General Discussion

Prize cars

grandvachegrandvache Member Posts: 1,854 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited August 20 in General Discussion
hi @Hutch_Demorphic @Hutch_Robin @Hutch_Tim @Hutch_Matt

some time ago when you started banning prize cars from finals I asked if we should expect this in all, most or some finals going forward.

as far as I recall the response was somewhat noncommittal, but came down as “most” ... I could be wrong but I don’t honesty remember.

this final seems like a place where you could have allowed prize cars without giving too massive an advantage.  The GTS would have performed well on the drags but not so much on the twisties and could have been beaten by a few other cars. 

Bearing this in mind can we now assume that no prize cars in finals will be the case all the time?

Are you building in more granular restrictions so that you can have say max one prize car and still have two more restrictions?

As a F2P i’ll be honest it does make my life somewhat easier when it comes to allocating resources, the status quo means that (with one exception) NONE of my epic or legendary prize cars have any upgrades.  Surely that wasn’t your intention?

Doesn’t it somewhat defeat the point of the game if we’re disincentivised to spend resources on our most powerful cars?

I would be very interested in hearing your thoughts now that this status quo has been in operation for a few months.
Post edited by grandvache on

Best Answer

Answers

  • AndreasSimmerAndreasSimmer Member Posts: 518 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited August 16
    Edit:Sorry, it wasnt my intention to hijack the thread. Its just the frustration that all these issues never get any response from the devs.
    About the topic, i really like the idea of final like events with big prizes, prizecar use but no prizecars to win. In addition to the existing schedule, like 1 or 2 times a month. The out of order events were often among the most fun ones in the past.
    And as big prizes spark big interest packs are gonna sale too.  why not give it a try?
    Post edited by AndreasSimmer on
  • MrpiratepeteMrpiratepete Member Posts: 185 ✭✭✭
    9) ignoring feedback and wishes from forum members and instead listening to "silent" players

    10) blaming players for server errors and not compensating them for said errors

    11) internal policies

    12) car correction thread (I don't know how it's possible to have so much errors)
  • UltimateUltimate Member Posts: 777 ✭✭✭✭✭
    13) intermission


    ok.... you may continue 
  • UltimateUltimate Member Posts: 777 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Meanwhile, back at the original subject, I agree that the prize car ban is entirely counter-intuitive. You want us to invest huge effort and in-game resources (and real money, but I don’t go there any more) in winning cars that then have severely limited usage. As has already been said here, and many times before, there’s no benefit in ploughing resources into those cars, so they become an expensive white elephant. And before Hutch argue that they can be used in all other events, that’s only to win a Ceramic, or occasional CF. Scarce resources are best saved for Tri-Series. 

    Some of us already have partly-maxed prize cars from before the ban, which was is even more galling. 

    I understand the argument from some that allowing prize cars makes it even more unfair, but with the tidal wave of CF offers that simply doesn’t wash, as anyone can now buy their way to a decent hand. Just let us use the cars that we’ve earned, please. 


    That’s not entirely accurate. As a f2p having a upgraded PP (and I imagine for others, having marque prize cars, ie, P1 and 918) has helped me bring in much needed gold that in the long run allows me to buy packs that I would not have if I lacked the PP. It’s a roundabout way of playing the game, but certainly not a waste in my opinion. Would I like to to use the PP in a final, most certainly, but the reality is all the p2w players would likewise have maxed prize cars on hand, so it’s a zero net sum gain or worse, a negative if you haven’t maxed your own. I think that’s the thinking behind not having prize cars in finals. I think there is a place for prize cars in finals, but it has to be done so carefully so that finals are still competitive between players who have them
    and those that don’t and even those that have them but not fully upgraded.
  • TD01055TD01055 Member Posts: 2,200 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Ultimate said:
    Meanwhile, back at the original subject, I agree that the prize car ban is entirely counter-intuitive. You want us to invest huge effort and in-game resources (and real money, but I don’t go there any more) in winning cars that then have severely limited usage. As has already been said here, and many times before, there’s no benefit in ploughing resources into those cars, so they become an expensive white elephant. And before Hutch argue that they can be used in all other events, that’s only to win a Ceramic, or occasional CF. Scarce resources are best saved for Tri-Series. 

    Some of us already have partly-maxed prize cars from before the ban, which was is even more galling. 

    I understand the argument from some that allowing prize cars makes it even more unfair, but with the tidal wave of CF offers that simply doesn’t wash, as anyone can now buy their way to a decent hand. Just let us use the cars that we’ve earned, please. 


