Skip to content

Great Exhibition SUV Inconsistencies

mikesmikes Posts: 4,368 ✭✭✭✭✭
in General Discussion
Hey, a few of us have been noticing some strange results in these finals when it comes to the British Great Exhibition SUVs. We all now the upgrade engine traction bonus as well as weight play a factor in the off-road races, but some of the stats on these vehicles are so far off, the results do not make sense.

· Share on Facebook

Comments

  • OzzmanOzzman Posts: 1,827 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Wow, the last one is mad.
    · Share on Facebook
  • mikesmikes Posts: 4,368 ✭✭✭✭✭
    wow :/
    · Share on Facebook
  • KarhgathKarhgath Posts: 199 ✭✭✭
    Ozzman said:
    Wow, the last one is mad.
    From my (limited) understanding, I believe it is related to the original traction issue - The sharp corners + acceleration on to the short straight of the Hairpin creates an issue with fast 0-60 vs slow 0-60: the faster car is more quickly affected by traction and cannot accelerate properly, while the slower one gently accelerates without too much traction issues. The straight isn't long enough to help the faster car in the end. Snow is also more traction demanding than other surfaces. Still crazy results.

    This is what I understood based on experience and posts by others, I might be 100% wrong.

    The Velar vs Discovery is a bit more baffling tho when you look at the time difference. There is a slight weight difference, but it is a 1:45 difference!
    · Share on Facebook
  • KarhgathKarhgath Posts: 199 ✭✭✭
    mikes said:
    wow :/
    Yeah. I ran many tests in the campaign tracks and my conclusion is: do not use the Bentleys on Snow. At all.
    · Share on Facebook
  • willcf15willcf15 Posts: 422 ✭✭✭✭
    While yeah, these results seem ridiculous, and indeed would be in real life, if you accept the engine traction bonus, it makes complete sense - since there is so little grip on snow, as long as your acceleration is good enough to slip all or most of the time, a cars acceleration is entirely based on the amount of traction you have, and therefore the engine traction bonus.

    I'd say there's a little bit of a competing logic problem going on here:

    -At low speeds, particularly on snow and ice, most cars' acceleration should logically be traction-based
    -If if engine upgrades did not improve traction, we would have many cases where upgraded cars lost to less upgraded counterparts. Since every cars' acceleration is reduced when it is slipping, whether it has TCS or not*, in scenarios where the car with less upgrades can get grip more often than the car with more upgrades, the car with less upgrades will win. This is very frustrating for the players

    I can't say I have an easy answer here. I think I'm in favor of leaving things how they are, preferring game balance over realism, though if you asked me a couple years ago, I may have said the opposite.

    *TCS just reduces the performance hit, it does not eliminate it
    · Share on Facebook
  • bullet_splatterbullet_splatter Posts: 667 ✭✭✭✭
    A couple more. 

    · Share on Facebook
  • KarhgathKarhgath Posts: 199 ✭✭✭
    edited February 2020
    bullet_splatter said:
    A couple more. 

    I was sad to pull the RQ19 Opel Adam and not the RQ21 Corsa... but not so much now. This is ridiculous! my Adam dominates Twisty Road (Snow) vs all my others (Bentley V8/Diesel/RR SVR), but the higher ranked and clearly better Corsa is DNF on that same track!?!?

    Edit: Ohhhh,the Adam has ABS but not the Corsa. Only difference. Looks like you need ABS for this track to be able to finish, wow.
    · Share on Facebook
  • HeissRodHeissRod Posts: 7,607 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The Corsa is not maxed; not even 2 stars
    · Share on Facebook
  • bullet_splatterbullet_splatter Posts: 667 ✭✭✭✭
    I’m sure it’s because it’s not upgraded, but still silly nonetheless. 
    · Share on Facebook
  • KarhgathKarhgath Posts: 199 ✭✭✭
    HeissRod said:
    The Corsa is not maxed; not even 2 stars
    My 333 Adam was beating my 636 RR Sport SVR on this track before I maxed it. It has to be the lack of ABS on the Corsa, it is way better than the Adam otherwise.
    · Share on Facebook
  • AndreasSimmerAndreasSimmer Posts: 1,927 ✭✭✭✭✭

