![]() I don't want things become easier, calculating the correct tyre wear would avoid higher risks to occur in a puncture, exactly as calculating parts wear would avoid a potential retire. Quote ( Kevin Mcferrin November 6th 2014,13:39:22 ) I submit that that is the biggest difference between the good managers and everyone else. ![]() This game needs to reward people who can be bothered to do proper planning and put together sound strategies. I don't think that we need to be making this game easier in this fashion. All of these little tweaks to allow you to choose different strategies for every possible situation are really just a proxy for being allowed to make changes in real time (which has been said repeatedly will not happen). Too many managers are wanting to have a massive set of options to allow them to program a perfect race strategy for every possible contingency. Once again, I don't see this as being any different than what was suggested in post #40 in this thread: /gb/forum/ViewTopic.asp?TopicId=4594&LP=Y#scroll Correctly estimating tire wear/lifetime is one of the most basic parts of putting together a strategy in this game. There is no such thing as a "random tire wear failure," and if you push your tires too far you simply make an extra pit stop rather than retire from the race.Īt any rate, the simple solution is to not run your tires down to zero. ![]() ![]() Additionally, if you push a worn car part too far then you could potentially retire from the race and not make 90% distance. A malfunction covers not just a case where you have pushed the car part too far on wear, but would also cover random parts failures. Malfunctioning risk is very different from a "high tire wear risk" as is being suggested here. Then for the same reason we shouldn't have a malfunctioning risk. Quote ( David Galvagni November 6th 2014,12:32:39 ) ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |