Vanilla Balance Mod Beta - Testers Wanted

[TheFlamingRed]

http://www.racedepartment.com/downloads/motorsport-manager-balance-mod-part-1.12965/

Make sure you down load all the parts!​

This mod has now been released. All the changes are listed in the above link. If a Forum Admin is reading this, if you could remove the "Testers Wanted" and change it to "Development Discussion" thread, it would be appreciated.

UPDATED TO WORK WITH 1.3​

Note: In attempts to fix the interviews and dilemmas, I have temporarily removed all non English languages from those two files. I hope to reinsert them into a later version (but when I do, they'll still be the vanilla text as I am unable to translate in any other language).

 

[TheFlamingRed]

Is it possible that the problem is within the DLL file? A wrong valuable assignment or something like that. (I have no idea what I am talking now )

Yes... Looking closer at it all, the interviews.txt isn't incorrect.
In fact, the only real issue is PlayerDriverRacePositionVsExpectation, which in turn is effecting everything else. and PlayerDriverRacePositionVsExpectation is defined in the DLL as

"inQuery.AddCriteria("#1PlayerDriverRacePositionVsExpectation", (bestPlayerDriverResult.position - driver2.lastRaceExpectedRacePosition).ToString());"

Now even that, suggests If I am expected to finish 10th and instead finish 2nd... I do 2 - 10 = -8...

-8 means I did better then expected.... Which is correct in the interviews. -Number always indicateds I did well when looking at PlayerDriverRacePositionVsExpectation. e.g.,
Type = Question1; #1PlayerDriverRacePositionVsExpectation <= -5; #1PlayerDriverRacePosition > 1;FiredDriverBeforeInterview = False; MediaPerson That was a superb result for {#1PlayerDriver:Name}, finishing up in {#1PlayerDriver:LastRacePosition}! You must be delighted with that, surely?

But it's not behaving like that... its behaving like -8 is a BAD thing, and I cannot see why!

Ignore all this. This is partly incorrect. Skip to Post 350 to see what's going on! -8 wasn't a bad thing, it was like 'the spoon' and did not exist

 

[TheFlamingRed]

Getting there...

No you're not!

still some anomolies, Not-Nice Rosburg came in 20th an they thought it was a good result But most other situations seem to be fixed.

#

 

[Beynasuh]

"inQuery.AddCriteria("#1PlayerDriverRacePositionVsExpectation", (bestPlayerDriverResult.position - driver2.lastRaceExpectedRacePosition).ToString());"

Now even that, suggests If I am expected to finish 10th and instead finish 2nd... I do 2 - 10 = -8...

- bestPlayerDriverResult.position / driver2.lastRaceExpectedRacePosition These aren't the same driver right? Or are they?

- So does it basically compare the best resulted driver in the actual race against the previous races 2nd drivers expected position or what?

Getting there... still some anomolies, Not-Nice Rosburg came in 20th an they thought it was a good result But most other situations seem to be fixed.

#

These are looking good.

 

[TheFlamingRed]

- bestPlayerDriverResult.position / driver2.lastRaceExpectedRacePosition These aren't the same driver right? Or are they?

- So does it basically compare the best resulted driver in the actual race against the previous races 2nd drivers expected position or what?



These are looking good.

Best placed driver is simply the person who was highest. Your interview question is always the Highest placed driver in the race, then the next highest...

The LASTRACE section is talking about the race you just completed... as the interview comes after the race.

LASTRACE! oh how you decieved me!

 

[Beynasuh]

- Is there somethong like ExpectedRacePosition (without LASTRACE) and LASTRACEPlayerDriverResult.position (with LASTRACE). If so what are the difference between them?

- Could they use reverse point for the positions? Maybe for 1st Position the bestPlayerDriverResult.position isn't 1 it could be 20?

 

[TheFlamingRed]

Something weirder is going on though....

Yes, it is

In your changes, my Octanes that did well, are still getting negative news reports. And so are my Steinmans who finished lasts...

In my changes, my Octanes get good reports, but so do my Steinmans who finished last...

 

[Beynasuh]

So does it mean the problems are not only the </> signs? Are they any miscalculations in the DLL?

 

[TheFlamingRed]

So does it mean the problems are not only the </> signs? Are they any miscalculations in the DLL?

Yes, the problem is a lot more complex. Changing the signs simply did the opposite to vanilla. i.e., instead of having always negative interviews, you always get positive ones.

Nothing obvious wrong in the dll. I am going to need to instead change the "Very Testing" Vs variable, and slowly decrease/increase it until the behaviour changes, and we see something else. So I can get a baseline on what on earth these numbers are doing.

In short. Ignore everything we;ve been talking about over the last several pages, and start again.

Yes, Future Red has gone back to tell you as much!!

 

[Beynasuh]

Okey then fresh start. Let the trials begin...

 

[TheFlamingRed]

I have an hypthesis dear Watson....

I don't think PlayerDriverRacePositionVsExpectation works.

