F1RWRS 2016 Rules Discussion (READ THIS TEAM OWNERS)

[AndreaModa]

That sounds fine to me Aerond, that way drivers who have been invested in are rewarded and those credits that have been spent aren't just lost. Seems fair for everyone then.

[SuperAguri]

OFFICIAL TEST SESSIONS: Your usual treat of all the drivers. We'll have 3 official test sessions per season at the beggining. This sessions are free to attend for every team BUT WILL NOT BE MANDATORY, so if a team choses to hide their cards, it's ok to do so. The max. number of drivers per team is 2 for official test sessions. No exp. or grip points will be given during official test sessions. All entries to test sessions must be CONFIRMED; so if you don't confirm you're attending a test session, it will be understood you have no interest in attending the test.

I think this should be op out rather then op in. If you dont want to do the test then it is easier to say so, as it is more likely teams would want to test then not to.

[Nuppiz]

OFFICIAL TEST SESSIONS: Your usual treat of all the drivers. We'll have 3 official test sessions per season at the beggining. This sessions are free to attend for every team BUT WILL NOT BE MANDATORY, so if a team choses to hide their cards, it's ok to do so. The max. number of drivers per team is 2 for official test sessions. No exp. or grip points will be given during official test sessions. All entries to test sessions must be CONFIRMED; so if you don't confirm you're attending a test session, it will be understood you have no interest in attending the test.

I think this should be op out rather then op in. If you dont want to do the test then it is easier to say so, as it is more likely teams would want to test then not to.

But at the same time, it also tests how active each team owner is. You could give each owner a week to confirm whether or not they'll take part; if they can't log on for more than a week and won't warn Aerond beforehand (for example if they know they're away for some time and don't have access to internet), then it's their loss. It doesn't take more than five minutes to get on the forums to confirm taking part in the test or to say that they can't be sure whether or not they're able to log in for a certain period of time.

I know it sounds harsh, but we can't wait forever if someone is unable/unwilling to confirm something about his/her team within a reasonable time.

[Aerond]

OFFICIAL TEST SESSIONS: Your usual treat of all the drivers. We'll have 3 official test sessions per season at the beggining. This sessions are free to attend for every team BUT WILL NOT BE MANDATORY, so if a team choses to hide their cards, it's ok to do so. The max. number of drivers per team is 2 for official test sessions. No exp. or grip points will be given during official test sessions. All entries to test sessions must be CONFIRMED; so if you don't confirm you're attending a test session, it will be understood you have no interest in attending the test.

I think this should be op out rather then op in. If you dont want to do the test then it is easier to say so, as it is more likely teams would want to test then not to.

But at the same time, it also tests how active each team owner is. You could give each owner a week to confirm whether or not they'll take part; if they can't log on for more than a week and won't warn Aerond beforehand (for example if they know they're away for some time and don't have access to internet), then it's their loss. It doesn't take more than five minutes to get on the forums to confirm taking part in the test or to say that they can't be sure whether or not they're able to log in for a certain period of time.

I know it sounds harsh, but we can't wait forever if someone is unable/unwilling to confirm something about his/her team within a reasonable time.

Exactly, and you can confirm your pressence all at once before tests happen, so there isn't even a need to get in touch too often. By the way, the new testing and chassis build rules mean a team owner could start pre-season testing with their old chassis and if they feel something is wrong, build a new one later (you can even do this mid season!)

[Aerond]

I'm making one own ammend over the proposed usage of credits for pay drivers; first, I think with the new rule of having to use the credits, we should either lift or raise the pay driver cap. Second, teams must use 75% of Pay driver credits instead of 100% (that is, all credits received in first 12 races); the last bunch of credits will come at the end of round 16 as usual and teams will be able to keep those credits into next season.

[Klon]

That sounds like a good idea. With that, teams who just got it wrong may salvage some more cash to relaunch a bid for the next season.

[Aerond]

Now, may I come with one (possible) solution to the entry list problem we face? (ie: several users not being able to play the series as the waiting list is long and users running teams quite established); it may sound like a stupid idea, so don't throw papayas just yet and think well about this:

What about if the two worst performing teams (that is, those finishing 19th and 20th) are "forced out" of F1RWRS and make two new users come every season --starting team from scratch--?? Those two users would be included inmediately in the waiting list again and would be able to use the same team name (for those keeping racing organisations in different categories). Plus we can make the affected users play the "tyre manufacturer" role for the following season while they wait, so if we have 5 people controlling tyre manufacturers it'd be the two users forced out, and top 3 in the waiting list playing those roles.

[DemocalypseNow]

Now, may I come with one (possible) solution to the entry list problem we face? (ie: several users not being able to play the series as the waiting list is long and users running teams quite established); it may sound like a stupid idea, so don't throw papayas just yet and think well about this:

What about if the two worst performing teams (that is, those finishing 19th and 20th) are "forced out" of F1RWRS and make two new users come every season --starting team from scratch--?? Those two users would be included inmediately in the waiting list again and would be able to use the same team name (for those keeping racing organisations in different categories). Plus we can make the affected users play the "tyre manufacturer" role for the following season while they wait, so if we have 5 people controlling tyre manufacturers it'd be the two users forced out, and top 3 in the waiting list playing those roles.

I see what you're getting at. My only worry is, the new teams are always on the back foot to start with, and will usually spend all season scraping the bottom of the table trying to plan for the future. You might end up with the situation where the same 10-15 teams stay in F1RWRS all the time, and the bottom 5 are the only ones affected by this, so basically you're making half the people interested in F1RWRS rotate with each other, and the other half are safely locked in.

This problem will require a lot of thought.

[AndreaModa]

I think to be honest, the situation we have now is fine. There are so many series running these days, when the waiting list was at its biggest, around the 2014 season, there were far fewer than there are now. We have at least one new team coming in this year, and no-one likely to join the waiting list (how long is it currently, out of curiosity?). I can definitely see a situation where one or two teams may leave following 2016, especially bearing in mind the new rules coming in which may not be everyone's cup of tea.

I think forcing teams out based on performance is a risky business and would only create arguments, negativity and accusations from those forced to leave. It would also create continuity issues in peoples' back-stories for their teams.

Where we are now with plenty of interest, and a waiting list that is going down, is a good place to be. It gives the series more standing, and people value being a part of it, meaning they're more likely to put more effort into it, something that really benefits it.

[pi314159]

I would like public waiting lists. I have no idea were I am at the moment.

[Aerond]

I would like public waiting lists. I have no idea were I am at the moment.

They ARE public; you just have to look for them; right now. AFAIK you're not on the F1RWRS waiting list. If there's a mistake in here, please point me out to the correct post:

1. Salamander --going to enter in 2016--
2. Pasta_Maldonado (Plus One)
3. andrew
4. Nuppiz
5. Jeroen Krautmeir
6. WaffleCat
7. Ataxia

[Nuppiz]

I remember having a similar idea to this, and discussed it in a chat few months ago. My model was largely based on some of the European ball sports leagues, where one or two of the weakest teams of the top league have to compete against the best teams in the next-highest league. For example, the Finnish ice hockey leagues SM-Liiga (top) and Mestis (second-highest) have this arrangement. If the worst SM-Liiga team wins, then both teams stay in their respective series, but if the Mestis team who challenged them wins, then they get promoted to SM-Liiga and the worst SM-Liiga team is demoted to Mestis.

Of course, in F1RWRS this would've meant that the worst F1RWRS teams had competed against the first members on the waiting list in a special series of races to determine who would've been in the series next year. The idea was shot down rather quickly, as admittedly there were too many problems with the model, the worst being that it could've easily led to a loop where the same users competed for the same spots season after season. Also, it would've been difficult to determine how exactly the teams' cars and drivers would've been set up.

However, I'd be intrigued to still see some ways to stimulate the entry list, as currently staying in the F1RWRS doesn't require much work. It should be a privilige to be part of the series, not something where you can just sit around and do the bare minimum to keep your team alive. And while there are many alternative series at the moment, most of them actually have waiting lists as well (F2RWRS and RoLFS certainly have them). Quite a few people have teams in most, if not all of the series, while some have none as they have to wait for a slot to open. Obviously we can't just create more and more series to satisfy the demand, so instead I'd propose for a rule where a member is limited to a certain number of teams across the current main RWRS universe (F1RWRS, F2RWRS, F3RWRS, RoLFS, F1RDS, the future kart championship).

[AndreaModa]

Excellent, cheers Aerond.

Nuppiz, that final point from you is a good idea, I agree that for example I hog a slot in four championships, which was exactly the reason why I didn't start an F1RDS team, because I felt it was unfair. The same will go for the kart championship if the status quo remains.

I am willing to relinquish a slot if necessary, and if that's what people want then I propose a maximum of three teams per user across all RWRS open-wheel series (so F1, 2 and 3RWRS, RoLFS, F1RDS, Aerond's future kart series, and possibly the F1RICS), but of course in an ideal world I'd rather keep my fourth team!

[pasta_maldonado]

When I joined, I didn't see any hope in hell of me getting into any racing series for 2015, but here we are and Plus One are in F3, ROLFS, and F1RDS. Two of these were down to Lappy's and Nuppiz's generosity, respectively, and the third thanks to te sheer luck of Ataxia starting F1RDS.

Being in the right place at the right time is a crucial factor in getting into the RWRS, luckily I was here at the right time, just in time for new openings. The RWRS is becoming increasingly popular; more popular than it has ever been, and far more popular from even when I joined the forums, not that long ago. Many new, and existing members, have inadvertently clicked on the madhouse that is the PMMF and been compelled to join in - does anyone remember when BLN had his dome avatar, and never ventured into the PMMF?

This is a very complicated issue - as an owner of a team in 3 series, my aim was to have a team in all 5 RWRS series. Being first on the waiting lists for F1 and F2 RWRS, now that Salamander has his F1 entry, I'd probably relinquish my ROLFS team when I get into F2 and F1, but that won't be for another 3 RL years probably!

[DemocalypseNow]

AFAIK there is no waiting list for RoLFS at the moment, but if there was one I'd give up my team there for anyone in a waiting list elsewhere. I'm not so eager to ditch the rest of my teams though.

[pi314159]

I would like public waiting lists. I have no idea were I am at the moment.

They ARE public; you just have to look for them; right now. AFAIK you're not on the F1RWRS waiting list. If there's a mistake in here, please point me out to the correct post:

1. Salamander --going to enter in 2016--
2. Pasta_Maldonado (Plus One)
3. andrew
4. Nuppiz
5. Jeroen Krautmeir
6. WaffleCat
7. Ataxia

I asked you to put me on the entry list in the silly season thread, but my entry was after Ataxia's, so you can just put me on eighth place on the waiting list.

I don't know if that's the best thread for this, but I'd like to be put on the waiting lists for F2 and F1, so I can join around 2026 maybe.

Well, I was a little too pessimistic back then.

[Nuppiz]

AFAIK there is no waiting list for RoLFS at the moment, but if there was one I'd give up my team there for anyone in a waiting list elsewhere. I'm not so eager to ditch the rest of my teams though.

takagi_for_the_win, WaffleCat and SuperAguri have all expressed interest in taking part in RoLFS, in that order. There might be more, but those three are certain. Also, a few of the one-car entries have talked about expanding to two cars if the pportunity arises.

[Klon]

No, I am afraid I must throw papayas here like I am Scottie Pippen: doing this would be forcing an issue which is inevitable. Sure, it is nasty to sit on the waiting list with nothing about to happen - that's true - but that doesn't mean we should treat F1RWRS like a football league. It is a sad necessity due to GP2's limitations to limit the teams unless we introduce a ridiculous situation where more than half of the attempting entries fail to make qualifying: with rFactor 2 we would be safe on that and could just do away with entry list limitation, but for now we have to deal with it and well, if you came here first, you get to play first.

If you want to give more users something to do, a limit like the drivers would be a good solution: only two teams per user for the FxRWRSes and F1RDS.

[pasta_maldonado]

No, I am afraid I must throw papayas here like I am Scottie Pippen: doing this would be forcing an issue which is inevitable. Sure, it is nasty to sit on the waiting list with nothing about to happen - that's true - but that doesn't mean we should treat F1RWRS like a football league. It is a sad necessity due to GP2's limitations to limit the teams unless we introduce a ridiculous situation where more than half of the attempting entries fail to make qualifying: with rFactor 2 we would be safe on that and could just do away with entry list limitation, but for now we have to deal with it and well, if you came here first, you get to play first.

