UKGPL Season 20 (2010-2011) Graduates Cup (67) - Mosport - Oct 10

[Hristo Itchov]

For the Watkins 1948 warm-up race we did I had a message like "Your connection has too much latency" or something similar, but after repeated attempts to join I eventually got in.  I've never had that before.  When I did join the connection meters were nearly full scale.  

There's a setting when hosting a GPL race that limits the amount of latency people who join can have, so the Watkins Glen server probably had that. I think we shouldn't use such limits for the official events and leave it to those with lots of lag to conduct themselves properly and get penalized if they cause an accident rather than keeping them out of the race completely with a ping limit.

Also sometimes ISPs cause temporary spike in latency that may last just a few minutes, but if you can't join a server because of that, you miss out those few minutes instead of doing your Qualifying runs where lag is irrelevant (unless the dreaded S bar goes up and you take pole with a 6 seconds lap, lol).

[bernie]

How can it be my connection ? we can join other servers,  but not the one used by VOS and if we had managed to join what would the latency have been like with more cars on the grid ? Whats wrong with resceduling a race , its been done before

Being unable to connect still doesn't resolve the points situation ,the main thing that peed me off as it effects car choice for the next race/ races. 

Why should we be penalised for not being able to join , weve had all this stuff before , it was even suggested that some one not at home on a particular w/e could join a race from wherever , and using for e.g. his laptop,  start the race in say the BRM , do the neccasary 1 lap and retire thus collecting max bonus points for the next race .

 

[b_1_rd]

This comment is not submitted to antagonise the situation here, it is a genuine question....

How do you propose it is done then Bernie?

I do sympathise with your predicament but the line must be drawn somewhere with regard to awarding tokens.  IMHO I think to reward safe driving that nothing (championship points, tokens, cuddly toy) should be awarded until something like 75% of the race has been completed, but that too has its fall downs.

Thoughts? And I welcome any comments, not just from Bernie on that.

[FullMetalGasket]

I actually like the 75% idea, although enforcing it could be a 'mare, in the event of 2 people being taken out would the 'innocent' party (as determined by mods) still be given their points? ect ect.
It's actually something that I wouldn't object to next season if we can work out how to deal with incidents fairly and in a mannner that drivers are happy with 

As for the problem Bernie and the others who couldn't join had I don't really know what to suggest short of the potential other servers coming to fuitition*.
There's a problem I'm aware of on the Xbox with sky internet (broadband) and router settings when hosting private races in Forza, but I'm not technically minded enough to understand if it (or something similar) is perhaps responsible for sunday....

*one of the potentials is mine so will be a little while as i'm a muppet at this sort of thing!

[Ronniepeterson]

One of the unfortunate consequences of changing to a 75% completion before you get your tokens for the next race rule would be to ruin the championship. Sure it rewards safe fast driving but it also gives in essence the best drivers an increasing advantage over the course of the season allowing them to select the best cars. Hardly conducive to close racing. Personally I don't think the moderators would cope with the complaints from drivers being penalised for shift R/stop and go penalties not taken during races. Leave well alone?

[Hristo Itchov]

I think you have 10 tokens for the next race, Bernie, plus 10 more for crossing the s/f line for the first time, so that's 20 tokens and the choice of any car you want. If not this, what do you mean about tokens?

BTW, if you wouldn't care about tokens if you drive the Wazamobile all the time. 

[b_1_rd]

Yes Bernie will have 20 for the next race, but I think his point is that depending on which chassis he took, he could have had up to 30 tokens when starting race 2 therefore is disadvantaged through no fault of his own by the 10 tokens missed in race 1, potentially affecting his future chassis choice further along the championship.

Clear as mud, right  

[Turkey Machine]

it was even suggested that some one not at home on a particular w/e could join a race from wherever , and using for e.g. his laptop,  start the race in say the BRM , do the neccasary 1 lap and retire thus collecting max bonus points for the next race .  

I take absolutely no responsibility for this, despite the fact that yep, that was me.

Just on availability of servers, if I can't get or pay for one at work I'll order one in my spare time and set it up for GPL racing and see how it goes.

[vosblod]

One of the unfortunate consequences of changing to a 75% completion before you get your tokens for the next race rule would be to ruin the championship. Sure it rewards safe fast driving but it also gives in essence the best drivers an increasing advantage over the course of the season allowing them to select the best cars. Hardly conducive to close racing. Personally I don't think the moderators would cope with the complaints from drivers being penalised for shift R/stop and go penalties not taken during races. Leave well alone?

