Matheus Machado
Talking Door Racing
Mismatch for the 488 has just been fixed.
RD GT Championship 2016
- Thread starter TobiasR
- Start date
- Status
Is it okay to practice in the server even without a confirmation yet of a drive for the upcoming rounds?
Yes, go right ahead.
What is the server called? I cant find any with the racedepartment tag on it and is it the same password with club racing?
Look for RDGTC
Server password is same as club password.
Search for RDGTC. Make sure you have the skinpack and circuit downloaded.
All good now. Thanks
Frank
Premium
RedShift Racing:
#7 @Dennis93 (Dennis Lind)
#33 @Ricardo Edelmann
This is provisional, if I don't let anything else know the lineup is automatically confirmed.
#7 @Dennis93 (Dennis Lind)
#33 @Ricardo Edelmann
This is provisional, if I don't let anything else know the lineup is automatically confirmed.
Matheus Machado
Talking Door Racing
Ballast Note
All cars will remain at 0Kg for Silverstone.
It was deemed qualifying times are similar across all cars and defending race positions can be done using the strengths of each car.
Keep in mind the objective of ballast is not to turn GT3 into a spec category, but give equal championship chances for all car choices.
If there is a physics update that changes the cars' pace, those values can still change.
All cars will remain at 0Kg for Silverstone.
It was deemed qualifying times are similar across all cars and defending race positions can be done using the strengths of each car.
Keep in mind the objective of ballast is not to turn GT3 into a spec category, but give equal championship chances for all car choices.
If there is a physics update that changes the cars' pace, those values can still change.
As fair as that is, I do feel a bit cheated by the ballast update for us McLaren drivers (at least, there may be other cars at the Nurb)
Monza was always going to be the weakness of the McLaren, but because of the tracks of the calendar, it had extra ballast added, making a slow car even slower, basically negating us to regain our lap time in the places we could and leaving us useless on the straights. So now we come to circuits the McLaren is quick at (Brands and Silverstone), the ballast has been removed. At circuits we were already bad at, we were penalised more, but as the new patch has come in, all cars are supposedly balanced, so no need for ballast. However, cars that were strong at Monza got to race against a handicapped opposition that was already on the backfoot.
Without adding any more ballast now, we get the problem where everyone is equal, and nobody is being punished more than they deserve for the track, so for example, the Nissan's getting an extra few kg's for Silverstone, which isn't a strong track for them.
I know the point I'm trying to make, I'm just don't quite know how to make my point. By removing the ballast, although we're going back to equality, some cars that were penalised extra at previous rounds now don't have the chance to get it in the other direction.
2 questions:
1: Does anyone understand what point I'm trying to make?
2: Does anyone feel that it's something that should be looked at more closely, and was anyone also feel that some opponents should be ballasted to try and give everyone equal opportunities over the season.
On a side note, as we sure the Audi's aren't going to get filled with a load of Success ballast? To maybe give someone else a chance at a win?
Simon Marshall
Team Rookie Monsters #73
I totally understand the point you are making, @Matheus Machado did his best to go into some detail to explain why there is now zero ballast with me via PM and am glad I'm not to only one feeling short changed.
I don't think there is any ideal solution other than success ballast based on previous rounds results, I thought this has already been discussed and discounted prior to the season starting.
I (and you) would probably feel a lot better if the ballast was discussed and debated from an open minded viewpoint on public forum or at least a group PM including all participants so we all understood and aired our own views. It's not RD's fault the physics update came when it did but so long as everyone can understand why the decision for no ballast then it will help all who feel hard done by.
I will certainly be using this as an excuse, I mean logical reason, for coming last! Nothing to do with me being slow
I don't think there is any ideal solution other than success ballast based on previous rounds results, I thought this has already been discussed and discounted prior to the season starting.
