i think that means the number of voters…
although, it should all be the same though…
I’m surprised there’s a difference at all. Especially between the 3 and 1 point sections.
Thing is that I can definitely make up my mind about which is the best, but after that with so many entries I just become lazy trying to make a choice between so many entrants
That’s what my post is about yes 
[quote=“ramthecowy, post:224, topic:17404”]
after that with so many entries I just become lazy trying to make a choice between so many entrants
[/quote]
I hope you are joking…there are 15 cars to choose from.
yes. i just done derped.
done.
Okay that’s enough, kids. You will get along or I will Turn This Car Around.
Edit: Thanks.
I don’t really see it being a big problem if the number of votes is slightly different between the polls. If somebody really wanted to “throw away” a vote and voting in all three were mandatory, they could just vote for someone who was way behind in the running and that’d be that. So I’d say, more votes is more points all around and the more the merrier. If someone really can’t make up their mind or needs time to think, leaving a vote for later or unused is OK too.
2 Likes
Overheard wandering about the DBR65 Auto Show, G+C Engineering drivers Ethan Irving and Clark Morrison:
E: Off road headlamps, spare tires, even racing livery? There are some proper looking rally cars here!
C: Right.
E: Rumor is that our lovely Cascadia is a right gas guzzler compared to this lot. Do you suppose the folks in engineering know about this fuel economist, @Packbat?
C: I doubt it.
E: It’s as though they confused economy at peak power with what it is at the ol’ redline, but what do I know, I’m just the driver.
C: A driver, friend. Let’s get some food.
6 Likes
“So, we’ve got the most powerful engine in the group.”
“Yeah, we do, it’d be shameful not to. We’re American, we should have the most powerful.”
“Yeah, but we’re also getting good fuel efficiency.”
“Which just shows we made the right move. Relax, Brian. You built a good engine. Sure, we had to stretch the trunk some to balance the car, and the ridiculous wing has a purpose, but the engine’s solid.”
“Yes, John, and it melts the tires in just about all of the forward gears.”
“Leave that to me. I can drive it, I installed the long-throw pedal for a damn reason.”
“Wonder what number we’ll be assigned.”
“Doesn’t matter. What matters is what number we finish as. And I don’t aim to lose.”
“What’s your plan?”
“Not entirely sure yet. Something instinctive tells me that someone needs to run those Ravencraft guys off the road first chance they get, but it won’t be me. Their car’s built more solidly than ours, and I’m not going to smack up the aluminum panels for no good reason. I’m predicting the tortoise gets mired in mud the first time we see the stuff, and that that Sleek one, or whatever they call their company, they’ll fall apart the first time the going gets rough.”
“So who do we watch out for?”
“Everyone, to be fair. Anyone can prove to be a challenge. We just have to out-drive them. That said, I’m not afraid to put a few dents in the body panels if it’ll give us an unfair advantage. What I won’t stand for is foul play with the cars between stages. As much as I’m willing to run people off the track, or play bumper-tag in the corners, I’m not willing to steal tools, foul up people’s fuel tanks, or dump gasoline in the oil. That’s just wasting time.”
“And if they do it to us, John?”
“Hit 'em tenfold. They steal a wrench, we take a whole wrench kit and distribute it among the countryside. They foul our oil, we deflate the tires and foul their oil and gas. They’ll learn not to mess with us. And if they take our car out of the race, we’ll just set their car on fire. Let’s face it, cigars are such messy things around gasoline.”
10 Likes
Okay folks, a little update.
Voting is ending tomorrow. I’ve gone in and done the full calcs for all cars, with the expectation that I’ll redo them for the three who win.
I tested the excel fairly thoroughly before starting the thread, but naturally, I didn’t have this wide a range of test subjects and I probably didn’t run a hundred full stages (which the full calc amounts to). The bottom line is, while random events and crashes were intended and designed to play a significant role, the amount that is occurring is a bit greater than I had anticipated.
The unluckiest car had 10 crashes totaling some seventy points of damage, the luckiest one had I think just two.
We now have some options:
1.) Play the ball as it lies. Even in hardship,a good car is a good car. I have run each car through the sim exactly once. luck has played a significant part in some people’s downfall (perhaps a bit more than I expected but that’s randomness for you), but you were warned this could happen in the very first post.
