racing where several different classes of car race on the same track at the same time but are only in competition with their own class, not every car on the track. But often I feel like I'm in one of those races driving a stock Porsche and expected to compete against the different race car classes instead of just my own class. To me, the racing in the game doesn't feel like Formula One. It feels like the racing I described, but don't know the name.

    I don't see much Formula One. It just isn't shown where I am. Sadly we don't have the Wide World of Sports anymore like we used to. The performance in American racing has gotten so even that there's a cutoff for qualifing and a car that doesn't perform doesn't make the field. Those that do and are lucky with no mechanical trouble, no errors in the pits, no driving errors, can drive the whole race in a bunch and any one of them can be in front at the finish. There is seldom a hot car with an edge on the others anymore. But when there is, the edge is very slight. There are certainly no cars that outclass the field so that one or a small number are locked into finishing 1st or in the top spots leaving the rest of the field to race for 2nd or the best spot left after those cars finish. Bad luck can end any car's day early. And you certainly have that in spades in the game. In American racing, teams who have as many errors in a race as I do don't finish the season. They get replaced with another driver, another crew chief, another whole team.
    I can only guess that things are similar in Formula One.

  5. #5
    Developer
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    561
    Hi Enzo,
    thanks for your feedback. I kindly ask you to give the latest update some time. There are some high level component upgrades arround that result in these high PP differences. In a perfect world with a lot more managers in UGP we could think about another matchmaking option but for now, there are just to few managers arround to change it, sorry.

    Quote Originally Posted by KG75 View Post
    (everyone with same actions is a VERY bad decision).
    What are you talking about? That is just not true!

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by _spc07 View Post
    What are you talking about? That is just not true!
    It was my original impression when I started playing after the upgrade. Incorrect impression, I concede, though it's easy to make the mistake since the difference between a racer who has researched actions for months and one who hasn't is so slimmed down. But, slice it any way you want. The changes made to actions were a kick in the pants to anyone who's been playing this game and working to build up their actions and duration. You can't just cut away on people's advantages and think they're going to say OK and throw money at you. Working out algorithms to match people together based on actual PPI of their cars would be a much smarter way to go about it than completely changing the game-play experience.

    How about having a cap on vehicle PPI per series? A racer's car could be a max of 500PPI at start of race and the actions (as before the upgrade, not in the current arcade mode) would be the only thing to take you above that. Look at the actions as Kers or DRS in an F1 race or e-boost in Formula-E. Those are what actually pushes very similar vehicles apart. That would really even-out the playing field and make races much more realistic. Plus, you could actually make the PPI correspond with component levels achieved at each racing level. Managers would still have the motivation to purchase upgrades because they would need to try and be right at the PPI limit at start of race.

    I stand by what I said. The upgrade you just made is a train-wreck. The changes in action duration and their multiplication is very bad decision, one that I found profoundly un-creative towards making this game better, rather than changing it's entire feel. I was wrong about the way action duration was changed, I admit that, but I still think it was a VERY bad decision.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •