|
Greetings, So, What Is It? Automation Website posted:Automation is a car company tycoon game in which you design and build cars from scratch. It is you who designs everything from the very core that is the engine, over the chassis, to the suspension and the car's looks. Several games have tried this before... but were able to merely scratch the surface. Go ahead, build your dream-car company, or simply aim to dominate the world markets with your superior design skills! Well, there's this vidya game made by Camshaft Software called Automation (Get it here on Steam) or at AutomationGame.com that is basically a car company tycoon game, except this one is made by a team of serious car guys/gals, just like you and I! Unlike most tycoon-style games that kind of gloss over nitty-gritty details about the products you make, Automation has a very in-depth engine and car designer; in fact, it's kind of the defining feature of the game. Want to build your automotive empire on trucks and SUVs? Sure you can do that. Just build an engine:  Design a chassis and body to put it in:  And send it around the track for fun!  (yes, that 5700-pound hunk of metal is lapping the former Top Gear test track faster than an E9x M3) Want to be a boutique manufacturer of fast little sports cars? You can do that too:  So, what is it? OH WILL SOMEONE PUNCH HIM OUT! Anyways, you'll notice I haven't made much mention of the tycoon side of the game...that's because Automation is still in early access, and as such the actual tycoon part of the game is non-existent (but should be coming in an early form in the next update). So how will we occupy ourselves? By building and racing some virtual GT cars, of course! What's the plan, then? Design a car (or two cars in two different classes) to conform to the rules below, submit the design to me, and when I have all the entries, we (well, I) take these cars out for a simulated 15 (and possibly 16) race season on some of the greatest historic race tracks and time trials from around the world. Whomever has the most points at the end of the season wins their class! I Don't Know What I'm Doing! Neither do I!  Just do the best you can at building a fast car that complies with the rules in the next post, then follow the submission guidelines in the third post.
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 02:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:55 |
|
|
SA-GT 1975 Design Criteria Fuel Economy Estimator Tool: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vKJyfj2Hwp0dLss1CHbuZtlWjbOKlkBf8ARjce8US7o/edit?usp=sharing RULES Chassis and Engine Revisions Revisions are not permitted in-season. Fuel Consumption Fuel consumption is modelled based on in-game data, and fuel weight will be simulated in the race simulation. Reliability Chassis reliability calculations will be made based upon the following: -Body Quality Points; -Chassis design Quality Points; -Gearbox Quality Points (additional weighting); -Wheels and Tires Quality Points (additional weighting); -Brakes Quality Points(additional weighting); -Aerodynamics Quality Points; -Suspension Quality Points (additional weighting); and -Overall Reliability Rating, less Engine Reliability Rating and categories not counted (as mentioned below). Engine reliability calculations will be made based upon the following; -Bottom End Quality Points; -Top End Quality Points; -Induction Quality Points (turbocharged engines only, additional weighting); -Fuel Preparation Quality Points (additonal weighting); and -Exhaust Quality Points (additional weighting). Exhaust Quality Points shall count for engine accessories not covered in other categories. Quality Points in the following areas do not count towards reliability calculations or overall totals: -Exterior fixtures; -Interior; and -Entertainment/Driver Assists. Breakdown Simulation Time to repair failures is calculated based on track position, speed penalty (if applicable), system affected and failure severity. Tire Life Simulation Tire life shall be calculated from a baseline durability, adjusted for Wheel and Tires Quality Points, weight distribution and all-up vehicle weight above the minimum empty class weight. Pit Stop Simulation Pit stop simulations will be calculated based as follows: -Refueling - 6 liters per second; -Tire Change - additional 60 seconds to Fuel Only stop; and -Driver Change - additional 20 seconds to Fuel Only stop, no additional time to Fuel and Tires Stop. Driver changes will be at the pit stop closest to the end of a two-hour stint. In/Out lap times will be adjusted based on track data. Race Season The race season will be as follows: Round 1 - Daytona Road Course, 24 hours; Round 2 - Watkins Glen, 12 hours; Round 3 - Road America, 6 hours; TT 1 - Pikes Peak Hillclimb (2 runs) Round 4 - Silverstone Circuit, 6 hours; Round 5 - Brands Hatch GP, 6 hours; Round 6 - Zolder, 6 hours; Special Round - BRC Rally (9 stages); Round 7 - Spa-Francorchamps, 12 hours; Round 8 - Le Mans, 24 hours; Round 9 - Pau Circuit, 6 hours TT 2 - Freiburg-Shauinsland Hillclimb (2 runs) Round 10 - Nordschleife, 24 hours; Round 11 - Estoril, 6 hours; Round 12 - Monza, 6 hours; TT 3 - Trento-Bondone Hillclimb; Round 13 - Hermanos Rodriguez, 6 hours Round 14 - Mount Panorama, 12 hours; Round 15 - Fuji Speedway, 6 hours; and *Tentative Round 16 - Targa Florio, 24 hours. Teams A team shall consist of two cars of the same type. A constructor’s championship will be awarded to the team that acquires the largest number of points through the season. At the discretion of the Organiser, no entrant is allowed to enter more than one team. Each participant will be allowed to enter a team in no more than two classes. Scoring Points will be awarded to entrants by class as follows: pre:Position 6 Hour Race 12 Hour Race 24 Hour Race 1st 50 points 100 points 200 points 2nd 40 points 80 points 160 points 3rd 35 points 70 points 140 points 4th 32 points 64 points 128 points 5th 30 points 60 points 120 points 6th 28 points 56 points 102 points 7th 26 points 52 points 104 points 8th 24 points 48 points 96 points 9th 22 points 44 points 88 points 10th 20 points 40 points 80 points 11th 19 points 38 points 76 points 12th 18 points 36 points 72 points 13th 17 points 34 points 68 points 14th 16 points 32 points 64 points 15th 15 points 30 points 60 points 16th 14 points 28 points 56 points 17th 13 points 26 points 52 points 18th 12 points 24 points 48 points 19th 11 points 22 points 44 points 20th 10 points 20 points 40 points 21st 9 points 18 points 36 points 22nd 8 points 16 points 32 points 23rd 7 points 14 points 28 points 24th 6 points 12 points 24 points 25th + 5 points 10 points 20 points pre:Rally Stage Winners Position Points 1st 5 2nd 4 3rd 3 4th 2 5th 1 MrChips fucked around with this message at 20:20 on Oct 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 02:42
|
|
|
Submission Guidelines Each participant will be allowed to enter one car each in as many as two classes. Entries must be in the following format when viewed in Automation:   IMPORTANT NOTE: Due to the complexity of administering this challenge, this naming format MUST be followed or your entries will be disallowed! All entries must have unique names, as a) it adds flavour to the event and makes it easy for me to keep track of what’s what, and b) leaving your entry as “Car Model 1 - Car Trim 1” basically ensures that it won’t save or load properly (on account of Automation’s screwy save system).Entry Instructions So, you’ve built and tested your cars and now it’s time to send them off, here are the files you need:     Zip these four files up for each of your entries, then send them to AISheepGame@gmail.com (with “SA-GT 1975” in the subject line) no later than TBD. IMPORTANT: Again, due to the complexity of this challenge, I will only accept one group of legal entries from each participant before the submission deadline, so make sure you’re happy with them before you send them in! Scrutineering will work the same way as it did in SA-GTE; each participant will receive an email with the scrutineering reports for their cars. Teams with compliant entries will be frozen until the appropriate date in the timeline, while teams with non-compliant entries will be allowed one additional submission only - again, that’s due to the complexity of administering this challenge. Additionally, I will allow one revision after the first (and only) testing day, so if you have any changes you wish to submit, you have a chance to do so. Here’s the timeline: October 2nd: Submissions open October 20th: Submissions close; no new players will be accepted. October 21st: Test Day for all cars; revision window opens. October 25th: Revision window closes; all entrants designs are frozen after this. October 26th: Season begins! MrChips fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Oct 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 02:42
|
|
|
Oh gently caress I totally forgot this was happening. You win this time TMR. Phoenix Racing will be back. we will not unveil our car until it is ready but I assure you it will be a revolution to the automotive industry.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 09:55
|
|
|
I'll be downloading Automation when I get home. Been wanting to get in on the auto tycoon fun 
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 18:07
|
|
|
Definitely wanna get in this time. No Road Atlanta? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Modus Motor Company is currently developing their Touring Class entry, the 1.5 Liter NA, 145hp Spinfire. Well that's an unfortunate name but the t-shirts have already been printed. Our main goal right now is to get the cost down to $7000 from it's current $7,900 without losing too much of that 145hp. Good luck assholes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 19:56
|
|
|
My game is still broken. Is it virtually non-functional for others too? I can't open any car or engine right now. Anyone have an idea of how far out an update is?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
I just got Automation to work under Parallels on my Mac, so I'm pretty much good to go. Crappy graphics performance, but the sucker works. Got a couple noob questions over the rules and their corresponding things in the game though (possibly covered in the previous thread, but I can't easily find what I'm looking for):
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 22:25
|
|
|
