05:28 PM - September 12, 2016 by fearwhatnow
NASCAR Heat Evolution is available now for PC, PlayStation 4 and Xbox One. Get in a few laps and post your impressions!
NASCAR Heat Evolution News Post
05:28 PM - September 12, 2016 by fearwhatnowNASCAR Heat Evolution is available now for PC, PlayStation 4 and Xbox One. Get in a few laps and post your impressions!
Member Comments
# 242
bravesfan1984 @ 02/21/17 10:55 AM
|
|||||||||||||
|
As of this AM Amazon had it for $19.99 for PS4 and I believe $28.99 for XB1
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
|
|||||||||||||
|
So, what you're essentially saying is outside of career, if you set the AI to "auto" it does the same thing?
I've never ran outside of career with it set to Auto. Except maybe when I first got the game initially and I'm not sure I ran enough races, or long enough races to experience it. I went automatically to setting it to a certain number. I typically like it at a setting where I can work my way past the garbage at the back of the field, but at least have some good racing with the top of the pack.
That's a pretty dramatic difference in laptimes between 85 and 105. Just to compare to real laptimes I did some digging...
At a difficulty of 85 = 37.692
At a difficulty of 105 = 30.113
In 2015 (2016 qualifying appears to be rained out), Keselowski took the pole with a laptime of 27.492
Sure, we're comparing qualifying to race times, and I assume qualifying times are typically a bit better. Be curious to see how qualifying times worked out at 85 and 105 just to see how the AI laptimes, compare to the real laptimes. I can't seem to find laptimes for the race itself anywhere online, or even just the "best laptime" turned during the race day, but of course, those can be affected by draft etc, etc.
So, am I correct to assume then, what you're saying is essentially that using the "Auto" setting outside of career mode, the AI has the similar effect to career mode when you may get stuck in the field around 20th. However, if you use the custom AI settings to a specific value 85-105, that effect goes away, and you're left to just try and find the sweet spot that works for you? Which of course, unfortunately varies from track to track based on skill level.
I really don't understand why they couldn't use the same AI difficulty/rating settings between career and single race. If there's one thing I can't stand in my sports games, it's AI levels that change between game modes. When I fire up the game, I want the same challenge inside career or franchise, as I do in a quick race or play now event.
# 245
bravesfan1984 @ 02/21/17 01:26 PM
I know this would take some time and effort, but maybe we could get an excel sheet or something worked up with lap times at each track based on AI setting (85-105) that would help fit our driving skill. Do you think it'd be possible to get something like this started?
# 246
Turbojugend @ 02/21/17 01:59 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
Easy = Auto (-2%)
Normal = Auto
Hard = Auto (+2%)
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Having said this, if the standard AI settings applied to Career Mode, you could simply lower the AI setting to make it slower, thereby defeating the need to purchase upgrades, thereby killing any sense of progression. It's a lousy way of going about things but I can see why they did it.
# 247
Turbojugend @ 02/21/17 02:39 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
For instance, I'm currently racing at Custom 98 in my Carl Edwards season (did I mention that I suck at racing games?), I manage to place high and win a few at this level but definitely not every race. At the same time, I'm not great on road courses so I know that I'm probably not going to win any of those races, maybe not even place in the Top 10. But I think this keeps things somewhat realistic, not every driver excels on every type of track.
# 248
bravesfan1984 @ 02/21/17 02:50 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Even if you had a spreadsheet with the approximate lap times of the AI at each setting, you'd still need to know your own personal lap times at each track in order to dial in a difficulty setting prior to starting the race.
Maybe instead of doing them at 85-105. Do them in intervals of 5. I'd be willing to bet the difference between 85 and 86 is pretty minor, but 85-90 you'd probably notice.
Just to give an idea on the spread of lap times at certain difficulties I just did some quick testing at Vegas. I ran 3 qualifying sessions per difficulty level. I started at 85, then went up to 86, then jumped to 90. At each level, for each run, I recorded the top AI time, and the last place AI time. Here's what I can report: (my apologies if the chart doesn't show up the way it should)
There's a bit more spread between 85 and 86 than I anticipated there would be. Quite the jump from 85 to 90. However, it seems that the qualifying times and race lap times differ. Now, the game of course shows you no way to see in-race AI laptimes, so it's hard to compare. So, I ran 10 laps of the race, at AI level 90. I ran laptimes myself as the leader between 31.600 and 31.800. After 10 laps, I had opened a 5.7 second lead. So, if you say I ran my best laptime of 31.6 all 10 laps, and the AI ran it's best 90 OVR laptime of 32.181 each of the 10 laps, I should have gained 0.511 seconds per lap, or 5.1 seconds in total. So, seeing as I had a 5.7 second lead, and that assumes I ran my best time every lap (I did not btw, I was usually about a tenth higher) and it assumes the AI ran their best time. Someone is off, and it's likely to be the AI times since mine were slower than my best lap time, which is the one I used in the calculation.
Now, as for making a sheet of these times at every difficulty level, or even in 5 level increments(85, 90, 95, 100, 105) it's going to be extremely time consuming. I'd suggest doing it as I did here with a 3 run sample of first AI time, and last AI time for each level. The problem is, in order to see the qualifying times, you've actually got to run a qualifying session yourself since you can't sim qualifying, and see the qualifying results. Only way to see them is to load the race, run qualifying, view results, then exit the race... rinse and repeat 3 times to get an average high & low. Three runs is a small sample size of course, but it at least gives you an idea.
For the record... I did this in simulation physics model. Using a controller, and the default Vegas car setup. I doubt any of that matters though.
I do though think it's an interesting venture to put a full list together. For the sake of saving time, I guess you don't NEED a sample size of at least 3, I mean, there is a difference between the 3 highest/lowest times in each qualifying session, but I guess it's not that big of a gap it would have an effect.
That being said, you'd still need to know your own lap times ahead of time in order to know what setting to use. Again, stat tracking is pretty horrible in the game, so there's really no way to know your own historical or average times unless you track them yourself somewhere.
Seems like it could be a long road that would just lead to a ton of work. I'm just not sure it's worth it.
| Track | 85H | 85L | 86H | 86L | 90H | 90L | ||
| Vegas | 33.435 | 36.492 | 33.190 | 35.992 | 32.181 | 34.256 | ||
| 33.430 | 36.583 | 33.043 | 35.902 | 32.217 | 34.289 | |||
| 33.361 | 36.510 | 33.085 | 36.028 | 32.303 | 34.313 | |||
| Average: | 33.409 | 36.528 | 33.106 | 35.974 | 32.234 | 34.286 |
There's a bit more spread between 85 and 86 than I anticipated there would be. Quite the jump from 85 to 90. However, it seems that the qualifying times and race lap times differ. Now, the game of course shows you no way to see in-race AI laptimes, so it's hard to compare. So, I ran 10 laps of the race, at AI level 90. I ran laptimes myself as the leader between 31.600 and 31.800. After 10 laps, I had opened a 5.7 second lead. So, if you say I ran my best laptime of 31.6 all 10 laps, and the AI ran it's best 90 OVR laptime of 32.181 each of the 10 laps, I should have gained 0.511 seconds per lap, or 5.1 seconds in total. So, seeing as I had a 5.7 second lead, and that assumes I ran my best time every lap (I did not btw, I was usually about a tenth higher) and it assumes the AI ran their best time. Someone is off, and it's likely to be the AI times since mine were slower than my best lap time, which is the one I used in the calculation.
Now, as for making a sheet of these times at every difficulty level, or even in 5 level increments(85, 90, 95, 100, 105) it's going to be extremely time consuming. I'd suggest doing it as I did here with a 3 run sample of first AI time, and last AI time for each level. The problem is, in order to see the qualifying times, you've actually got to run a qualifying session yourself since you can't sim qualifying, and see the qualifying results. Only way to see them is to load the race, run qualifying, view results, then exit the race... rinse and repeat 3 times to get an average high & low. Three runs is a small sample size of course, but it at least gives you an idea.
For the record... I did this in simulation physics model. Using a controller, and the default Vegas car setup. I doubt any of that matters though.
I do though think it's an interesting venture to put a full list together. For the sake of saving time, I guess you don't NEED a sample size of at least 3, I mean, there is a difference between the 3 highest/lowest times in each qualifying session, but I guess it's not that big of a gap it would have an effect.
