-Ultimate Super Saloon- {Finished}

[titleguy1]

Thanks, fixed.

[nialloftara]

At least I made a nice soundtrack, considering how long my lap took.

[Leonardo9613]

I am sorry, but I don't get these notes at all.

It truly makes no sense how you ever got them, they just seem awfully arbitrary. Cheeseman has a complex and intelligent way of giving scores for his car, with lots of forumlas. Yours just seem to come out of the blue, without an underlying logic behind them. I am sorry if I am being harsh, but I like to sense that things are well explained and that they had some thought put into them.

[conan]

So a car that went .3 of a second quicker get 1.5 less points? What? What are the parameters? Self-explanatory, quicker car should get more points no?

[nialloftara]

He talks about ride quality too, I'd assume he's judging bump harshness, roll angles and general poise. These are luxury sports cars afterall, can't go dislocating spines with solid dampers or having your driver get tipped out of their chair.

[Rollarider10]

It seems to me that 7 is average, and then you're punished based on how easily something could be fixed, and rewarded for how outstanding something is. I imagine that the fact that the car is slow (thus needs to be fixed) penalises people to begin with. Lastly, it may also be a way of skewing against cars that are less sporty, I know mine only had 25 sportiness, and it came second last, and that's to be expected. So all in all, I don't think the scoring was that far off.

[strop]

Well I guess it doesn't help that what is included in "performance" doesn't have a consensus on Automation. Mentioned in the comments is power, redline, top speed, weight, body roll, lap time... but in the absence of a formula, the comments also suggest that certain scores were affected by how prominent some features were over others. After all, I'm pretty sure at 1817kg, my car qualifies as a "bus" too, but I just happened to pour a bucketload of cash into the tyres and I actually tuned the suspension for track performance (which actually helped, not hindered comfort), hence the really good lap time >_>

That said, with this many entries, it's going to be difficult to have acceptable scoring unless you have a fairly robust system in place.

[conan]

I dunno but reading the "Performance" section, I'd assume that it is judge purely by the laptimes. And if anybody wants to give a toss about your car comfort level they can wait and see it on Comfort and Prestige section.

[strop]

You have a point there.

Maybe if the statement said "how fast your car feels around a track", then all the things mentioned would seem more relevant

[Leonardo9613]

I deliberately made my car less sporty than it could have been, because I thought it wouldn't matter.

I traded some of that for better comfort and tameness. Values which in my mind suit an executive car way better.

[Jakgoe]

I deliberately made my car less sporty than it could have been, because I thought it wouldn't matter.

I traded some of that for better comfort and tameness. Values which in my mind suit an executive car way better.

And your car goes like hell around the track as well, good job!

[onix953]

Im sorry but I didnt get it....How can my car get 5 points and last position when there is a 2 cars with slower lap time?

Performance: (10 Pts.) Self-Explanatory. How fast your car can drive around a track. Will be based off of the airfield track.

[Chipskate]

...Okay, so I may have overdone the power a teensy-weensy bit. I actually didn't intend on making the car that poweful at first, but I was worried about getting trailed in the performance department so I just said "fuck it" and went bananas with the engine.

[strop]

I thank you for overdoing the power, actually, it was a very good wake-up call for me to go back to my original philosophy of "if the power output doesn't have four figures, I won't bother"

[doncornaldie]

maybe i should have spent some time tuning the suspension, but meh. let's see how it does in the other categories.