ionn posted:I just got Automation to work under Parallels on my Mac, so I'm pretty much good to go. Crappy graphics performance, but the sucker works. Got a couple noob questions over the rules and their corresponding things in the game though (possibly covered in the previous thread, but I can't easily find what I'm looking for): First of all I'm surprised that you got this working on a Mac...good job! To answer your questions in order:
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
ionn posted:I just got Automation to work under Parallels on my Mac, so I'm pretty much good to go. Crappy graphics performance, but the sucker works. Got a couple noob questions over the rules and their corresponding things in the game though (possibly covered in the previous thread, but I can't easily find what I'm looking for): Now you know why Lotus fit into that body pretty much only on a 2.2l I4.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 07:33
|
|
|
Thanks, señor Chips. After failing a while, the trick to getting it running wasn't too difficult in the end. I spent a lot of time trying to get experimental graphics stuff working in VirtualBox (that a rumour said would support Pixel Shader 3.0) but never got anywhere. Tried it out in Parallels instead, and it just worked (due to having much better graphics support). Crappy performance, but it works, and doesn't seem to be more buggy than it is for everyone else. And I guess the glorious graphics isn't why you play this anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 07:33
|
|
|
I eventually managed to get a not-entirely-horrible V6 in there. Probably going to be worse than an FR setup with a better engine though. I'm fully realise how not good I am at this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 09:37
|
|
|
Is it September already? Victorian Hooray's are due to make the scene in style.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
Tremek posted:My game is still broken. Is it virtually non-functional for others too? I can't open any car or engine right now. It sounds like we might be only a week or so away from a new beta release; hopefully they've fixed some of the issues we've been having. If it does come out soon, I will push back the timeline by a week or two so we can see if the beta is usable at all. Also, the rules will change a bit if we switch to the beta, as it has been confirmed that rear-engine cars are in the new version. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
A new challenge ! Sorry for being gone for the actual races of the last one, I got seriously busy at the time so when you announced the tire rule changes I given up on it as i didn't have time to rework the car. It was a surprise to see it win in the end, turns out that my strategy of concentrating on handling while everyone was obsessing over Le Mans times worked. Even if the excessive tire wear kinda killed me on the Ring. Let's see if I can make some waves for KRG again 
Kafouille fucked around with this message at 21:00 on Sep 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
MrChips posted:It sounds like we might be only a week or so away from a new beta release; hopefully they've fixed some of the issues we've been having. If it does come out soon, I will push back the timeline by a week or two so we can see if the beta is usable at all. Also, the rules will change a bit if we switch to the beta, as it has been confirmed that rear-engine cars are in the new version. Fixes would be much appreciated. I'm sick and tired of the snip tool. That said, I'd be a bit miffed if I had to throw out the builds I have - without seeing them "in action" - and start over from scratch due to changes in rules. I mean, I think they pack a pretty decent punch competition wise with the rules as they are. I might be alone in this I guess. Ultimately the rules are the rules, whatever they'll end up as.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
MrChips posted:It sounds like we might be only a week or so away from a new beta release; hopefully they've fixed some of the issues we've been having. If it does come out soon, I will push back the timeline by a week or two so we can see if the beta is usable at all. Also, the rules will change a bit if we switch to the beta, as it has been confirmed that rear-engine cars are in the new version. I've heard "Week or two away" for like three weeks 
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 03:54
|
|
|
The rule change will only be to permit rear-engine cars, likely in all classes. Also, it was two or three weeks as of the last dev update on the 23rd of August, so that puts the release window opening very shortly (I hope). E: I think we also get turbo V6s this update too. Yet another reason why I hope the beta is in better working order than the current build. MrChips fucked around with this message at 04:59 on Sep 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2015 04:04
|
|
|
Dev Update today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKpYdOdJy3M tl,dr: Beta is a week away or so, many bugs fixed including the save system (which they finally admitted was really bugged), a bit of UI cleanup, first taste of the tycoon mode, rear-engine cars, V6 turbos and longitudinal 4x4 drivetrain added. Old saves very likely to work in new version. I am going to postpone the challenge until the open beta comes out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 01:42
|
|
|
So are people not working on cars or just being secretive ? That's no fun. Currently working on a pair of Touring class cars, current Ring times top out at 8:16 with a NA V6 of all things. It's not even DOHC.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 11:41
|
|
|
Wait what. A TOURING CAR with a 1.2-1.5L engine does the Ring in 8:16? What the gently caress are you doing?
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 12:09
|
|
|
Kafouille posted:So are people not working on cars or just being secretive ? That's no fun. Personally, I'm waiting for the beta.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 12:24
|
|
|
Kafouille posted:So are people not working on cars or just being secretive ? That's no fun. Well, the beta is a week away or more than that (dev update suggested it might get delayed a bit more), the release is a week behind that. In addition to rear engined cars and turbo V6-s being added the dev update suggested cooling requirements for old cars will become more strict and who knows what else. Don't see the point in sweating away at something to find it's useless two weeks down the line. Personally I'd rather see this challenge run with the old lovely version and then start the next with the shiny fresh client with a (hopefully) working Save button. Also because I'm antsy to see my Howlers stacked up against other people's stuff in the sim. That said, if your Touring is doing 8:16 on a 1.5 litre NA V6 you can just submit it and rest assured in your victory because what the gently caress. In the off chance you meant 9:16 then I've seen NA Tourers go down to about 9 minutes flat. And Turbos will handily beat that. Duuk fucked around with this message at 12:33 on Sep 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 12:26
|
|
|
Riso posted:Wait what. A TOURING CAR with a 1.2-1.5L engine does the Ring in 8:16? My bad, Sportsman. My Touring is barely squeaking below 9:00 on another NA V6. Sportsman is also now managing 8:10 after fussing the gearing and suspension tunning Kafouille fucked around with this message at 13:08 on Sep 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 13:06
|
|
|
Kafouille posted:My bad, Sportsman. My Touring is barely squeaking below 9:00 on another NA V6. Sportsman is also now managing 8:10 after fussing the gearing and suspension tunning 8:10 is impressive. Thank you for the benchmark - you have made tinkering interesting, even if it's just to learn for the future. Sounds like I'm either missing something critical or have picked the wrong body type again. FYI, Turbo tourers in this thread, including my own, have put in lap times below 8:50. In my calculations at least, the fuel economy of the 1,5NA can't win that back. Duuk fucked around with this message at 18:22 on Sep 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
I'm personally wondering how many of the people posting ridiculously low times with cars have forgotten to change the car's year from 2015 to 1975. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
HotCanadianChick posted:I'm personally wondering how many of the people posting ridiculously low times with cars have forgotten to change the car's year from 2015 to 1975. The somewhat unfortunate thing is, that there is always "the best" body type, which tends to be several seconds quicker than the others. I have been able to get several body types down below 8:20 for the Sportsman class and my favourite ran a 8:16 while looking awesome, so I was very happy with it. Also rather glad there were other bodies so close by. The 8:10 body is, in hindsight, the obvious choice (although I might be missing something again and there could be another). It can't be that hard to get down to that time if I could do it with my little experience. Unfortunately it looks rather lumpy in my opinion so I might stick to Touring and Open unless the Beta brings a competitive Porsche-like.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2015 23:50
|
|
|
HotCanadianChick posted:I'm personally wondering how many of the people posting ridiculously low times with cars have forgotten to change the car's year from 2015 to 1975. 8:10 is 100% possible in 1975, keep messing around with the game, and get very very very good with suspension.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 01:10
|
|
|
It's a little crazy what all those suspension tweaks and brake tweaks can do for you. My current Touring entry is turning high 2:51 at RA and high 9:12 at the Green Hell. I think I need to re-add my total quality points though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
I would be pretty gosh darned annoyed if they made another delay
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
Well, I'm sure there's 1,5-2 more seconds in there somewhere - possibly even more I suppose - but I can't be bothered to find out: On the bright side the stuff I learned from this exercise made my Tourer about half a second faster around the Ring  and I have yet to apply the Treatment to my Open car.