If you want to give more users something to do, a limit like the drivers would be a good solution: only two teams per user for the FxRWRSes and F1RDS.

Even with rFactor 2, I don't think that unlimited team entries to the F1RWRS is a good idea. 20 teams is big enough as it is, we don't want the whole thing to become ridiculous with 37 teams on the entry list, 70 entries per race and 60 starters or something stupid like that. rFactor 2 or similar would be good to be able to raise the number of starters, not to de value the series with excessive entries, it'd cause a hyper-inflation style problem where the quality just wouldn't be the same. This is coming from somone on the waiting list, as well: I'd rather wait and join a realistic F1RWRS than to join an impossibly large F1RWRS immediately.

[pi314159]

No, I am afraid I must throw papayas here like I am Scottie Pippen: doing this would be forcing an issue which is inevitable. Sure, it is nasty to sit on the waiting list with nothing about to happen - that's true - but that doesn't mean we should treat F1RWRS like a football league. It is a sad necessity due to GP2's limitations to limit the teams unless we introduce a ridiculous situation where more than half of the attempting entries fail to make qualifying: with rFactor 2 we would be safe on that and could just do away with entry list limitation, but for now we have to deal with it and well, if you came here first, you get to play first.

If you want to give more users something to do, a limit like the drivers would be a good solution: only two teams per user for the FxRWRSes and F1RDS.

Despite being on place eight on the waiting list, I agree with Klon. 20 teams in F1RWRS are enough, and I don't think forcing teams out of F1RWRS is necessary, as usually 1-3 teams leave the series at the end of the season. And races with more than 30 drivers are simply unrealistic, and I'd rather wait for an entry in a realistic F1RWRS, just as pasta_maldonado said.

I think it would help if the number of teams per user in RWRS would be limited. It's quite difficult to get into the lower categories, as there are some F1RWRS teams which have junior teams in F2 and F3 and RDS.

[AndreaModa]

Right so limiting the number of teams a user can have does have some mileage in it then, judging by the responses above. The problem there is of course that everyone wants to be in F1RWRS, not everyone wants to be in F1RDS, so we run the risk of running out of entries in the lower series if every member was limited to say teams in just three series. I know for a fact that if a three series limit was imposed, that I would keep my F1, F2 and F3RWRS teams primarily. That's not to insult the other series, but these are the ones that carry the most prestige at the end of the day, and I think we risk side-lining the other series if everyone is limited and thus shifts their focus to the ones they'd prefer to be in.

Before anything happens though, something like this, which is a big and important change, needs to have as much approval as possible. A poll or vote or something similar would be a good idea in my opinion, rather than have a massive over-sized thread with everyone posting and the details lost in it. That is of course, if we want to go ahead with something like this. There's no rush, and I suspect with plans already in place for a lot of teams, it would have to wait until the 2017 season to be implemented.

[takagi_for_the_win]

In response to the earlier discussion, if I was going to join the series, I would rather it were against 20 quality teams, rather than 20 quality teams and 20 teams that make up the numbers.

Right so limiting the number of teams a user can have does have some mileage in it then, judging by the responses above. The problem there is of course that everyone wants to be in F1RWRS, not everyone wants to be in F1RDS, so we run the risk of running out of entries in the lower series if every member was limited to say teams in just three series. I know for a fact that if a three series limit was imposed, that I would keep my F1, F2 and F3RWRS teams primarily. That's not to insult the other series, but these are the ones that carry the most prestige at the end of the day, and I think we risk side-lining the other series if everyone is limited and thus shifts their focus to the ones they'd prefer to be in.

That is also a good idea, but I would rather the limit was 2 teams in the RWRS pyramid, and leave the other series' alone e.g. RoLFS, F1RDS etc. However, this is only my opinion.

[TomWazzleshaw]

I know it's not quite the same but what happened to the idea of people on the waiting list taking over the tyre manufacturers next year?

[dr-baker]

To add my perspective, I only really focus on my participations in F1RWRS, F3RWRS and the Woman's F1RMGP series. And of those, I would happily give up the F3 team if somebody wanted an entry there. But I have been with the F1RWRS from the start and would be sad if I had to give it up.