    That’s not entirely accurate. As a f2p having a upgraded PP (and I imagine for others, having marque prize cars, ie, P1 and 918) has helped me bring in much needed gold that in the long run allows me to buy packs that I would not have if I lacked the PP. It’s a roundabout way of playing the game, but certainly not a waste in my opinion. Would I like to to use the PP in a final, most certainly, but the reality is all the p2w players would likewise have maxed prize cars on hand, so it’s a zero net sum gain or worse, a negative if you haven’t maxed your own. I think that’s the thinking behind not having prize cars in finals. I think there is a place for prize cars in finals, but it has to be done so carefully so that finals are still competitive between players who have them
    and those that don’t and even those that have them but not fully upgraded.
    This is valid, and I suppose highlights 2 ways to play the game. I’m with James, I’m super-stingy when it comes to upgrades and only upgrade epics or higher for a tri-series final, not even a prelim. It works for me, and I’ve won every prize car since the carerra GT rerun as a f2p. The downside to this is that they stay stock, by my own rules. (SCG still 000) 

    I could upgrade them and sacrifice prize cars for more T1’s, but I choose the collectors route - I can hit T2 in 95% of events anyways, and T1 isn’t worth the extra effort / resources. I rarely even upgrade SR cars since the prize nerf, all about those ceramics :)

    A good touch would be some high-roller events that allow - or are even geared towards prize cars. These could even run in place of a prize car so they go to every 3 weeks, with a couple high-payout events in the extra week?
  • grandvachegrandvache Member Posts: 1,854 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Ultimate said:
    Meanwhile, back at the original subject, I agree that the prize car ban is entirely counter-intuitive. You want us to invest huge effort and in-game resources (and real money, but I don’t go there any more) in winning cars that then have severely limited usage. As has already been said here, and many times before, there’s no benefit in ploughing resources into those cars, so they become an expensive white elephant. And before Hutch argue that they can be used in all other events, that’s only to win a Ceramic, or occasional CF. Scarce resources are best saved for Tri-Series. 

    Some of us already have partly-maxed prize cars from before the ban, which was is even more galling. 

    I understand the argument from some that allowing prize cars makes it even more unfair, but with the tidal wave of CF offers that simply doesn’t wash, as anyone can now buy their way to a decent hand. Just let us use the cars that we’ve earned, please. 


    That’s not entirely accurate. As a f2p having a upgraded PP (and I imagine for others, having marque prize cars, ie, P1 and 918) has helped me bring in much needed gold that in the long run allows me to buy packs that I would not have if I lacked the PP. It’s a roundabout way of playing the game, but certainly not a waste in my opinion. Would I like to to use the PP in a final, most certainly, but the reality is all the p2w players would likewise have maxed prize cars on hand, so it’s a zero net sum gain or worse, a negative if you haven’t maxed your own. I think that’s the thinking behind not having prize cars in finals. I think there is a place for prize cars in finals, but it has to be done so carefully so that finals are still competitive between players who have them
    and those that don’t and even those that have them but not fully upgraded.
    In my experience (two years, almost entirely f2p, 13 “proper” prize cars) having the prize cars is undoubtably of considerable help in non prize car events, 918>gt2rs, P1>675lt, etc.  Having said that  having UPGRADED prize cars is of marginal utility only.  

    Yes, you might get a few more t1 finishes in standard events, and an extra few hundred gold a week is clearly useful but it’s still IMHO much better to feed non prize legends and epics.
  • grandvachegrandvache Member Posts: 1,854 ✭✭✭✭✭
    @Hutch_Tim please forgive the pestering, bumping in the hopes of a response.
  • grandvachegrandvache Member Posts: 1,854 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Hutch_Tim said:

    Bearing this in mind can we now assume that no prize cars in finals will be the case all the time?

    Are you building in more granular restrictions so that you can have say max one prize car and still have two more restrictions?
    It's going to be no-prize-car-finals most, possibly all of the time. The plans for Finals events aren't drawn up that far in advance, so it remains possible that we'll want a Final event that uses both restrictions on other things and therefore allows prize cars, in a case where we don't think prize cars would be overwhelmingly advantageous.

    Having more granular restrictions on events isn't high up on the list (as far as I'm aware), although as you've seen we are working around it a bit with 'dual' restrictions (like 2010 Convertibles).


    As a F2P i’ll be honest it does make my life somewhat easier when it comes to allocating resources, the status quo means that (with one exception) NONE of my epic or legendary prize cars have any upgrades.  Surely that wasn’t your intention?