Duuk fucked around with this message at 21:50 on Sep 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
Just aa friendly reminder guys, submissions are closed until the beta releases. Also please make sure you follow the submission guidelines in the third post, regarding the naming of your car(s). It might not seem like a big deal, but with potentially 60+ entries in this challenge, it's going to be a big job to keep it organised.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
In case anyone was wondering, I am putting the downtime in the challenge to good use. In the last few days I have:
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 06:14
|
|
|
MrChips posted:In case anyone was wondering, I am putting the downtime in the challenge to good use. In the last few days I have: Thank you for all the hard work you're putting in. This is an awesome event. I'm trying to get a better sense of how the reliability calculations work. Could you help out? Do I understand it correctly that the base reliability targets are 30 for the engine, 60-engine for rest of car, which means if you have 60 total but 32 in engine, you are slightly in trouble with just 28 rest-of-car reliability? And then, the ~30 reliability score determines whether something breaks and IF it does then the quality points determine which part of it craps out and maybe how badly? So you can risk having some negative quality points if your overall is high enough but you know if something goes bad it could be that much more severe? I'm asking first and foremost because sometimes the choices are pretty polar. For example, if you put mechanical injection on an engine, you will be paying out of your rear end for the privilege, but you will be getting a good reliability figure and lots of power. You will also not have very much money left for quality points. On the other hand when you fill the engine bay flush with carburettors your reliability will be poo poo and you will get slightly less power with slightly worse fuel economy out of the gate, but you will have literally thousands of monies to pump into QPs - and after doing that you seem to be more or less on par with mechanical injection. Much closer at least. Maybe even enough cash left for a few points elsewhere. If quality points had an effect on whether things break this would put the inherently less reliable system ahead of the other one, just by virtue that you can and need to stuff it with quality points to bring it to the target reliability. Which would seem to dilute the choice. As far as overheating, are you in the clear if you're slightly above the required area?