I (and you) would probably feel a lot better if the ballast was discussed and debated from an open minded viewpoint on public forum or at least a group PM including all participants so we all understood and aired our own views. It's not RD's fault the physics update came when it did but so long as everyone can understand why the decision for no ballast then it will help all who feel hard done by.
I will certainly be using this as an excuse, I mean logical reason, for coming last! Nothing to do with me being slow
Matheus Machado
Talking Door Racing
I will answer based on what I understood from your post: Cars were "punished" before with ballast, so removing it now makes it unequal, as they would have better chances with the previous system.
You cited Monza as it being a bad track for the 650S. If it didn't have ballast it would have struggled in the race, simply because it has 490Bhp and other cars have something in the 600s figure. The Ferrari was the quickest car back then, it had 40Kg and still was quite strong. The GT-R still suffered in the corners, but it could make up in the straights, it even got a small ballast to reduce its acceleration to make it more fair in the race, as top speeds were exactly the same until 60Kg of ballast were added.
Moving to other tracks it was clear that the 650S had more pace, it could be the fastest car on the field for the rest of the season, so taking a hit in Monza wouldn't reduce the chances of McLaren teams to take the championship.
That worked for 1.8 cars. Now they are much more equal in raw laptimes, while still keeping strong points that are most noticed in the race, while still being evident at qualy (in a minor scale). This isn't spec racing and manufacturer differences will be there.
So if Monza was this Saturday, it would probably not have ballast too, as I'm sure the differences would still be there although smaller, which is what we are trying to achieve since the start of the season. Of course it would have been tested to confirm the prepositions, as it will be for Spa and Red Bull Ring.
Silverstone is exactly on that parameter: Different strong and weak points which balance out themselves throughout the championship lineup.
If it was implemented at the championship's rulebook it could happen, but it isn't. The only reason anyone will get ballast is if a car gives more chance of winning the championship.
Matheus Machado
Talking Door Racing
Success ballast was something we looked at, but given the cars differences at the season's start, first round would require equal balance within the cars for an individual race, which is impossible to achieve given the cars weak and strong points.
That system has some pros and cons, for this season it seemed to have more cons than pros. Although it is certainly something to be considered for future editions
.
But the McLaren will be the fastest car @ Red Bull Ring and @ Spa maybe too
Matheus Machado
Talking Door Racing
Then it is to be worried for next rounds. As I said more testing will be conducted.
Matheus Machado
Talking Door Racing
The BoP was never meant to equalize a specific round performance, if we were doing it the 650S would get 40Kg at Brands and as you know it didn't.
So unless there is a advantage that falls out of what is expected from the cars throughout the championship there won't be BoP changes.
Tuomas Tähtelä
Yet another Finn
The 650S is not as bad at Monza as one might think. Yes, it doesn't have as much power but it's light and it's very aero-efficient. Low drag but high downforce. From my testing it was about 2 tenths faster than the 488 with equal ballast and about 4 tenths slower than the Nissan. I didn't agree with the amount of ballast the 650S got. It should have gotten 10 kg to 20 kg more ballast for it to be balanced against the 488 with 40 kg. So it was definitely OP on all other tracks other than Monza before 1.9 hit.
Now it's pretty close, but still maybe a tenth or two faster in a qualifying lap than other cars (no need for ballast though!)
He was talking about that the 650S was penalised with the ballast at Monza ("making a slow car even slower..") and Nurb. compared to the Audi, Nissan,.. . Now they are equal since v1.9, but he now wants too see the Nissan, Audi.. get some ballast for the next rounds as well to equal out what was done negatively to the 650S before in the first two rounds. That's the point he makes there. (I think some did not understand, what he was trying to say.)
But for me it's ok, not complaining.
All this ballast makes no huge difference either in laptimes apart from a very few tenth, so just leave the cars as they are now. I think Kunos has equaled those GT3 cars in a whole already in some way.
Last edited:
Lorenzo Bonder
Wah wah.
Well, 4 teams need to confirm their presence and which drivers will most likely taking the helm.
- Status