Test: Octane. Expected finishes 11th/12th.... Finished a race, Drayfuss in 8th.
Shes meant to have a PlayerDriverRacePositionVsExpectation = 8 - (11 or 12) = -3 or -4

Instead, she gets the "Very testing weekend" scenario, but that requires PlayerDriverRacePositionVsExpectation > 2....

So I changed PlayerDriverRacePositionVsExpectation > 2...upwars.... > 4, > 6, > 7, all the same outcome....
But at PlayerDriverRacePositionVsExpectation > 8 something changed. I got a "different" possibility

This implies that Dreyfuss PlayerDriverRacePositionVsExpectation for this race is = 8, not -3 or 4

I believe.... that PlayerDriverRacePositionVsExpectation is not looking at any expectations and JUST looking at the race result.

This makes a log of sence... with PlayerDriverRacePositionVsExpectation > 2, any time your character doesnt finish in the top 2, you get the message saying "This dude had a very testing race"

I think we've found the reason its broken.

Edit// My next driver finished 9th... I just put his value to > 8 and it behaved as normal... I put it to ? 9 and the game crashed, because his value is =9 and no other arguement allows for the value 9... I think thats enough confirmation...

In "bestPlayerDriverResult.position - driver2.lastRaceExpectedRacePosition" the second part of the formula isn't working

FINALLY

 

[Beynasuh]

That's a perfect analyzation dear Holmes.

So instead calculate the result it just takes the "PlayerDriverRacePosition" for "PlayerDriverRacePositionVsExpectation" because there is somewhere in the DLL a broken line for "driver2.lastRaceExpectedRacePosition".

By the way does the status of the drivers (number1, number2, equal and reserve) or there positions in the cars (car1 and car2) have an effect on the driver variables like "driver2.lastRaceExpectedRacePosition"?

 

[TheFlamingRed]

That's a perfect analyzation dear Holmes.

So instead calculate the result it just takes the "PlayerDriverRacePosition" for "PlayerDriverRacePositionVsExpectation" because there is somewhere in the DLL a broken line for "driver2.lastRaceExpectedRacePosition".

Yep, just figuring out why/how/if it can be fixed

By the way does the status of the drivers (number1, number2, equal and reserve) or there positions in the cars (car1 and car2) have an effect on the driver variables like "driver2.lastRaceExpectedRacePosition"?

I believe in this instance driver2 is just a variable and nothing to do with reserve. It is actually refering to your bette driver (the one who got the higher position in the previous race. "resultForDriver.position - driver3.lastRaceExpectedRacePosition" is used for the next driver. they use driver4-8 elswhere for other criteria.

 

[Beynasuh]

So normally only the positions in race they get is a factor then. Whoever get the better result becomes #1PlayerDriverRacePosition. The second is then #2PlayerDriverRacePosition.

Sorry for the re-explanation / re-writing thing. I am no good with programming. Just trying to understand it.

Changing the .txt files from ressource.assets was easier. Simple text.

 

[TheFlamingRed]

Okay, we're fixed. I abandoned the -lastracexxxxxxx stuff as I can't make out why it isn't working, and inserted the expectations from elsewhere.

The Stienmans who finished stupidly low now have got their "testing weekend"

The Octanges that did okay Dreyfuss -3 positions, Marchetta -2 have Average / good reports.
Note: the more negative the number the better. .

This triggers between +3 and -3 in the Asset File (default)

This triggers in the -3 to +3 range too,

If nothign else, we have different things happening AND they roughly make sense

So! We're working again! The problem was the 'wrong' (or a defective) variable was being called.

I just need to crawl through the InterviewsAsset again, anmd make sure everything has been set correctly (because as this hasn't been working for a long time, I do not know if the devs have tested this very much).

To Do List:
I have this change currently in the Assembly.
I want to make sure the Interviews.txt works as intended. Which probably means altering the file.
I have another set of Component Redzone tweaks I wamt to make (i.e., Remove Redzone +10 on parts which improve reliability, and any risky parts).
I have a few more rule change proposals. - which I was going to post up today but I have been completely sidetracked

So we're probably going to get a full 3 Part Mod Update by the end of the week.

 

[TheFlamingRed]

Development Discussion for Future Releases

Interviews

Okay! I have completely fixed and overhauled the Interviews! They work splendidly for the most part. There may still be a few options hidden in the code that aren't activating yet, but I'll unlock them as I play the game.

I will ask anyone who thinks they get an odd Interview question (or crash) let me know about it - I can change how they activate

Rule Changes

I now want to talk about Rule Changes... Namely Rules which currently do Extremely little:

• Pitlane Speeds - Currently I haven't notice these do anything at all. Even moving these from 50-60-70 to 40-60-80 has seemed to have done nothing. I am going to increase the gaps further, to try and make things noticeable,

Then theres a more pressing thing:

• Costs! There are 4 areas of costs, most of which are completely negligible. These are:
  • Pitstops (+£15,000 between Small and Large Pitcrews)
  • Refueling (+£20,000 between No refueling and refueling equipment)
  • Tyre Supplyer Costs (£8,500 and £10,000 dependning on which of the two suppliers)
  • Tyre types (Road Tyres, Performance Tyres, Slicks. These are £5,000, £10,000, £15,000, £20,000 and £25,000)

