Suggestions board?

[Guest]

I don't know how far exactly you guys are with renovating the site and all, but where is the suggestions board? I do have some input I would like to put in and possibly have others give theirs on it as well.

[IFCA Eries]

Yes great idea, currently we are just getting everything in place first before we start to change as we get suggestions.

But yes thanks this will happen!

[Guest]

Aight. I just wanted to know if we'd be able to get our input in before series get set in stone for the season.

[IFCA GTDon]

Yes, best place to do this would be at the particular series thread. Nothing has solidified just yet, but we have a basic outline to go by.

[Guest]

Well you guys still haven't put up a few series boards just yet, and those are the ones I'm waiting for *cough* Stock Car Series *cough*

[IFCA Eries]

Don is master of the series and he will answer you, I am just playing round with the site currently, making everything easy to follow.

[Guest]

is there a place to suggest events as well?

[IFCA GTDon]

For now we can talk about ideas here. Currently we have 5 OSR events hammered out, and ready to go when the time is right. Official events such as these are the result of years of running tournaments and series events. It is somewhat an art to have a popular series or group of series. Over time we have learned what mostly works well and what doesn't usually work well.

The features of our 2012 Official events is all about uniformity with relatively the same number of laps, type of qualifying, points system, length of season, etc. Also important with this is driver friendliness and the ease at which a competitor can join, compete, and complete a series. We think we have come up with the best balance of these important factors in the history of the IFCA. Join this to our new IFCA ratings formula, and we have the makings of a truly fun and meaningful year of racing.

If you have any new ideas we are all ears.

[Guest]

I'm just waiting to hear on the Stock Car series honestly. The only thing that I didn't like was that it was only one make for each race. Granted I know you guys tested the 3 makes of stock cars that FM3 had, but not everyone could get those results. I could smoke everyone with the Chevrolet that was barely tuned, but could barely drive the Ford to save my life. Yet your guy's testing showed the Ford was always faster, no matter what track. I'm wondering why does it really matter? If that were the case, they'd all be using Ford's in Nascar. I hope y'all see where I'm getting at with this.

[IFCA GTDon]

Well, this time around it appears the Dodge is out and only the Ford and Chevy remain. They may be very equal this time, won't know until we test. Speaking of the Stock Car series, it is the only one we haven't fiddled with yet, but we will!

[Guest]

I just don't fully make sense as to why you guys separate them. I understand the fairness aspect to it, but separating the two makes no sense. That's what I'm trying to get at. If you're just gonna test to see which is faster, then use the faster one and call it the '-make- Stock Car Series' so that way people don't have to waste time trying to figure out setups for cars the don't want to use, much less have in their garage. I'd rather pick a Chevrolet myself and keep that all season. If someone else wants to switch back and forth, I don't care. Anyways, I really hope you guys take this into consideration when you get this goin.

[IFCA Eries]

For the Stock car it is realistically all about the driver. Where one plays with a wheel and other controller, one likes a stiffer ride and others loose.

It is generally a rule that loose = fast but this takes hours to really get the hang of them. I made plenty loose setups that the top dogs took and ripped the scoreboards apart with after practice. I then gave my stiffer setups and they struggled to get the laptimes but found that more laps counted due to it being easier to control.

In the stock cars its almost the same, I couldnt get the times as well but for 1 out of 10 laps I would beat my other make times, in the end it was about average and what would give me the best result.

I have given up on these oval races, me and my controller just didnt stack up.

[IFCA GTDon]

Our past Stock Car seasons were what they were because we wanted all of them to have the same exact real car build, in part so people wouldn't have to figure out what a good build was. But then, by doing so we could easily tell they were unequal. At the same time everyone has a favorite brand, so, we kept all 3 cars (x2 for restrictor plate racing) and designated which car would be used each week. That way all the cars would be driven, and fairly so.

A new Stock Car season will probably use both cars, but we shall see.

[Guest]

Stock Cars vs. V8 Supercars *wink wink*
Don. i have some things we need to discuss....... ill try and catch you online.
SP33D........

[Guest]

Like I said, I understand the fairness part to it. It just doesn't make sense to me. If you wanted to make it fair, then don't allow setups so that everyone has the same stock period. If you're still gonna let us use set ups, then automatically you're gonna have the guys who are at least 1-1.5 sec faster because they know how to tune. If they want to use the same car, then let them, I won't care. But what's it gonna matter to those of us who are the 1-1.5 sec behind them? I mentioned earlier my difference of driving the makes. Yes, I did have the fastest times with the Ford, but those were clean laps. The "dirty" laps were fastest with the Chevrolet because I had a damn good set up meant for traffic. Get that car in the draft and BAM! I was up front racing side by side for the lead against Fords. If you're gonna let us use both models, then let us use them together, not separate. Cause believe it or not, the "fairness" your talking about is eliminated when setups are involved because not everyone is a master tuner.