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
Duuk posted:Thank you for all the hard work you're putting in. This is an awesome event. Reliability works largely like this: The calculated reliability from the game serves as your base score. Then, I take the QP values for each category and compare them to the Max QPs for the class, divided by the total QP categories (11 for NA cars, 12 for turbo cars). So for example, the average value for a turbo Touring car would be 40 divided by 12, giving a value of 3.333. Any QPs over that in a given category add to your base score; any below subtract from it. It should also be noted that several categories (as noted in the rules) are multiplied (by factors as high as 2) to increase their importance. Chassis reliability is calculated the same, except the base score is the overall reliability less engine reliability and a small value that results from the categories (such as interior) that are not counted in the QP allowance. At this point, the model combines these two calculated scores and compares them to the target reliability set in the rules (30 for engines and 60 overall), as well as the expected breakdown rate per hour (set right now at a uniform 1% per hour); a car with better than target reliability gets a smaller number, while a car with worse than target reliability gets a larger one. The result of this comparison becomes a trigger score; for each lap, a random number is generated. If the random number is lower than the target score, you have an incident. Another RNG then rolls to determine the affected system (which is compared to a table generated for each car, using the same QP comparison as before to determine how likely each system is to experience a failure), and another one determines the severity of the failure, which determines a) track position when the failure occurs, b) if the car can continue to its next pit stop or if it needs to stop immediately, c) if the damage slows the car down at all (either until repairs are done or on a permanent basis) and d) how long the repairs will take. Accidents are now handled in a similar way, except its a lot less complicated; an RNG fires every lap after the first lap to determine if you have an accident, which is compared to the base accident rate per hour (which is currently set at 0.7% per hour). Again, a RNG for severity, just like for mechanical failures. As for overheating, the square of the ratio between cooling provided divided by cooling needed determines your overheat trigger. Currently it is maybe a bit on the sensitive side - I ran a sample car on a simulated 24-hour Nordschliefe race and with the car 0.5% short of its cooling needs, it overheated four times and lost three hours on track. A car with only 50% cooling won't ever leave the starting line. Hopefully that's cleared up reliability for you somewhat.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 03:51
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/AutomationGame/status/642179414307020802
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 22:30
|
|
|
this sounds pretty cool so last night I downloaded it on Steam and messed around on it. Built a big limousine barge, and an attempt at meeting the challenge criteria for the Touring Class, only to find the car grossly overweight. Still, gonna give it a try! Also, I don't know what the gently caress I am doing either! I wish there was a little more freedom in how you can bend the body panels. You can't really make the CRX look anything but like a CRX.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 22:42
|
|
|
MrChips posted:Reliability works largely like this: Thank you for the thorough write-up, I think I've got a reasonably good grip on it now. Is the baseline point of the system something you'd be willing to discuss? What I'm getting at ties into the example of injection/carbs I brought earlier, but let's get a bit more specific. My current Tourer offering is fuel injected with an engine reliability of 32 and overall 60. It runs the Ring in around 8:48 and uses a grand total of 22 Quality Points. There are a couple of negative QP in Body but nowhere else. The total price is precisely 47 cents below the limit price. Now, the reliability model suggests that if I want the car to stay "on par" reliability wise, I need to have 3.33 QP in each category on average in addition to the basic 30/60 targets. Considering the price, this would require some changes in the technology used and seems to lean rather in favour of carbs (which will both allow and require more money spent on QP). I could save money on other things of course, the idea is that I would have to lean towards a narrower range of cheaper technologies in order to save money for generic quality points. What I'm a bit worried about is that at the end this may funnel the most successful designs towards one set of features. Basically, lead to less variety among the competitors. Which would be a shame, I think. I am guessing the system more or less expects you to not reach the targets every time and a good enough lap time might make up for making GBS threads out cylinders every couple of races. It's a game of risk. It'd just suck if you had to have those QP to be able to compete - considering the complexity of the simulation you've built I don't think you'd let that be the case but I just figured I'd throw out the thought below.  There could be a small dead spot in the middle of the quality point scale, allowing people to choose whether to go for the reliability bonus and inherent positive effect of the QPs or spend the money elsewhere - presumably on funky more expensive technologies. Alternately, the bonus could be smaller but start at zero qp, since the game itself uses zero as the baseline. Alternately, if you're not susceptible to suggestion, could you please provide a baseline in-game reliability number with 0 QP in all categories that would put you on par with the 30/60 + 3.33QP baseline?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:55 |
|
|
Duuk posted:The somewhat unfortunate thing is, that there is always "the best" body type, which tends to be several seconds quicker than the others. I have been able to get several body types down below 8:20 for the Sportsman class and my favourite ran a 8:16 while looking awesome, so I was very happy with it. Also rather glad there were other bodies so close by. Yeah, it bugs me a bit. We lose out on a lot of variety by there being bodies that are legitimately the best. It doesn't stop me from entering slow, terrible things out of sheer amusement value, though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2015 23:11
|
|
