Nearly forgot, would be interesting to know if you can set the highest reliability rating to 60% or so and increase the amount of cars that can crash. These old cars were very unreliable and failed all the time!

Hi Riso, firstly cheers for the feedback, massively appreciate it.

1. On Piquet, my thoughts are that despite the crash at Imola, he was still a top level driver and I felt that he dragged the Lotus team to good finishes despite the car being not much better than the midfield teams, hence why I've given him a high rating, but his peak is fairly soon. For his traits, I can agree with changing Late Braker to Early to simulate his loss of depth perception and adding Mercenary for driving for money.

2. All the old drivers I have given all under 5 points of potential as they might improve a tiny bit, but they shouldn't realistically use them all as they improvement rate will slow the closer they get to their peak. About fitness, while I agree that Fitness was taken less seriously back then, in the game it could cause some unbalance between drivers so I think I'll keep it how it is.

3. Yes I agree with Drivers being 'hidden' away using the scouting system, defenitely the rookies/young drivers as you mentioned, it would make it more interesting in terms of driver choices so I'll change that.

4. I'm going to the leave the GT DLC for now, I don't really want to mix the fake and real drivers toghether, so all the real drivers will stay on the F1 side for now.

5. I think you make a good point on the starting reliability of each of the cars, they were quite unreliable as you say, I'll look into adjusting that aspect.

You really need to give Piquet that trait that makes him a bad leader in a race. All his wins after his 1987 Imola crash were because the driver in front retired.

I would agree his Japan and Canada wins, he got from others retiring, but Australia was a good drive to win, plus the cars were more unreliable back then as you mentioned so it affected everyone and Benetton while a good team, weren't consistant race win challengers, so I wouldn't say personally he deserves that trait

Piquet said he needed a car in front of him to know the braking points because he couldn't see them anymore without help.

Anyway, is there a trait for drivers ruining mechanic relationship with their whining? Because if someone deserves it, it's Nigel. Nobody in the teams liked him for various reasons. Also if there's a trait that is the opposite of Hard Worker/Dedicated give it to him. At Williams he once refused to come when the team asked to do car testing despite being relatively nearby at the Isle of Man. Afterwards they asked Piquet and he took the next plane FROM BRAZIL to do car testing. Now that's dedication.

Alesi should be notoriously bad for car development (feedback) but very quick.Oh and less focus, he was prone to moments of genius but also unbelievably stupid mistakes like not pitting for fuel. Very emotional/passionate guy.

Yeah, I think those are definetly valid points you raise, I'll give them the appropriate traits!

Change "Mean" to "Blunt". And it shouldn't affect team mate or mechanic morale (Piquet was loved by mechanics because he gave them money each year and was a good chap all around) but chairman and marketing hits.

Tyre rules probably should be endurance tyres, pre-selected and two compounds only.

Effectively Qualifying + Race.

Eddie Irvine should probably have Lightning Reactions instead of Aggressive. He was able to beat Schumacher at the starts, he just usually didn't because Michael was better after that.
Also he should have British citizenship, not Irish.

Heinz-Harald Frenzen meanwhile should probably gain that "wilts under pressure" trait if he hasn't. He had no problems at Jordan but the pressure at Williams was too much.

Noted!

Hm yeah I play Lotus and Piquet may be a bit overrated, though that was a nice bonus in the first year. McLaren hired him for the second season where he replaced Alain Prost (now unemployed) where he is tied with Senna in the drivers championship.

Heinz Harald Frentzen should have a rain master or at least likes changeable condition. and he should get the penalty for driving at the front. I still remember his year at Williams and how he dissappointed there, so he may not have been champion material (though a very good driver in less exposed positions)

Recent Eddie Irvine interview where you can learn that after Senna's death Schumacher was without question the best driver in the field. A step above Hakkinnen who himself was a step above all other drivers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-IdrYM86KY

Can you tweak the reliability rate gain? Set it to ~33% of current values.

Also I was thinking about the engines.

The Ferrari V12 should have the worst fuel consumption in the field with the greatest improvability and the Ford/Judd V8s exactly the other way around, with the Honda/Renault V10s in the middle.

Funny thing about the Judd V8, it was actually more powerful than the Ford in 1988 despite being the cheap option. They redesigned it for 1989 but the V8 engines were more equal and both were hopelessly outclassed by the V10s.

Checking the rules I have to note refuelling was banned in 1984 and only allowed again in 1994!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Formula_One_regulations

I think Ford is a great option as it is. It has been a great choice so far. It's 10 million cheaper, has less power (base and improvability) but significantly better fuel efficency. I could basically build a very competitive car for almost 10 million less.
Precisely, I made a car with almost all 5-stars for 32 million, just with less improvabilty.

@Riso. Just have to add that Irvine was Schumachers teammate, so his opinions will just reflect his own situation, having to justify to himself why he practically became Michaels adjudant and water carrier. I personally don't think that Hakkinen and Schumacher were much apart as the best drivers in the field at that time. Both had the 10% extra that separates a real champion from just a very good driver.