    · Share on Facebook
  • milewski1015milewski1015 Posts: 2,243 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Karhgath said:
    HeissRod said:
    The Corsa is not maxed; not even 2 stars
    My 333 Adam was beating my 636 RR Sport SVR on this track before I maxed it. It has to be the lack of ABS on the Corsa, it is way better than the Adam otherwise.
    I noticed my Adam (I think it was 636 at the time as well) was struggling to get up the hill midway through the twisty road track. I’m thinking it’s the FWD coupled with the medium ride height. I’ve since switched to using it on the other offroad track on that trackset
    · Share on Facebook
  • HeissRodHeissRod Posts: 7,607 ✭✭✭✭✭
    666 v 666


    · Share on Facebook
  • EndlessWavesEndlessWaves Posts: 853 ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2020
    The Bentley is 15% heavier so maybe that's a factor? Although I didn't think snow in game was that weight sensitive, unlike ice. 

    It could be braking, but I can't see the brakes on a Bentayga being particularly bad. ABS not working maybe?

    Where was the Disco pulling ahead? 
    · Share on Facebook
  • HeissRodHeissRod Posts: 7,607 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Unfortunately, I did not watch the race.
    · Share on Facebook
  • HeissRodHeissRod Posts: 7,607 ✭✭✭✭✭
    666 v 333 and really close.  This is not ETB.  This has to be weight?

    · Share on Facebook
  • HeissRodHeissRod Posts: 7,607 ✭✭✭✭✭
    969 v 666 WTF?


    · Share on Facebook
  • Pete1989Pete1989 Posts: 2 ✭
    edited February 2020
    122 vs 323. Both had the exact same weight. 

    · Share on Facebook
  • Robbie_CheauxRobbie_Cheaux Posts: 298 ✭✭✭
    Is this still etb🤔

    · Share on Facebook
  • HeissRodHeissRod Posts: 7,607 ✭✭✭✭✭
    WTF?  969 loses to 699 on snow & ice?

    · Share on Facebook
  • genialrapiergenialrapier Posts: 129 ✭✭✭
    HeissRod said:
    WTF?  969 loses to 699 on snow & ice?

    Who in their right mind would tune an suv 699?
    · Share on Facebook
  • mikesmikes Posts: 4,368 ✭✭✭✭✭
    No ETB here. Just dumbfounded. 
    · Share on Facebook
  • BoxtaSBoxtaS Posts: 1,895 ✭✭✭✭✭
    What a mess 
    · Share on Facebook
  • 0171801718 Posts: 538 ✭✭✭
    I'm just here to say that I believe in the explanation of @Karhgath and I'm not sure what the "real world" comparison would look like.
    If you look at the results above as a mix of grip-value + weight, it makes mores sense.

    Regarding realism: Remember the cool video comparing the suzuki jimny and a mercedes g-class on hill climbs? Side note: I think weight should be a bigger factor in hill climbs!

    Also I want so say, that I have troubles believing in ETB. My Landrover Works V8, which I have seen with 3, 6 and 9 engine upgrades did not have noticeable performance bumbs. I also upgraded my Bentayga W12 to 636 hoping it would improve in drags (remember the tests done on those common BMWs, where the performance pump occured after 2.1 engine tune...) but the Bentayga also didn't improve noticeably by those engine upgrades.

    · Share on Facebook
  • 0171801718 Posts: 538 ✭✭✭
    edited February 2020
    I tested ETB using a BMW 2002 turbo (1973). Mind this is not a SUV but a RWD STD Sedan.
    Tracks are all on Atsugi Stage 8 and on Snow.



    You can see that there is no specific engine upgrade decreasing the race time in a conspicuous manners. In other words, there is not ETB on this car. When I get a reasonable test object with 4WD and ALL or OFF tyres, I will try this again. Any comments on the test protocol are welcome.
    Post edited by 01718 on
    · Share on Facebook
Sign In or Register to comment.