Everyone is a socialist in my game (almost).

[Don Cool]

First, this is not a political thread to be brought outside the games scope, it will probably be locked so please keep that in mind. However the game does have "politics".

Anyway, everyone votes for the better of the poorer teams in my game like reverse grids, money distribution and whatnot, kind of goes against anything I know about Formula 1 where the richer usually hammer the poorer (with a few exceptions as to anything).

Have you had any games where capitalism seemed to prevail? I think I have played about 7 or 8 games and they all turned into one big happy hippie race club.

[Xautos]

It's not so much the richer teams hammering the poorer as it is the commercial rights holder making things up and making it hard for everyone, not just small teams but even race organisers think twice about getting into high level racing because the costs are staggering, so because costs are going up, smaller teams can't keep up with it.

also the commercial rights holder has a constructors prize and legacy prize, for the former any team in the top 10 gets rewarded money for finishing within that point, however the distribution from 1st to 10th is lop sided. the legacy prizes are given to teams that have spent a long time in the sport and automatically given a large sum of money a season, sort of like an expensive bribe to keep the older teams in the sport.

this is mimicked in the game, just not to the unrealistic levels seen outside the game where a small team can only operate on 70m a year compared to the older teams that can operate on 300m a year. a small team just can't compete against this. in game there is a very high merit payment in place which kind of shows you what you are up against in MM, but it doesn't show how hard it is for small team to beat the big teams and honestly it should.

however the game isn't meant to be a political thing, it's meant to be a racing game and it touches on aspects of racing politics.

[Sayla Massochist]

Well wouldn't games working like they do in real life (richer teams always winning) be boring? We are talking about video games here and they should hold an element of entertainment above all else.

Like if I played F1 20whatever and no matter how good a driver I was Mercades always won because they just had so much better cars then any other team.

So like this game the rich teams have a certain advantage, but not to the degree real life teams would have. And that is how it should be I feel in video games. There needs to be that element of progression, entertainment, and challenge or...well it be a pretty boring game. Whats the point playing the rich team if you know you are always so far ahead of the other teams that you would have to purposely try to lose. And on the opposite what would be the point of playing a poorer team if you knew you could never ever hope to compete for even a top 5, let alone a podium or win.

[Froz]

It depends on the series you're in too. WMC has a lot of traditional teams that would probably vote the way you'd expect them to, while the lower tiers tend to have teams that want an equal playing field because otherwise they can't compete with the traditional teams.

[Inardesco]

I kinda like the 250k for last place teams since that'll keep the championship interesting. Even if you get 10 race 250k last blace bonus, it's only 2.5mill extra cash which, can, when saved, buy you between 3-8 parts depending on what you get with them.

It's not gonna do much in the short term but they're gonna do well in the long term.

[Racer D]

I invested the 1 million to vote for Very High Merit Payments.

Used up my 5 votes that I collected before, and with a 9 to 7 vote it was Approved. Fortunately.

The season after next season is going to be awesome ;)

http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/158028865537834016/D36D68AA462027BDEDCA1963787156CD6B2049C7/

[Person012345]

As I've pointed out before, this isn't a FIA sanctioned F1 game, so it's not an F1 game. The cars are F1-esque, but they're not F1 cars. This gives them far more flexibility when it comes to designing mechanics and interesting tracks and rules. One interesting thing they can do as a result is the politics system. And yes, I've seen things change for the less equal, I personally initiated a vote that brought back qualifying sessions to the ERS and then got promoted to the APS which is using merit based payments and qualifying sessions.

Though equal payments and rules that benefit lower teams have some benefits for you in that they keep things closer and more interesting (in theory) rather than letting you just run away with it. In practice you will run away with it anyway but that's just an "AI is worse than player" issue. At least it's closer.

[Tig_green]

Originally posted by Froz:

It depends on the series you're in too. WMC has a lot of traditional teams that would probably vote the way you'd expect them to, while the lower tiers tend to have teams that want an equal playing field because otherwise they can't compete with the traditional teams.

Isn't this the case in each tier... there are better teams that want to keep their position and worse teams that want equality.

Generally speaking:

It's not quite true that smaller teams can't never ever win anything irl, it can happen through innovation or single race wins can come with luck. There are examples, though few.

While I agree that some fantasy elements are good for a game, I still hope this game would be build so that modders could do a realism mod. If I pick a bad team I shouldn't think that I will win championship one day. Imo that isn't fun either. I would like that there is a chance that I never succeed in winning the championship or even get any other significant success because others do it better. Getting points, maybe odd podiums or even a win should feel like winning the championship. You could ask why Sauber still competes in F1 while it's pretty clear they will never win the championship? That is motorsport.

[Racer D]

Haha the poorer teams struck back!

The season after I force-voted Very High Merit Payments in, there was a vote on Reversed Standings Grid...
And I didn't have enough voting power left :)
The vote was tied though - but good ol' Ernie voted in favour...

[Dave H]

I haven't really noticed a trend at all in the way the teams vote. I have seen plenty of things passed that favoured the richer teams - large pit crew, expensive tyres etc., - while also plenty of other votes going the way of the minnows - higher merit payments always seems to be voted down.

[Socialist]

Wohoooo!

[Destin Skye]

Very rarely have I seen anything like you describe play out in any of my careers. Most of the time it tends to favor the money teams with only occasionally some favors to the backmarkers. I haven't done enough seasons in IEC to know for sure that's also the case there, but in Formula and GT seasons it's been pretty consistent.

Lately I've been doing my GT team career and it's tough to get them to go along with parity. For example, when the issue of changing the points systems from full field getting points, to only the top 10 getting points, I used x5 vote power to try and block it. They still managed to override my voting power because a few of them voted x3 and x2, etc. themselves. Only 1 team joined me in voting against, 2 abstained and rest voted in favor, heavily with a few using extra voting power. We got outvoted 12-6, lol.

It was similar when last season they voted in favor of using advanced ERS systems on the cars that would add an additional $2 million to the cost of new cars. OUCH. I voted against that one too but like with the points change, it was a futile effort. And this is in GT Challenger, the lower rung of the GT hierarchy. Money talks serious business even down there. lol