Agreed, this has been a very well executed tournament, and I hope to use what I’ve learnt from this experience to make a better balanced car!
same here! lol in 18th
can we say our cars are balanced? or stucked? lol
My clienti cars arrived first! O_O’
And it reached the 3rd position in the general standing… wow…
Hold your horses guys
Wait what? Did the van just finish 3rd?
What the hell just happened 
inorite, it’s like, now just about every car (are there any exceptions?) has had the dubious honour of being beaten by a freaking van
[quote=“trackpaduser”]Your tweaks are really making it interesting.
Even though it caused me to have my first race of the championship with no points.
And even though its not finished yet, I hope there is going to be a 1997 ATCC Season. I’ve been screwing around and made some decent engines. Now I just need to find decent cars to put them on.[/quote]
Firstly, thanks for the compliments!
I do plan on making a second series, although I won’t it run in 1997. I will use a different year, with some 10 years of gap between them.
Also, I was thinking of shaking the rules up a little bit, instead of using small engined, cheap cars, I could aim to replicate some other touring championships, like the DTM or V8 Supercars. This season was vaguely based on 90s BTCC and seeing the multitude of cheap car challenges that followed that, I think aiming for a 35-40k price limit could be a good thing.
Please tell me your thoughts on this season and what you would like to see on the next one. Also, I would gladly accept suggestions on how to streamline my process of doing it.
What is redundant? Are the cards necessary from your point of view?
One thing I settled is that I will reduce the number of races, from 10 down to 8.
Hi Leonardo9613,
Could you make a graph with the Aero Eff stats of our cars to show on the next race?
I like the cards. I would suggest adding HP limitation and the same chassis materials /same body type.
[quote=“8bs”]Hi Leonardo9613,
Could you make a graph with the Aero Eff stats of our cars to show on the next race?
I like the cards. I would suggest adding HP limitation and the same chassis materials /same body type.[/quote]
I am sorry, but I’m not making the aero graph. I have all the stats gathered for this season and checking all 37 cars would take too much time.
This suggestion is noted for the next season though.
Limiting choice isn’t the way I want to go, I am not sure it would make for a better race if everyone had the same power and chassis and body.
Ok!
[quote=“Leonardo9613”]
Firstly, thanks for the compliments!
I do plan on making a second series, although I won’t it run in 1997. I will use a different year, with some 10 years of gap between them.
Also, I was thinking of shaking the rules up a little bit, instead of using small engined, cheap cars, I could aim to replicate some other touring championships, like the DTM or V8 Supercars. This season was vaguely based on 90s BTCC and seeing the multitude of cheap car challenges that followed that, I think aiming for a 35-40k price limit could be a good thing.
Please tell me your thoughts on this season and what you would like to see on the next one. Also, I would gladly accept suggestions on how to streamline my process of doing it.
What is redundant? Are the cards necessary from your point of view?
One thing I settled is that I will reduce the number of races, from 10 down to 8.[/quote]
Personally I would like rules that allow a decent variety of cars. One of the things that was great for this championship is how you ended up with a lot of fairly different cars, some turbo, some NA, some RWD and some FWD. This, in addition to your track modding made for an interesting championship and it would be nice if the rules for the next one allowed variety, and didn’t just result in a contest of who can build the best FR NA engined car within regs.
As for the cards, while they aren’t necessary they are really cool. Same for your charts comparing the performance of the various cars.
[quote=“trackpaduser”]
Personally I would like rules that allow a decent variety of cars. One of the things that was great for this championship is how you ended up with a lot of fairly different cars, some turbo, some NA, some RWD and some FWD. This, in addition to your track modding made for an interesting championship and it would be nice if the rules for the next one allowed variety, and didn’t just result in a contest of who can build the best FR NA engined car within regs.
As for the cards, while they aren’t necessary they are really cool. Same for your charts comparing the performance of the various cars.[/quote]
I plan on adding some more randomness to the tracks, yes. Even with a few surprises.
The charts are very easy to make, I plan to keep them.
And the cards could be less of a pain next time, because I will be able to do them as soon as I get the car. The reason that I couldn’t do this time is because I allowed for revisions to be sent, which wasn’t a good idea and won’t happen next time. First PM counts, if you didn’t read the rules, I am sorry.
[quote=“Leonardo9613”]
When I did my Underground Comrade Cup I entered all that sort of data as soon as I got the car, mind you it was a pain when revisions came in to update the stats, but it saved me a lot of time towards raceday.
[quote=“np1993”]
When I did my Underground Comrade Cup I entered all that sort of data as soon as I got the car, mind you it was a pain when revisions came in to update the stats, but it saved me a lot of time towards raceday.[/quote]
I was also on my finals week when I released the challenge, to be able to run it as soon as I was on vacations. So that hampered things a bit, and once I had time, I couldn’t do much, because I could easily lose track of things and everything I did could be destroyed once I got a new PM.
Next time, I’ll be more strict to keep my enjoyment and mental sanity.
Here you have the penultimate race of the season!
It was business as usual, the most powerful cars dominating it once again.
This time, I’ll have the safety graph. For next season the safety rule will be changed, there will be a minimum safety requirement then.
And the race results:
These are in fact better than expected results for the Gemini! We weren’t expecting to win Laguna Seca, in fact we were expecting to be beaten by the Trollololol and the Thundercat.
It’s interesting that the Thundercat has remarkably poor safety despite being heavier. Given that most of us would likely have used really horrible quality safety as was allowed, that implies a difference in the chassis material used, but… which one I wonder.
Strop, you can check the cards once again 
What about them? I knew that it had the worst safety, but I’m commenting on the disparity: it’s 14kg heavier but has 6 points worse safety than the Gemini. Then again, if I recall correctly, I used aluminium frame in mine? That’s probably what boosts the safety rating for me, over using some kind of steel.
I read body instead of chassis material…
Sorry 
Ahhhhhhh ok! No problem.
Each round gives me something new to think about…
So, the goal is better than 15th in the next race.
And Strop, yes, I did goof around with the chassis in counter-intuitive ways.