    Doesn’t it somewhat defeat the point of the game if we’re disincentivised to spend resources on our most powerful cars?
    Yep, I largely agree with this. As a player, I largely save B and A food for significant Finals events, only deviating if I manage to build up a good supply (like 9+ A food or 18+ B food) and there's a repeatedly useful car I want to invest in. I've got one fusion in my 959 Dakar for that reason, which is just enough to give me an edge over other 959 Dakar owners when those times come around (so it has a 90% win rate).

    My preferred solution is just as people are saying here, some sort of bigger events where having a prize car is useful, with prizes good enough you'd at least consider upgrading them for it. That's what I'm advocating for.

    While I'm here...
    TimBut said:

    My top hated things:

    1) Prize cars ban
    2) Speculative update with lowering current top cars (rs6, alpha, camaro) and introducing new medium height cars. 
    3) Infinite CF offers
    4) Clubs
    5) Absense of special events
    1) Prize cars ban
    See above. Would make the number 1 most-hated-thing list of many more people if we removed it I think!

    2) Lowering cars / introducing medium
    We have a much better process for correcting existing cars now, and for pre-emptively screening incoming cars, thanks to the input from the expert player team. I do think that the combination of lowering + adding medium was pretty unfortunate though, and I think we should put more emphasis on checking ground clearance on incoming cars in future.

    3) Infinite CF offers
    Okay, slight hyperbole, but I know what you mean. As I covered elsewhere though, these aren't as insanely destabilising as people tend to think. They mostly help people fill in gaps (from what I see in the data), so are more useful to less well-off players. (Long term, there's also the fact that if someone buys an overwhelming number of 1599 specialist CFs to help them win Ceramic events instead of generic 1499 CFs, they will tend to be slightly worse off on average due to the price difference.)

    4) Clubs
    Sure, Clubs could be improved a lot. I put the ideas I'm backing in this post

    5) Absence of Special events
    I guess things like the IRGP series, or something like the bigger prize events I mentioned above, right? Yeah, we should have some more of those.

    Edit:
    One point I caught here before you edited it was (I think) being fed up of "we'll think about it" type responses, which could easily apply to a lot of what I'm writing in this post too. In terms of features/bug-fixes, of course we're just working on those continually, it's just there's only so much we can do at once - and the list of things players would like and that we want to implement is extremely long compared to what we can get done in a given release. We figure it's at least something to indicate how much we like or would consider an idea in the mean time.

    9) ignoring feedback and wishes from forum members and instead listening to "silent" players

    10) blaming players for server errors and not compensating them for said errors

    11) internal policies

    12) car correction thread (I don't know how it's possible to have so much errors)
    9) Listening to "silent" players over active forum members
    I can think of two big examples of this. The big prize board rebalance is the most obvious one, and is kind of the definitive example of it - it made things harder for the biggest smarfers, who are relatively few and are extremely vocal on the forums, and easier for just about everyone else. That's why I shared the data on it, because the discrepancy was so extreme. The other example is the Challenge I think, and you would be amazed how different the number of people entering is with the updated prize structure and types of requirements. It works much better for early-to-mid game players now, which of course doesn't feel great for late-game players. Hopefully moving the next longer-term challenge series to monthly (instead of bi-monthly like the Austin challenges) will give a bit more of a regular and more interesting challenge for you guys.

    10) Blaming players for server errors / not compensating
    I'm not sure what exactly was said here. Server errors are exacerbated by late-joiners, but I agree it wouldn't be correct to blame players for it - players do what we incentivise them to do, it's on us to deal with that or change the incentives. That is what we're trying to do. Compensation for affected players gets at the next point I guess.

    11) Internal policies
    I assume by this you mean under what conditions someone gets a prize car if they missed out due to server errors? I think LittleEnosBurdette covered that well in the relevant thread actually. My brief summary:
    - The more convincing a case you can make that you should have won it, the more likely you are to get it
    - Entering relatively early and ranking high is in general more convincing than entering relatively late and ranking high
    - We judge each case on its own merits. If we made public exactly what the criteria were, the number of people claiming those exact criteria in the next event would (of course) shoot up massively, and we'd have to move where we join the line again.

