all we'd need is a basic weight penalty which can be enforced server-side to make leagues attractive again. but then again, I already suggested this over a year ago. so did many before me.
Seesh, I've not mentioned those things for a long time and you guys are still running this chauvunism crap? If someone comes up with an old suggestion over and over again such as this ballast thing that crops up any time car balance issues are mentioned, OK. If I mention the really serious driving related issues such as incomplete suspension modelling and aero modelling, not OK. Speaking of double standards...illepall
OR you have NOT read what I've said for the past few weeks at all...
Well, can't remember the last time F-1 cars run ballast beyond the minimally required weight. There's only 1 single seater in each class to choose from, so why do we need ballasts? Imagine adding ballasts to Alonso's/Kimi's car just to slow them down and let mediocre jerks like Scott Speed dominate the show. Rewarding mediocrity and punishing excellence, something that's WAY too prevalent in this already crazy world. illepall
Ballast can be double edged sword. It will slow you down in the straights simply because F = ma, but for some cars it could be used to improve weight distribution and actually IMPROVE handling. And yes, IRL, more normal force on the tires DOES mean more grip (up to the point that load sensitivity gets obvious causes the nomal force/grip curve to flatten and eventually decline as the tire disentigrates). Your cornering speeds won't increase with weight of course, but with mass distibuted better you'll end up with a car that's actually more balanced than normal. Ever tried RB4 rallycrossing with a full load of passengers? Close to 50/50 mass distribution + excellent, neutral setup to take advantage of this = great handling rallycar. Just wish it had 320hp and we'll have a great to drive rallycar, but that's a different story.
Let's just settle this once and for all. For road cars, use passenger ballasts. Well, some of us have alrady figured out that even the horribly unbalanced TBO class can be quickly remedied with a few extra passengers in the FXOs. And I'm all for ballasts for the race cars (the XFR, UFR and GTRs) if it's used to balance the cars' performance instead of punishing competent drivers (aka abused). Yes, I'm very aware that JGTC does this, but it could go a long way to explaining why Japan has NOT come up with Aryton Sennas, Alain Prosts or Micheal Schumachers. What's the point of exceptional performance when they are just going to punish your excellence anyway.
Ballast for balancing -> +infinity
Ballast for punishing drivers that win fair and square -> -infinity
IRL the cars do vary a bit so it makes more sense to force ballast on the winners, the idea as I see it is also to equalise the cars and provide closer, more entertaining racing (for both spectators and drivers).
In LFS we have identical cars (setups aside), so ballast isn't so useful. I still wouldn't mind it though if it makes racing closer and more fun.
That's one of my chief points all along. If we have an RB4 vs FXO race on a tarmac circuit, then adding ballast to the FXO would do wonders to bring closer and truely better racing. But when we penalize a consistant winner of a one make race in LFS, it just doesn't make much sense. All cars of the same model in LFS are identical. FZR == FZR in LFS, no matter who's driving. Setups do vary, but that's part of racing too since even NASCAR allows different exact setups for individual drivers, despite of all their restrictions such as permissable spring wire diameter ranges. The performance potentials for the same car in LFS are all the same and the only real determinants racing victory are efficient setups and, of course, driver skill, concentration and strategy (all these factors are of equal impotance). All this is barring luck, of course (e.g. a wrecker hell bent on wiping you out r someone makes an error causing a whole pack of closely racing cars to crash, etc).
Imho the ballast feature with server side options (set different amount of ballast for individual racers, set predefined ballast per car, force ballast by host) is the easiest, simplest and least time consuming method for equal car classes. When the cars are just few % off from perfect you could easily use the ballast to get their speed on one lap close to each others. With proper ballast amount you can even balance the different tire wears, fuel consumptions and etc.
Also it would makes Scavier's LFS development a bit easier when you don't need to test the car classes ad infimum before incompatible patches.
btw the SEARCH button in this case would be very much useful.
to add one point to the discussion - server side managed ballast system was discussed here many times - it would allow devs to balance cars for most popular short distances (5-10 laps) while endurance leagues cuold balance cars and drivers with their own regulations.
I meant in the context that an XRT is identical on one persons machine as it is on another. I never even hinted that it would perform similar to another car in the VERY lose classes we currently have in LFS.
When you like to make a race real you have no other joice as to use weight anything else would be bs. I don't think it will be such a hard thing to this in a code so why not making it?! Those who dont like to use it they dont have to. Extra weight is often used in reallity so it is a must for LFS!
well, i sustain my sig till patch V 'cos I got about 2s difference depending on length at almost every track between cars I drive. So when wr difference is likely to be 1.5 sec in every configuration it is an issue.
and btw: btw search was not directed to you as could be misunderstood that way
sir
Think I'll add that I'm in favor of a proper success-ballast thing as an option for leagues/series' (as long as people are aware of it before the season begins, there's nothing wrong with it, imo), but, I can see horrific misuse of it by sore-losing public-server admins. It would have to be for use on passworded servers only, I think.
Why not putting it in the setup options and than after the name a little mark that this driver has extra weight (like: "tomylee (+20kg)"). like this each person can handle it on it's own and for league races the admin can see if the drivers who should drive with extra weight have it
But then you couldn't use it to balance the TBO or GTR classes on public servers. FZR&FXO would still be unstoppable.
