OK, I finally got a few minutes to run NSR, so here goes regarding my
previous post about the annoying inconsistency/skill level/speed of the AI
from one track to the next. It is bad enough that it basically renders the
career mode useless. You can already predict what will happen at 75% of the
tracks before you even get there.
The test:
Jump in the truck; change to the default race set-up; drive a few dozen laps
in practise mode. First time in a truck at these tracks (although I
certainly know my way around them after all these years). First time
driving them in NSR. Record results.
RESULTS:
Atlanta: top 2
Bristol: top 3
Darlington: dead last
Dover: 1st
Homestead: dead last
IRP: close to back of pack
Kansas: dead last
Las Vegas: 1st
Lowes: 1st
Marty: dead last
Michigan: back of pack
Milwaukee: top 5
New Hampshire: 1st
Phoenix: dead last
Richmond: dead last
Texas: close to back of pack
The reason this is wacky is many-fold:
1) I shouldn't be able to get in an unfamiliar race "vehicle" and beat the
AI at 100% in the first laps I have ever driven at that track.
2) You would think that very similar tracks might yield similar results--no
(see: LV vs. Kansas; Texas vs. Atlanta).
3) Some tracks are obviously harder than others--but my results don't
correlate to the accepted wisdom about which tracks are difficult.
4) Too many of the results are black and white (either significantly slower
than the slowest AI or significantly faster than the fastest AI)--career
mode is useless when this happens for no apparent reason.
The exact behaviour could be found in NT2004 and NR2003, so this is nothing
new. However, they didn't purport to have career modes.
I'd love feedback from other experienced racers whether you find the AI fast
and slow where I did. I also assume some variant of this will apply to the
other two series, but I haven't tested them yet.
Marc
--
****************************************************************************
Marc Collins
[email hidden]
Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change
to take effect. Reboot now?
****************************************************************************
Totally the same with me. The difference is with the default race setup
I am last, then when i make just a couple of simple adjustments, i am at
least 1 second faster than the CPU cars. It sucks
Interesting. Could you give me an actual example of this and tell me what
set-up changes you made? I'd love to try to replicate it and prove that the
whole thing is wacky. Then I'll just leave it on the shelf until the
vaunted patch comes out (NT2006).
I don't know about you, but with little effort and no practise, I don't like
driving away from the AI at 1 second per lap when they are supposed to be
set at a realistic level.
Marc
"fredrickson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:ieSTd.21468$[email hidden]...
> Totally the same with me. The difference is with the default race setup I
> am last, then when i make just a couple of simple adjustments, i am at
> least 1 second faster than the CPU cars. It sucks
The track I did was dover. The default race setup is slow and loose as
heck, So i stiffened up the front springs, lowered the rear rebound, and
inflated all the tires something like 20 psi, then lowered the camber on
the front tires. Now I can floor it through the turns and pass everyone.
Marc Collins wrote:
Quoted text (20 lines)
> Interesting. Could you give me an actual example of this and tell me what > set-up changes you made? I'd love to try to replicate it and prove that the > whole thing is wacky. Then I'll just leave it on the shelf until the > vaunted patch comes out (NT2006). > > I don't know about you, but with little effort and no practise, I don't like > driving away from the AI at 1 second per lap when they are supposed to be > set at a realistic level. > > Marc > > "fredrickson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:ieSTd.21468$[email hidden]... > >>Totally the same with me. The difference is with the default race setup I >>am last, then when i make just a couple of simple adjustments, i am at >>least 1 second faster than the CPU cars. It sucks > > >This is in the Cup car? Because the Default race set-up for the trucks at
Dover is already a guaranteed 1st place!
Marc
"fredrickson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:k11Ud.22547$[email hidden]...
Quoted text (26 lines)
> The track I did was dover. The default race setup is slow and loose as > heck, So i stiffened up the front springs, lowered the rear rebound, and > inflated all the tires something like 20 psi, then lowered the camber on > the front tires. Now I can floor it through the turns and pass everyone. > > > Marc Collins wrote: >> Interesting. Could you give me an actual example of this and tell me >> what set-up changes you made? I'd love to try to replicate it and prove >> that the whole thing is wacky. Then I'll just leave it on the shelf >> until the vaunted patch comes out (NT2006). >> >> I don't know about you, but with little effort and no practise, I don't >> like driving away from the AI at 1 second per lap when they are supposed >> to be set at a realistic level. >> >> Marc >> >> "fredrickson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> news:ieSTd.21468$[email hidden]... >> >>>Totally the same with me. The difference is with the default race setup I >>>am last, then when i make just a couple of simple adjustments, i am at >>>least 1 second faster than the CPU cars. It sucks >> >>I have to do another comparis to NR2003. I was having a blast at
Daytona yesterday. I fired up NSR right after and the AI is horrible.
In NR2003 I actually feel like I'm driving against intelligent drivers
whereas in NSR, the cars seem to robotic. I do notice that if I use the
defualt race setup on most tracks I suck. Make some adjustments and I'm
able to kill. I wish NSR had better options to adjusting AI strength
like 2003 has.
