rec.autos.simulators

iRacing... help... must... resist!

Byron Forbe

iRacing... help... must... resist!

by Byron Forbe » Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:17:28


    Ok. Obvious is it? What about easy to implement? How does the program
know that someone did not deliberately run into them?

jeffarei

iRacing... help... must... resist!

by jeffarei » Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:55:51

If a car is on the track going well below the normal speed, than any
contact is the slow car drivers fault, by definition. It's better than
having any contact be both drivers fault. With a damage system, why would
any player deliberately crash into another player, especially when the
"other" player is going very slow?

As far as deliberate wrecking goes, a service should include track
monitors or at least replay reviews (for complaints about wreckers).

Ronald Stoeh

iRacing... help... must... resist!

by Ronald Stoeh » Thu, 14 Aug 2008 03:05:25


>>> One obvious thing would be no penalty for avoiding or having contact
>>> with one or more cars that were well below the normal speed for a
>>> particular section of track.

>> Ok. Obvious is it? What about easy to implement? How does the program know that someone did not deliberately run into
>> them?

> If a car is on the track going well below the normal speed, than any
> contact is the slow car drivers fault, by definition. It's better than
> having any contact be both drivers fault. With a damage system, why would
> any player deliberately crash into another player, especially when the
> "other" player is going very slow?

> As far as deliberate wrecking goes, a service should include track
> monitors or at least replay reviews (for complaints about wreckers).

Hmm, I'm sure, iRacing would have to think about their budget.

One guy per race just watching! Who's gonna pay?
10 complaints (just guessing) per race! Who's gonna check and who's paying?

Larr

iRacing... help... must... resist!

by Larr » Thu, 14 Aug 2008 05:14:11

When I did a little SCCA racing in San Diego, every racer had to stand as a
corner marshal for at least one session :)

-Larry



>>>> One obvious thing would be no penalty for avoiding or having contact
>>>> with one or more cars that were well below the normal speed for a
>>>> particular section of track.

>>> Ok. Obvious is it? What about easy to implement? How does the program
>>> know that someone did not deliberately run into them?

>> If a car is on the track going well below the normal speed, than any
>> contact is the slow car drivers fault, by definition. It's better than
>> having any contact be both drivers fault. With a damage system, why would
>> any player deliberately crash into another player, especially when the
>> "other" player is going very slow?

>> As far as deliberate wrecking goes, a service should include track
>> monitors or at least replay reviews (for complaints about wreckers).

> Hmm, I'm sure, iRacing would have to think about their budget.

> One guy per race just watching! Who's gonna pay?
> 10 complaints (just guessing) per race! Who's gonna check and who's
> paying?

Byron Forbe

iRacing... help... must... resist!

by Byron Forbe » Thu, 14 Aug 2008 09:38:54


    For fun. They like to wreck others.

jeffarei

iRacing... help... must... resist!

by jeffarei » Thu, 14 Aug 2008 11:50:00

I would assume the wreckers SR rating would keep them off the higher
rated servers, so it's only an issue for the entry level servers.


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.