Maybe allow only different ballast per car on public servers and different ballast per driver only on passworded servers? But drivers should always have the possibility to add/use as much ballast as they want.
Problem is that balancing is very arbitrary. Fans of GTT will penalise FXO much more than fans of the FXO will, same goes for the GTR class. I want to know what I'm going to drive when I'm entering a server, I don't want to have to search for a server where the weight "balancing" is acceptable amongst other servers where the admins just want to make it a bit easier for their favourite car to be the winning car.
Also, what you said about the devs balancing the cars is exactly what I meant. "Balancing ballast" shouldn't be needed at all. I see ballast as a success penalty option for leagues/championships and nothing more.
But ballast is still used in real racing, to balance the cars or to balance the drivers. Balancing cars with specs is hard because there can be only one car spec that needs to work on most tracks. With ballast you can make it possible to have equal equipment even if the cars specs are not enough close on all tracks. This can be especially useful for leagues. And with properly used can balance the cars to provide more close racing with different cars.
One way to deal with the ballast problem with public servers is to make it possible to the players to change the ballasts per cars. A bit like the track selection thing. I don't see the misuse as a big problem because there are very rarely an admin present who could alter the ballast amounts to his/her liking. And I'm pretty sure that most servers would run with proper ballasts and there few servers which wouldn't would probably have less racers.
But in the end I just can't see that server owners would start using ballast as tool to give benefit to certain cars to get a benefit from it It wouldn't make the racing any better. And imho there should not be chance of admins to run without ballast when others are forced to take it. That should be defenately made impossible.
good idea to let only ballast per car for public. It could be used on leagues also, but each driver can apply it himself. The race marshall will check it on additional tag.
and it should be then typed with big letters like RESTART, driver/car BALLAST on start
That's the major problem that I've been trying to highlight all along with ANY ballast system. When it's top reach the minumum weight for a class then fine. When it's objectively set to balance a class and everyone uses the identical ballast then it's all as fair as practically possible. The weight should of course be set after extensive testing of the involved cars in racing (not hotlap) setups over the race distances involved. But if servers get too much power in the amount of ballast to use, it WILL be abused. It's just human nature and I know it all too well as I deal with it IRL situations all too often.
Imagine if you've got a sever full of people who can't drive. Everyone races say, the FZ50. You tend to win quite consistantly simply because most are just too slow or can't even keep the car running straight. Next thing you know they'll say: "Not fair! You, too fast! Must slow you down with crippling ballast, MUHAHAHAHA!!!"
How's that for fair play? Not to mention what it'll do for LFS's reputatuion.
A server full of people who can't drive? You can't put enough ballast to lose to drivers who can't drive. Take the LRF class for example. Add 100kg and a passenger to the RA and pit it against FZ5s. The FZ5 will obviously win if the driver can drive, but if the RA driver is better, the weight doesn't make that much difference, just few seconds per lap tops.
And it really souldn't be a vote thing anyway, because it would make it too easy. Just make it possible only for the server admins to change the ballast (car get ballasted when entering pits) or make it use the End race->change ballast. Of course you don't get the ballast 100% spot on but it gets the cars much closer, giving you more choise of cars that can win.
I just can't see the chance of misuse. And even if the cars where totally equal and the server had set the ballast to max for the FXO and XRT to help the RB4s to win - what's then? The result would be completely the same as it is now. One car rules, other try to not get lapped.
Yes, people do resort to less than savoury tactics to force a win. Happens often IRL, though fortunately, I've met very few of them while racing LFS online to date. Of course, if they're always crashing around they can't win, unless they crash yourself off as well.
And I'm all for ballasts that actually make races fair. On the TBO class imbalance issue, no we do NOT need to ballast up the XR GTTs, only the FXOs which are absurdly fast compared to the RWD and 4WD. In the hands of skilled drivers, RB4 vs XR GTTs can be very good indeed. Just remember to use the FXO when someone else uses it if you're planning to win. Or, we could just ballast up the FXOs for parity. Of course the ideal ballast could need some calculations and testing to figure out, but that's just the way it must be if ballasts are to be specified properly. All this assumes that drivers are all competent and drive properly (aka non-wreckers).
IRL, many types of racecars are designed underweight and then brought to minimum legal weight via ballasts. The chief benefit of this is that ballasts are actually used to optimize mass distribution and polar moment of inertia as far as packaging limits would allow. Just some insights on RL racing practice.
I think the line "very few" describes best why I can't see misuse being a problem.
Yes, that is maybe one thing LFS is missing but in a way that is different kind of ballast. I'm not sure but usually additional ballast required by the officials need to be in certain place in the car (under the driver's seat, lead plates?). But no one is really controlling where you put that ballast that you need to fill the minimum weight requirement and as you said this is one parameter on car setup as well.
illepall 
Or, we could just ballast up the FXOs for parity. Of course the ideal ballast could need some calculations and testing to figure out, but that's just the way it must be if ballasts are to be specified properly. All this assumes that drivers are all competent and drive properly (aka non-wreckers).