aarava's critique of the game
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExEt5jzfrAk&ab_channel=aarava It's long overdue for some real actual critiques for the series to reach out to more people. Hopefully these content creators will n...
Forum Discussion
@ImpartialCross06 I dont remember the upgrades ever telling you what exactly they changed in terms of percentage etc. since 2017.. Might have not seen it though
I know your problems with the system, its really far from ideal.. Seeing the performance for each subarea would be nice but in theory its always just pure guesswork IRL even teams informing the FIA about upgrades doesnt give them any indication of how effective these updates are.. IMO the performance chart shouldnt even be this accurate, maybe getting more accurate after certain races and completely unknown at the start of the season (pre season testing)..
The perfect "tech tree" for me would be no tech tree at all but just complete freedom of developing whatever you want, generally smaller steps not the current - getting 2-3seconds faster within one season when IRL its more like about 1 second or less.. So the upgrades should be smaller, for the AI a bit more difficult though but they should just pick random upgrades, higher chances on parts they are lacking at in comparison to others or giving then premade layouts like - more downforce for half a season, less drag, better chassis or whatever, plenty of options to go about it, making it more realistic yet IMO not less fun and its not really realistic that you have to do a DRS upgrade in order to do another front wing upgrade haha so yeah forced developments are definitely bad and there are better ways to go about it.. And dont get me started about a speedtrap chart😂
I know your problems with the system, its really far from ideal.. Seeing the performance for each subarea would be nice but in theory its always just pure guesswork IRL even teams informing the FIA about upgrades doesnt give them any indication of how effective these updates are.. IMO the performance chart shouldnt even be this accurate, maybe getting more accurate after certain races and completely unknown at the start of the season (pre season testing)..
The perfect "tech tree" for me would be no tech tree at all but just complete freedom of developing whatever you want, generally smaller steps not the current - getting 2-3seconds faster within one season when IRL its more like about 1 second or less.. So the upgrades should be smaller, for the AI a bit more difficult though but they should just pick random upgrades, higher chances on parts they are lacking at in comparison to others or giving then premade layouts like - more downforce for half a season, less drag, better chassis or whatever, plenty of options to go about it, making it more realistic yet IMO not less fun and its not really realistic that you have to do a DRS upgrade in order to do another front wing upgrade haha so yeah forced developments are definitely bad and there are better ways to go about it.. And dont get me started about a speedtrap chart😂
@Meza994 Yeah, thinking about it more you're right about not really knowing where other teams are in terms of performance, and that it's mostly rumors and guesswork by the media.
Yeah, for me too the development is way too quick, even on reduced it takes 2 seasons with no regulation changes for a fully developed car. Should be a bigger difference between reduced, standard and increased RND points.
I think it still would be nice to have a overview of our own car. Like weight and what areas we are strong or weak in. Your sort of have an overview with the performance chart, but it says nothing about like drag vs downforce.
Unless you go into the files and look at the cars, you have no idea where your car is strong or weak. (Or you know that it lacks in chassis as a whole, power or aerodynamics but still.)
Yeah, for me too the development is way too quick, even on reduced it takes 2 seasons with no regulation changes for a fully developed car. Should be a bigger difference between reduced, standard and increased RND points.
I think it still would be nice to have a overview of our own car. Like weight and what areas we are strong or weak in. Your sort of have an overview with the performance chart, but it says nothing about like drag vs downforce.
Unless you go into the files and look at the cars, you have no idea where your car is strong or weak. (Or you know that it lacks in chassis as a whole, power or aerodynamics but still.)
If you complete all practice programs all the time, even at reduced RD, advancement is too fast. I agree
that's why I tend to have the rule of only picking one program per race if you do 23 races and maybe two programs per race if you do 16/10 races
I know they should fix the balance, but there are a lot of settings and limitations we can impose ourselves to keep it interesting; It's a single game; you don't need to max out things you do just because they exist.
I found that doing one program only starting on reduced with 16 tracks, I was barely keeping up with AI (perhaps because I had an unlucky strike of failed upgrades or maybe the combo reduced Xp/team/money/RD), so I decided that two programs probably fit better with the 16/10 tracks schedule, doing all 3 is definitely an overkill resource wise you get too much too quickly.
@ImpartialCross06I totally agree that a certain overview about your own car is nice and should be in the game, as for the other teams a rough estimation would be nice, so an area in which the teams performance like downforce, weight, engine power, drag etc. would be placed at, like for Red Bull around 70-80 downforce (if it goes from 0-100) for instance although it should be completely random if its in the middle or at either end of that area...
And yes definitely need a much lowered setting for development, but actually a complete R&D rework
@Apophis-STRI just prefer a realistic presentation and not gamifying the tech side too much but thats personal preferance, liking the tech tree is nothing bad!