[Aerond]

I know it's not quite the same but what happened to the idea of people on the waiting list taking over the tyre manufacturers next year?

It will happen

[pycku]

I know I'm new here, but I'd like to submit an application for the entry list. Meanwhile I may play the role of tyre or engine supplier, if you wish so

[FMecha]

Why no-one has talked about ejecting inactive users from waiting list yet? Jeroen, for instance, is in the F1RWRS waiting list and yet he is AWOL AGAIN. Thoughts?

[AndreaModa]

Why no-one has talked about ejecting inactive users from waiting list yet? Jeroen, for instance, is in the F1RWRS waiting list and yet he is AWOL AGAIN. Thoughts?

Seeing as he's what 5th or 6th on the list, I really wouldn't worry about it for now. As Ted in How I Met Your Mother once said, "that's for future Ted to worry about".

[RonDenisDeletraz]

Why no-one has talked about ejecting inactive users from waiting list yet? Jeroen, for instance, is in the F1RWRS waiting list and yet he is AWOL AGAIN. Thoughts?

Stop whining about inactivity. That's my thoughts

[TomWazzleshaw]

Why no-one has talked about ejecting inactive users from waiting list yet? Jeroen, for instance, is in the F1RWRS waiting list and yet he is AWOL AGAIN. Thoughts?

Stop whining about inactivity. That's my thoughts

Woah, thar be a storm a brewin' captain.

[MinardiFan95]

Now, may I come with one (possible) solution to the entry list problem we face? (ie: several users not being able to play the series as the waiting list is long and users running teams quite established); it may sound like a stupid idea, so don't throw papayas just yet and think well about this:

What about if the two worst performing teams (that is, those finishing 19th and 20th) are "forced out" of F1RWRS and make two new users come every season --starting team from scratch--?? Those two users would be included inmediately in the waiting list again and would be able to use the same team name (for those keeping racing organisations in different categories). Plus we can make the affected users play the "tyre manufacturer" role for the following season while they wait, so if we have 5 people controlling tyre manufacturers it'd be the two users forced out, and top 3 in the waiting list playing those roles.

Not a good idea, I'm afraid. If it hadn't been for Dofasco's rather sideways step in terms of chassis/engine choice at the start of the season, the two new teams (Simpson and Autodynamics) would easily be the worst performing teams, and with all the teams from 18th upwards sure to improve for the next season, it'd make it much harder for the next two newcomers to make it past the first season.

[RonDenisDeletraz]

Absolutely hate the idea. Worst thing I've ever heard

[Shizuka]

I'm not really supporting it. My team was one of the last ones in 2014, and despite focusing ahead to have enough money to get a decent car in 2016, my team still keeps itself up front in prequalifying. What if someone does a Sauber, like I did? Decent in the beginning, not developing, falling back, yet still having results? Of course, the fact that my driver regularly keeps scoring points there hides this fact, but it still does happen.

[Aerond]

I've come up with another "mutation" from the Chassis proposal, which also affects chassis development. This would simulate the adaptability of your new chassis to different tracks. The thing would be the commission will divide the tracks in three types (High, Medium and Low downforce), and when assigning the new stats of your chassis when you build one; instead of generating one number, we would generate three (with the same ranges as in the table); each of those numbers will be attached to a type of track; so you can know beforehand which type of track will be better or worse for your chassis. As for current chassis, they would perform equally in each type of track; as for updates; instead of 1 Downforce = 200 credits; you'd buy depending on the type of track; So it'd be 1 Downforce for High DF track = 60 credits. So you'd be able to develop your car depending on your needs for a type of track, and you'd see your performance fluctuate from one type of track to another.
We could even extend this concept for tyres; and tyre developers would be able to develop their dry tyres according to a type of track; this time we'd divide the tracks into High and Low temperature tracks; if Rain, the track temperature will be allways low, even if it's classed as a High temp track. I'd alocate more credits to tyre developers so they could put some credits into this area if they want to.
So, with the current calendar, it'd work like this more or less:

Adelaide -- HIGH DOWNFORCE -- HIGH TEMP
Bathurst -- MID DOWNFORCE -- HIGH TEMP
Imola -- MID DOWNFORCE -- LOW TEMP
Monaco -- HIGH DOWNFORCE -- LOW TEMP
Mexico -- MID DOWNFORCE -- HIGH TEMP
Long Beach -- HIGH DOWNFORCE -- HIGH TEMP
Montreal -- LOW DOWNFORCE -- LOW TEMP
Brands Hatch -- MID DOWNFORCE -- LOW TEMP
Norisring -- LOW DOWNFORCE -- LOW TEMP
Spa -- LOW DOWNFORCE -- HIGH TEMP
A1 Ring -- LOW DOWNFORCE -- HIGH TEMP
Monza -- LOW DOWNFORCE -- HIGH TEMP
Zandvoort -- HIGH DOWNFORCE -- LOW TEMP
Macau -- HIGH DOWNFORCE -- HIGH TEMP
Fuji -- MID DOWNFORCE -- LOW TEMP
Brasilia -- MID DOWNFORCE -- HIGH TEMP

[AndreaModa]

This is a good idea, though I don't know if other people are comfortable with the chassis development going into even more detail than ever. You need to be pretty wised-up in terms of upgrades and your own chassis performance in order to maximise the chances of success. Whether the users who have less free time to keep track of their team will find this too much I don't know.

The most important thing here though is that the calender should represent an equal number of tracks for each downforce setting, and that's going to be a problem with 16 races. It's not fair at all if some teams are disadvantaged straight off purely from the calender, when their car's settings are entirely random. If people had an influence on what they wanted their car to perform like at the different types of track, then it would be fine, but I suspect you'd quickly have a situation where all teams focused more on the most common type of track. But then again, is that really a bad thing? Something to discuss no doubt.

[DemocalypseNow]

For me, this change is a step too far. The chassis market needed changed because its current configuration was a huge problem. That has been addressed and the new system should be a notable improvement for that.

However, I don't really see the need for this idea to be implementing. What currently issue is this fixing? Sure, it adds more detail to the game, but there has to be a limit. I don't have much interest in this idea, and for that reason, I'd have to vote against it should it be polled.

[Aerond]

This is a good idea, though I don't know if other people are comfortable with the chassis development going into even more detail than ever. You need to be pretty wised-up in terms of upgrades and your own chassis performance in order to maximise the chances of success. Whether the users who have less free time to keep track of their team will find this too much I don't know.

The most important thing here though is that the calender should represent an equal number of tracks for each downforce setting, and that's going to be a problem with 16 races. It's not fair at all if some teams are disadvantaged straight off purely from the calender, when their car's settings are entirely random. If people had an influence on what they wanted their car to perform like at the different types of track, then it would be fine, but I suspect you'd quickly have a situation where all teams focused more on the most common type of track. But then again, is that really a bad thing? Something to discuss no doubt.

The main idea behind this is that, as we see in real life, some teams struggle more at a type of track than others. While it might be too complicated (I have no doubts that the system would get more complex), it also adds the freedom of developing the car more for your needs. It also reduces the chances of someone receiving an all winning chassis if the RNG brings out a 10, as that car would be not so fast at some type of tracks. However, I think the tyre adaptability depending on temperature could be easier to implement, as this would correspond to tyre developers and, after all, the team owner only has to chose a tyre manufacturer at the beggining of the season.

[FMecha]

For me, this change is a step too far. The chassis market needed chang
ed because its current configuration was a huge problem. That has been addressed and the new system should be a notable improvement for that.

However, I don't really see the need for this idea to be implementing. What currently issue is this fixing? Sure, it adds more detail to the game, but there has to be a limit. I don't have much interest in this idea, and for that reason, I'd have to vote against it should it be polled.

More realism = more complicated technicalities. I concur with Alitalia - I vote AGAINST your proposal, Aerond.

[dr-baker]

While I understand the reasoning, and appreciate the effort that Aerond seems prepared to have to put in to make it work, it would be a step too far in overcomplicating things. KISS - Keep It Simple, Stupid.

[the Masked Lapwing]

For pretty much the same reasons as Stramala, I'm against this change. I'm still not convinced on the new chassis thing, but we certainly don't need this much depth.