2.) I will reduce the chance of crashes slightly (I’m thinking in the order of 30-40%) and rerun all calcs exactly once. There’s really no guarantee this will make any difference because randomness is random (and real life rally cars also often end up on their roofs, which I am sure wasn’t the drivers’ plan from the outset).
I’d like to hear from the 14 participants on how you’d like to go forward.
3 Likes
umm i thought my car is still crashing?
If you think there are more crashes than you intended to happen, you are free to tweak your calculations until you are happy with them in my opinion. Nobody saw the formulas, nobody will complain. Especially if you plan to make a recurring challenge out of this, I think it is a good idea to get a solid base for the first round, so that the players know what can happen in the following challenges. I tried to make small evolutions from season to season in the BRC and mostly made to many changes so that it was too much of a gamble at the beginning of each season again.
It’s your decision how you want to handle it and I’m fine with whatever you will choose to do. I just think you should be happy with the challenge mechanics in the end and are free to tweak as long as the initial information you gave is still correct. As far as I can see the absolute error chance was not specified so you can tweak that without us even noticing 
5 Likes
I would vote for 2 as I prefer less randomness. But since there has be no race yet, do what you think is the best for the challenge, it’s your vision so make it as close as it gets 
Oh…yeah basically what he said ^
2 Likes
I’m going to echo Der_Bayer on this one. While luck and crashes are things we’ve had to keep in mind from the outset, we’ve not seen your formulas. If you feel it’s a bit much, then adjust it. I’m not phased either way, although I’ll be personally rather disappointed if it turns out I’m the one with the 10 crashes in the aluminum can.
I mean, if you write any story behind it, tie crashes together. A mild example could go a bit like this:
Someone hit Somebody and both teams went sailing off the track, taking a bit of damage in the process. Something came around the corner and clobbered the unlucky driver, Somebody, as they were rejoining the track.
The result there is you’ve got 4 crashes (two from Somebody, one from Someone and one from Something) all tied up as one big oops.
If you’re not doing story for all the cars (and I wouldn’t blame you on that, either), I’m sure the more roleplay-heavy of us will inevitably fill in the blanks. After all, I’ve already established that Storm Raceworks Division’s driver/co-driver team aren’t afraid to put a few extra dents in the competition.
So to recap, do what feels right. If you think the amount of crashes will ruin the challenge, then tone them down. If you feel the amount is appropriate to a bunch of mixed drivers running a rally race, then keep it. And, heaven help us if this be the case, if you feel the amount isn’t enough, punch up the crashes so everyone gets a dent.
3 Likes
Now I don’t quite know much about the formulas or how much is possible with them. I got an idea to have a somewhat realistic middle way, if not already implemented:
When a team crashed their car, make them less likely (but not immune) to crash again, in exchange for a time/speed or stress penalty for the rest of the track.
Basically, the drivers drive more carefully after a crash to avoid crashing again. This could also make for an interactive race strategy! Teams could choose whether they would drive conservatively (with the trade-off from the beginning on), adaptively or recklessly (not applying that trade-off even after a crash). If that’d be too much for now, it would possibly be an idea for the next challenge
Other than that, please go on and surprise us, before the randomness does
2 Likes
I’ve been watching this challenge, and due to the variety of drivers people have roll-played into the race, I sorta want option 1.
Of course, I did not submit a car for this challenge, so I am more a Spectator, but as spectating goes (just like with NASCAR) I’m watching for the action (crashes).
3 Likes
You got a good point there! Yet there definitely should be cars attending to the finale, which means things need to be at least salvageable 
2 Likes
if this means the crashes are correlated to stats such as reliability, drivability and so on, i am generally for 1. if you think that events are simply too random or this would mess up the whole challenge just go for 2. you might also consider altering the severity of crashes. 10 crashes could easily happen during the last event alone
4 Likes
I could agree with stensen. Keep the amount (or increase it) of crashes, but reduce the severity. Not every crash is going to result in rolling the car over and into a tree. Some might be more “I went over the bump too fast, got airborne, and spun out on landing” and others might be “I snowplowed some dirt because the car bottomed out” while others that are more drivability based might be, “I approached the corner too fast, ended up off the track, but I was able to slow down a lot before colliding with the tree.” Add to that a realism factor, that you’ll only have so many panic stops (base this on the brake fade) before you cook your brakes, and one of those “off the track and into a tree” might not have much of the slowing down going on.
4 Likes
Basically everything was already said, i think i would prefer the first option, with the reducement in severity
2 Likes