[IFCA GTDon]

Good comments, but you are making a couple of assumptions we don't try to make. Tuning is helpful, but it will not make a slower guy faster than a fast guy. Having the same cars is equal, and more equal than you realize. Here's why; just as there are drivers who drive a car well, tuned to their liking, there are others who just happen to be very good at stock tuned cars. In other words, there are drivers who like the feel and handling of a car that has no tuning at all, and then there are the rest of us, who struggle driving an untuned stock car. So even though you think it might be more fair to disallow tuning, all that does it give the guys who didn't need any tuning an automatic advantage. This is why we have seperate events that make this distinction. People who don't like untuneable cars should probably not enter a series like the IFCA "Bone Stock" event. Likewise, those who desire a series where no tuning is ever allowed, should probably enter the "Bone Stock" series. https://ifca.forumotion.com/t5099-summary-decription

Hope you can see that a lot of these issues have been debated before, and aren't new, and we have long since resolved them by understanding what a true advantage is, and offering diverse options.
Thanks, and keep the ideas coming.

[Guest]

I think you took what I was saying a little too far than what I've been trying to say here lol. The whole thing I've been trying to talk about is why separate the Ford and Chevrolet Stock Cars in a Stock Car series? You guys say it's to keep things equal and fair, when it really doesn't make a difference. I agree that a fast tune set up doesn't make a slow guy faster. For the slow guy to get a tune to make him faster, he needs a setup for the line he drives. Where I made the comment referring to the unfairness in setups is that it doesn't matter if you separate the two makes. If you kept them completely stock, no tune, no setup, then sure. I can understand. But the second tuning and setups come into play, it doesn't make a bit of difference. Just because you guys can tune a car to exactly your liking and show that car a is faster that car b doesn't mean that lower down for those of us who are slower are gonna fit to that same level. If it were really that way, all racing series would just end up using the same make, same model, same everything practically. The only competition in that is the driver's skill to drive the car. You put in the different makes, then it becomes more than just that. It turns in to the driver's ability to drive that car. How is he gonna get car b in front of car a to show that car b is faster? Since a fair amount of us don't really have teams that help us out worth a damn, our setups are practically just us. I'm really hoping that you actually see what I'm trying to say here because I've said it in every post now and you guys don't seem to get it. Before you say something, no I'm not mad. If I was mad, this would be going very different. So I'm gonna try and say this one last time before I deem all hope is lost and people get disappointed again.

Combine both Ford and Chevy. Separated as completely stock, understandable, no issues. Apply setups and there becomes no point in separating them. Setups should be fitting to the driver, the line they run, and the car they drive. Two cars over a whole season to constantly set up? Massive inconvenience to those of us who still have lives (not saying you don't. just saying some people are busier than others). One car over a season allows for more time and dedication to that car, better tuning for that car, better lines for that car. Keep the consistency throughout the season, races will be better because drivers will have much better confidence in their car. Just because you guys can "prove" car a is faster than car b doesn't mean car a will always be faster than car b. Whoever is faster depends on who can setup that car, get that car to run a consistent line, and handle that car to win is going to decide who's faster. Not if they're driving car a or car b. Please tell you guys actually and fully understand this. Not trying to make it sound like you're not intelligent, I'm just trying to bring it to your attention that you're focusing too hard on making things "fair and equal" to a point where it no longer makes sense and becomes an inconvenience to people.

[Guest]

Also important with this is driver friendliness and the ease at which a competitor can join, compete, and complete a series.

Not to be the rear-end who does this, which is gonna come off that way anyways but screw it, what Don has said goes with what I'm saying about the inconvenience bit. Let's say that someone new wants to get into the Stock Car series, or any series that involves multiple makes and models of cars. They look at the list of cars that are legal in the series, and say "Hey! I can use Car C! I've got plenty of setups for Car C!" then continue on to the rest of it to only find out that out of a 20 race schedule, Car C is only used 5 times. Of the track list, he has setups for Car C on 13 of those tracks, but out of those 5 races, he only has setups for 2 of those tracks. This now means that for the other 18 tracks, he needs to create a setup for. Not just for Car C though. He has to match the 5 tracks that correspond to Cars A, B, and D to create setups, not to mention the other 3 tracks he doesn't have a setup for. This guy only feels like he has a shot to honestly compete if he's got his setup the way he likes it.