Very good point there. Something that can be included for debate for S21.

Getting back to the issue of rescheduling races the general guidelines are here. Cancelling an event is an absolute last resort. Nine drivers connected and were able to race and there has been no feedback that the connection was unstable, the two that disco'd were due to their own ISP issues. Where the majority can connect, I find it is often a case of conflicting core.ini values, you can see the server mdm settings in IGOR. When remote hosting you can set the server to override the client values.
Under the circumstances, and I am only aware of two drivers who could not connect, the majority joined and raced with no problems so there is no evidence the connection was either unstable or unobtainable. This would not constitute a red flag situation or justify deleting the event and organising a re-run. I do of course have sympathy for the two that couldn't join, I know the feeling well.

Being unable to connect still doesn't resolve the points situation ,the main thing that peed me off as it effects car choice for the next race/ races.  

Yep same for me. As mentioned above you will have 20 going into the next race.  Out of interest what are your ini settings? My home pc is 84/116.

[bernie]

My intension was to race the coop so My points total for the next race would have been (well you work it out ) more than 20 anyway , hopefully to allow a faster car on tracks where a speed advantage counts over handling , thats the idea is it not ?

Dont know my  ini settings off hand or how to find the info you ask but I did notice T7 was set for different values than your (3rd rate  ) laptop server.

As said we have had similar situations before , it has helped to test connection prior to race day by having servers available for test sessions , unfortunately this wasn't the case or we would not be discussing the problem here .

How hard would it be in future to award no fault none starters there due tokens (points) as if they had completed 1 lap I dont know, I suppose it is impractible , one of the foibles of virtual GPL world we have to live with , doesnt help the feeling of sheer desperation when everyone else goes racing and we are left out in the cold staring at a dammed error message .

[vosblod]

Dont know my  ini settings off hand or how to find the info you ask but I did notice T7 was set for different values than your (3rd rate  ) laptop server.

Ooh that hurts, the old girl has run a lot of our races - don't ask re settings, I think there was a 6 page thread at the time 

How hard would it be in future to award no fault none starters there due tokens (points) as if they had completed 1 lap I dont know, I suppose it is impractible , one of the foibles of virtual GPL world we have to live with , doesnt help the feeling of sheer desperation when everyone else goes racing and we are left out in the cold staring at a dammed error message .

Hmm. Firstly we try to keep the system as automatic as possible - Dave writes the LM2 code and the system does the rest - I can't even manually change the tokens.
As to actually implementing it I think your use of the word 'impracticable' sums it up. Where would we start and where would we stop (and how could a rule like that be worded); 'I had a heart attack last night as I was joining', 'my rabbit chewed through my cables', 'I caught the Mrs inflagranti'; I think you get the gist.
Personally I've revamped my chassis selections and they are not far off what I was planning, don't forget the worst two results (or no results) are dropped just for things like this. Believe me I do appreciate how frustrating it feels to be staring at a race you can't join after putting in time for it but as you say it's part of the GPL world. If we had the resources of I-Racing you could sue but we don't (and don't even think about it  )

[Phil Thornton]

I did notice T7 was set for different values

That will be the significant factor IMO

laptop server.

The hardware is irrelevant for GPL, well assuming if we are talking about a modern laptop.  We ran GPL successfully for years on servers that were crap compared to modern budget laptops!!!

The issue is internet contention.  So many people are on the net these days it is getting harder to obtain a reliable connection.  Bandwidth isn't the problem it is latency caused by contention if the server is not on a dedicated commercial line (as would be the case with a home based server using a domestic ISP).

[bernie]

I did notice T7 was set for different values

That will be the significant factor IMO

are we saying here that if I had changed my ini thingy to that of  VOS's server the connection would have been good ?

[bernie]

Just found the settings , forgot I had written 'em down at the time ......

Vosb   3/84   3/100

T7      3/84   3/132

I have no idea what these mean or how they effect the server , but would this explain why I could join T7 but not Vosb 3R   


 

[FullMetalGasket]

They're packet sizes, in theory though Vos' server should be set to over-ride your own Ini. which as I understand it should have allowed you to join.

Of course Tim may have made a mistake in the rush of sorting something at such short notice