Now I haven't changed these costs before, mainly because the AI would never be able to handle increased costs. However, the AI now have 80% development cost reduction, and can probably afford some price increased. Of course, the player who has 100% development costs may now have a new avenue to consider if some of these costs begin to increase. So I am proposing:

• Pitstops (+£50,000 between Small and Large Pitcrews) - This has quite a large effect anyway with regard to simultaneous pitstops. The price increase is a very secondary consideration.
• Refueling (+£50,000 between No refueling and refueling equipment) - Again, price is a very secondary consideration, whether refueling helps or hinders you is a more important decision.
• Tyre Supplyer Costs (£10,000 and £100,000 dependning on which of the two suppliers) - Performance now costs a lot. Cost is now a key consideration when when considering the tyre supplier.
• Tyre types (Road Tyres, Performance Tyres, Slicks. These are £50,000, £100,000, £150,000, £200,000 and £250,000) - again, performance now costs a lot and depending on how the votes go, you can now lose a lot of money per race.

All in all, there's a new tactic: Either reduce costs for yourself by voting in cheaper rules - allowing you to invest in other areas. Or Increase the costs, which while will bump up your costs, will also increase the costs for the AI - who may then begin to struggle with money and cease developing (despite their bonuses).

Morale Changes

In the experimental updates, I decreased the amount of Morale the drivers get from having a good race (as morale is too easy to increase and maintain). I intend to cap other areas of "morale increase", and increase further some "morale decrease".

One area I am looking at is the "Happiness with Car" and "Comparison with Teammates Car". Happy Faces will keep the status-quo. Orange faces will be a slight decrease in morale, and Red faces will be a big loss in morale.

Redzone Changes

I realised I have accidently added some Redzone to Risky Parts... these have been removed.

As a new feature, any component which has a +/-Reliability change will NOT incur the +10 redzone penality. This is to increase the importance, and thus the incentive, for players to choose a +/- Reliability Part.

This means, the +10 Redzone will ONLY occur on:

• Stock Parts.
• Which Have a +Performance or +MaxPerformance Stat

It will NOT occur on

• Designer slot Only Parts.
• Parts which already mention Redzone
• Parts which mention reliability
• Parts which are Risky.

Closing Notes

I am hoping to get this update up by the end of the week. If anyone has any other suggestions, let me know soon so I can look at it before updating.

Additional Topic:

Tweets, Dilemmas and Interviews

Some people have been interested in adding a larger variety of Tweets, Dilemmas and Interviews. This will be a project I will make a new Thread about in the coming days.

 

[Beynasuh]

Real good work there FlamingRed. New rules look good too.

The AI's money management choices for some teams are bad so hope that the new high cost don't effect the AI to much (In a bad way). (Right now starting 4. Season with Archer and we are toe to toe in part development (I like it and its really fun). Normally in Vanilla I would get ahead by a large margin by this time.)

 

[darkfng]

My only suggestion is to reduce the medium speed option to 3. I love the 10x for when I want to move on with a race, but I can't watch it at speed 5, its too fast. I find speed 1.5 too slow. I tried fixing changing this myself, but I can't work out how to do it properly. Besides, I really enjoy everything else about your mod.

Not sure if anyone else uses slow setting, but maybe change it to slow = 2, medium = 4, fast = 15?

Love your work, having tried using Ilspy and reflexil I admire your patience!

 

[BrianUK]

My only suggestion is to reduce the medium speed option to 3. I love the 10x for when I want to move on with a race, but I can't watch it at speed 5, its too fast. I find speed 1.5 too slow. I tried fixing changing this myself, but I can't work out how to do it properly. Besides, I really enjoy everything else about your mod.

Not sure if anyone else uses slow setting, but maybe change it to slow = 2, medium = 4, fast = 15?

Love your work, having tried using Ilspy and reflexil I admire your patience!

x2 would be too fast for slow. I permanently use x1.5 unless both drivers are out of the race, which happened a whole 1 time.

 

[Zero260]

Some people have been interested in adding a larger variety of Tweets, Dilemmas and Interviews. This will be a project I will make a new Thread about in the coming days.

Currently looking at the basic tweets file you uploaded and making my own modifications, hopefully we can find a way to get inputs from interested users and put them in the game. Could you also look at radio messages during the race? I think there are errors like during practice when drivers would ask for softer handling when what they really meant is the opposite.

 

[TheFlamingRed]

Currently looking at the basic tweets file you uploaded and making my own modifications, hopefully we can find a way to get inputs from interested users and put them in the game. Could you also look at radio messages during the race? I think there are errors like during practice when drivers would ask for softer handling when what they really meant is the opposite.

Is that 'wrong messages' problem still a thing? I thought that was fixed by the devs two patches ago. I had a suspension message the other day, and it seemed to be correct.

If you're putting the tweets in excel, then please put "quotations at the start and end of each column" for your modified tweets, otherwise they don't get read. (Excel got rid of all " marks when I turned the txt into an excel file. But they are meant to be there). I'll make a proper thread about it all, probably tomorrow.