    12) Car corrections
    Yeah, I've implied before how I'm surprised our data from Evo isn't more robust. But as mentioned above, we at least have a better process in place now for fixing existing mistakes, and catching upcoming ones before the cars are released.
    Thanks for the reply Tim.  It's appreciated.
  • AndreasSimmerAndreasSimmer Member Posts: 518 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Hi Tim, yes i edited my original post to not dillute from the original topic here, though it seems it turned into a Q&A anyway. What i was referring to is the long time between changes, we are talking month not weeks. As this is a mobile game which requires several logins a day to play properly it feels extremely long.
    I dont mean new cars, but improvements in gamecode, some special events, just something to wake people up again.
    The first IRGP was so much fun with the events starting at different time, all in addition to the regular schedule. My guess is that this was one of the highlights many people like to remember and have again. Asian players might send flowers as thanks for the endtimes. Having this more often would people give something to look for aside from the weekls schedule. Also something else on the weekend would be great.
    In true wall of text fashion i like to thank you for taking your time and giving us a response. This feels so much better than silence.  I could write some more but leave that up to @James_Pearce as he often finds better english words for my thoughts :)
  • James_PearceJames_Pearce Member Posts: 1,027 ✭✭✭✭✭
    @Hutch_Tim As always, engagement with our discussions is welcomed. I still don’t agree with everything that you say (Prize car bans, that specialist CFs aren’t a problem), but additional information about future events, car corrections and so forth is very welcome. 

    However, I have to call you on this one: 
    Hutch_Tim said:

    11) Internal policies
    I assume by this you mean under what conditions someone gets a prize car if they missed out due to server errors? I think LittleEnosBurdette covered that well in the relevant thread actually. My brief summary:
    - The more convincing a case you can make that you should have won it, the more likely you are to get it
    - Entering relatively early and ranking high is in general more convincing than entering relatively late and ranking high
    - We judge each case on its own merits. If we made public exactly what the criteria were, the number of people claiming those exact criteria in the next event would (of course) shoot up massively, and we'd have to move where we join the line again.
    Firstly, if you had fixed criteria that would eliminate the debate, not exacerbate it. The notion that we’re better off not knowing whether we’re entitled or not is, frankly, rather patronising. With fixed criteria you’d either qualify or not. In fact, it might even encourage people to stop late joining 😱. I really don’t understand the logic in keeping this a secret. 

    Another issue with the current approach is that it allows Hutch to be entirely subjective in their decision-making. The arbitrary, and secretive, nature of those decisions is frustrating and slightly insulting. And the fact that you don’t share any of the criteria but instead just tell us that we don’t qualify is unacceptable. 

    My biggest bugbear with this set up is that you allow us to late join, but punish us for doing so. You can’t have it both ways. Either solve late joining, or give people the car that they deserve if the servers are borked in the last few minutes. 
  • MrpiratepeteMrpiratepete Member Posts: 185 ✭✭✭
    edited August 21
    Am I missing something or did his post vanish?

    Edit: Okay, seems like the "best answer" is now on top instead of in the right place in the "conversation". Seems odd.
  • Knapster_HutchKnapster_Hutch Member, Administrator, Hutch Staff Posts: 15 admin
    edited August 22
    @Hutch_Tim As always, engagement with our discussions is welcomed. I still don’t agree with everything that you say (Prize car bans, that specialist CFs aren’t a problem), but additional information about future events, car corrections and so forth is very welcome. 

    However, I have to call you on this one: 
    Hutch_Tim said:

    11) Internal policies
    I assume by this you mean under what conditions someone gets a prize car if they missed out due to server errors? I think LittleEnosBurdette covered that well in the relevant thread actually. My brief summary:
    - The more convincing a case you can make that you should have won it, the more likely you are to get it
    - Entering relatively early and ranking high is in general more convincing than entering relatively late and ranking high
    - We judge each case on its own merits. If we made public exactly what the criteria were, the number of people claiming those exact criteria in the next event would (of course) shoot up massively, and we'd have to move where we join the line again.
    Firstly, if you had fixed criteria that would eliminate the debate, not exacerbate it. The notion that we’re better off not knowing whether we’re entitled or not is, frankly, rather patronising. With fixed criteria you’d either qualify or not. In fact, it might even encourage people to stop late joining 😱. I really don’t understand the logic in keeping this a secret. 

    Another issue with the current approach is that it allows Hutch to be entirely subjective in their decision-making. The arbitrary, and secretive, nature of those decisions is frustrating and slightly insulting. And the fact that you don’t share any of the criteria but instead just tell us that we don’t qualify is unacceptable. 