This where you guys are focusing too much on "equality and fairness" to the point it makes no sense. Why would somebody look at that and say "Oh, I absolutely want to do that! It's gonna take me time that I don't have to get to a point where I feel I can compete, but it's okay, I can do without school/work and my girlfriend/wife/partner won't mind me spending more time on a video game than her." I don't know a damn person who would say that, and if they did I'd slap them across the head and call them a f****** idiotic dips*** lmfao! However, if they look at a series in which either Car A, B, C, or D can be used across the season, and they already have setups they're confident with for 13 tracks with just Car C, I'm sure they're gonna be more inclined to join the series. "Equality and fairness" means just as much to me as clean racing with no intentional wrecking (contact still happens and you can't avoid that). But keep in in the realm of the series you're looking at. If it's Stock Car, then don't separate the only two makes, just make sure the cars are in specifications. If it's a LMP2 series, make sure it's just LMP2 cars that fit specifications and not LMP1 cars trying to get through. Some people won't be as fast but that's why it's called improvement. Practice makes perfect, but if practice needs to be split up between more than one car, where is the perfection gonna be at? I'd love to get to the point where I'm just barely getting into Room 1 or Room 2, but unless I can practice with one car, I'm gonna be stuck with Room 5 and below because I now have to split my practice up. Wouldn't you guys rather have everyone competing for the top spot while everything is neck and neck rather than see only 18, 20 people neck and neck while the other 80 struggle just to do something?

[IFCA GTDon]

And like I said, you are making a couple of assumptions here that we don't need to make. I understand what you are saying first off. And for the benefit of everyone reading this let me deepen the explanation.

We have made no decisions about the NASCAR Stock cars yet. In the past it was found that the 3 Stock cars were very unequal on ovals in our best drivers hands. The Ford and Chevy were closer to each other, but the Dodge was a very distant third. We further found if we allowed identical builds that were based on the real NASCAR specs (which we did do) no one would ever run the Dodge, and most would run the Ford exclusively the whole season. The Ford would have won 100% of the time. No one wants to see this because if only 1 driver uses the Ford it means everyone who wants to win is then forced to use it.

We did not not want to make it a single car series, so we came up with a creative compromise that would allow all 3 cars to shine in effect. This was widely accepted as being a good and fun way to diversify the field and racing each week given the limited number of tracks and cars. And yes, it created the most equal competition because everyone was in the same car each week. Even so, even though all were driving the same car and had good setups, there was a vast difference in skill. Had we allowed all 3 cars to run like this, the Chevy and Dodge would have been rarely used, and had no chance for an outright win as long as a fast guy was in a Ford.

As for the time consumption on tuning goes, what we found is that once the tunes were established for each car, very little extra tuning would take place. I typically only had 3 tunes per car, long oval, short oval, and 1 road course. With such a long season that shawdowed the real NASCAR boys, it didn't take long to have your basic setups in place so that you would just hop in and go each week.

I appreciate your passion to have things exactly like you would want them. We share your passion, but, their are limitations sometimes, and some compromise has to be made sometimes because this is not real life and only a simulation.

Like you, I hope the Ford and Chevy are really close right out of the box, but we don't know yet. If they are, then it should be easy to have them both in the same race, and that is ideally what we would want too.

Thanks.

[IFCA Eries]

Guys, I have increased the font sizes by one, tell me if this is better for you?

[IFCA GTDon]

Size looks good/better, but the opaque look sort of washed out for me, would like it to be a little more visible.

[IFCA Eries]

Thats Old age Don, your eyes are going mate.

I was also thinking maybe go a little darker on the background grey to highlight the text a little more but not black again, let me see.

[Guest]

Yes..on the background text..its looking better for sure. Of course you know im big on highlight colors here and there.

[Guest]

i would like to put it out there and make a suggestion for qualifying. The current 3 laps, I believe is too short. The 1st lap is a standing start & your tires aren't up to temp so you wont get anything there, if on the 2nd lap you happen to clip a corner on the last turn and "dirty" your lap, it will not count that lap as well as the 3rd. I understand it forces you to be cleaner & for time reasons but honestly bumping to a 5 lap wouldn't be a huge stretch. That way you get 4 laps to prove you are fast enough to be at the front..........who's with me?

[IFCA GTDon]

It may be too short, but then again NASCAR only gives you 2 laps to qualify. I'm not saying we are NASCAR understand, I'm saying that having just a few laps to qualify is not uncommon.

In the case of the "Grudge Match" series and the IFCA "Trans Am" we do allow you to qualify once a day before the race. Don't get it right the first time you can come back the next day.

[Sponsored content]