    My biggest bugbear with this set up is that you allow us to late join, but punish us for doing so. You can’t have it both ways. Either solve late joining, or give people the car that they deserve if the servers are borked in the last few minutes. 
    Hi James,

    We don't expose our policies because that would lead to people attempting to exploit the situation e.g. if we said the cutoff was was 15 mins (it's NOT btw!) then we'd have a wave of people attempting to join before that. We are as transparent as we can be without giving this information away. 

    That said there is some common sense stuff; the earlier you join and the closer you are to the tier you missed are the biggest factors. If you late join and only do a few races it's extremely likely you'll be disappointed.

    In reality we usually end up giving out <5 so considering the amount of hassle it is to write in to us, in likelihood you will be disappointed.

    I'll also reference my last post from July in the 405 Pikes Peak Finals, as it says much the same thing: https://forums.hutchgames.com/discussion/comment/142826#Comment_142826
  • MrpiratepeteMrpiratepete Member Posts: 185 ✭✭✭
    @Hutch_Tim As always, engagement with our discussions is welcomed. I still don’t agree with everything that you say (Prize car bans, that specialist CFs aren’t a problem), but additional information about future events, car corrections and so forth is very welcome. 

    However, I have to call you on this one: 
    Hutch_Tim said:

    11) Internal policies
    I assume by this you mean under what conditions someone gets a prize car if they missed out due to server errors? I think LittleEnosBurdette covered that well in the relevant thread actually. My brief summary:
    - The more convincing a case you can make that you should have won it, the more likely you are to get it
    - Entering relatively early and ranking high is in general more convincing than entering relatively late and ranking high
    - We judge each case on its own merits. If we made public exactly what the criteria were, the number of people claiming those exact criteria in the next event would (of course) shoot up massively, and we'd have to move where we join the line again.
    Firstly, if you had fixed criteria that would eliminate the debate, not exacerbate it. The notion that we’re better off not knowing whether we’re entitled or not is, frankly, rather patronising. With fixed criteria you’d either qualify or not. In fact, it might even encourage people to stop late joining 😱. I really don’t understand the logic in keeping this a secret. 

    Another issue with the current approach is that it allows Hutch to be entirely subjective in their decision-making. The arbitrary, and secretive, nature of those decisions is frustrating and slightly insulting. And the fact that you don’t share any of the criteria but instead just tell us that we don’t qualify is unacceptable. 

    My biggest bugbear with this set up is that you allow us to late join, but punish us for doing so. You can’t have it both ways. Either solve late joining, or give people the car that they deserve if the servers are borked in the last few minutes. 
    Hi James,

    We don't expose our policies because that would lead to people attempting to exploit the situation e.g. if we said the cutoff was was 15 mins (it's NOT btw!) then we'd have a wave of people attempting to join before that. We are as transparent as we can be without giving this information away. 

    That said there is some common sense stuff; the earlier you join and the closer you are to the tier you missed are the biggest factors. If you late join and only do a few races it's extremely likely you'll be disappointed.

    In reality we usually end up giving out <5 so considering the amount of hassle it is to write in to us, in likelihood you will be disappointed.

    I'll also reference my last post from July in the 405 Pikes Peak Finals, as it says much the same thing: https://forums.hutchgames.com/discussion/comment/142826#Comment_142826
    Na sorry I won't swallow that.

    I'm feed up with **** excuses and arguments like that and won't try to further aruge with you, because that would be to time consuming. I hope someone other will do it.

    Btw who are you again?
  • baestbaest Member Posts: 457 ✭✭✭✭
    I'll also reference my last post from July in the 405 Pikes Peak Finals, as it says much the same thing: https://forums.hutchgames.com/discussion/comment/142826#Comment_142826
    Thanks for resurrecting that thread, especially when it's another one that shows Hutch in the best of lights.
  • PlantedZebraPlantedZebra Member Posts: 368 ✭✭✭
    @Hutch_Tim I just stumbled across this post and I saw you said,

    "so it remains possible that we'll want a Final event that uses both restrictions on other things and therefore allows prize cars, in a case where we don't think prize cars would be overwhelmingly advantageous."

    Then the first thing that comes to my mind is BMW. It has happened multiple times already and my M3 GTS were always banned from those events that has the prize car ban.

    I admit that before the GR update, the M3 GTS is the best BMW in game, makes sense to ban it; but after the GR update, that isn't the case anymore as more and more superior BMW's got added and the GTS just isn't the best anymore, let alone "overwhelmingly advantageous".

    The best example is the M3 CS against the M3 GTS. The CS is almost better in every way possible, but the CS is useable in finals but not the GTS.

Sign In or Register to comment.