That being said, you'd still need to know your own lap times ahead of time in order to know what setting to use. Again, stat tracking is pretty horrible in the game, so there's really no way to know your own historical or average times unless you track them yourself somewhere.
Seems like it could be a long road that would just lead to a ton of work. I'm just not sure it's worth it.
# 251
Turbojugend @ 02/21/17 09:50 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 253
Turbojugend @ 02/22/17 10:41 AM
|
|||||||||||||
|
BTW, this is why I love communities like this. Pre-OS I would have labeled this game worthless and gave up on it within a couple of days. But here it is six months later and we're still trying to find out what this game has to offer and how to get the most out of it.
|
|||||||||||||
|
You're right though, that's the cool thing about this community. I remember with other Nascar games here the awesome setup threads we used to have too where people would share their great setups. Unfortunately this game just never gathered enough traction and interest to get that going. Which is sad, because even the NTG series earned itself a setups thread here for a while.
The AI issue for racing games to me is a tough one. Because I think as the player, you want a challenge, but at the same time you want the ability to win. I've almost never found a setting in any racing game that's allowed me to be able to compete for the win and get it, and not get it all on the same AI setting. It's always one or the other. I find this game very much that way too. For example, at AI90 (just pulling numbers out of the air) you might always win by a second or two. At AI 95 though, you may never stand a chance and always finish top 10 only. There never seems to be a setting that just works and gives a good mix. Luckily they gave the option to increase one at a time from 85-105 which helps, but still there is always that breaking point. At 100 you might always be 20th. 95 you're 10th, 90 you're winning by 5 seconds. There's always a threshold in your speed and AI speed that you break or cant break. Sure, varying laptimes and your consistency help and play into it, but that's still usually been my experience.
The other problem I have with the AI in this game though, even if you do get that setting that lets you run around other cars and fight for position, the AI too often wrecks you. They did a good job not having the AI riding on rails, or specific lines. They do shift around their lines. However the problem it does have is if I don't run a line similar to the AI, it's as if they have no awareness that I'm there, and they're going to drive their line. They're always all take, no give, that's just not the case in Nascar.
Too often I've seen a car behind me put their nose on my rear fender and just stay there until I either spin out, or get out of the way and drop 10 spots. Sure, on Sundays you may see Harvick put a fender on Logano and send him spinning. I get that, but that's not what I'm talking about. I expect that if I cut across the AI's line that I might spin out. I'm talking about the times where were in close quarters, not making contact, but the AI just keeps driving up under you, and eventually into you, and they don't let up until you've spun, and on simulation mode your car appears to be driving on an oil slick, but theirs is stuck to the track like glue. That's what bothers me. In those situations you'd expect a driver to take care of their own car too, not just plow through you with no repercussions.
The AI cars for me when it comes to contact with the player are too unaware still, and they drive like tanks that cant be moved, yet the slightest touch, even side to side and the player's car is slippin and slidin all over the place while the AI drives on as if you never touched them. You've got to hit them pretty darn good to get them to spin, as opposed to them feathering you and you're gone.
# 255
Turbojugend @ 02/22/17 01:33 PM
Y'know, it would be really nice if DMi had some type of presence on this board, much like the NBA 2K and The Show devs. I wonder if we made some attempt to reach out to them via social media if they would be responsive to having someone check this forum every now and then. What we are currently doing is definitely more productive than the usual Twitter "UR GAME SUX FIX IT" drivel.
I usually stay away from social media for just that reason, but I may try to reach out to DMi through their web portal just to see how responsive they are to this idea. I do believe they are passionate about making great NASCAR games, maybe we can help out.
I usually stay away from social media for just that reason, but I may try to reach out to DMi through their web portal just to see how responsive they are to this idea. I do believe they are passionate about making great NASCAR games, maybe we can help out.
# 256
bravesfan1984 @ 02/22/17 01:39 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 258
Turbojugend @ 02/22/17 01:45 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
Here's a copy of the e-mail I fired off to DMi:
Dear DMi,
I just wanted to make you aware that there is a great community over at Operation Sports that is committed to playing and getting the best out of NASCAR Heat Evolution. Operation Sports is one of the most popular sports gaming sites on the web today, the forums are usually populated with extremely positive gamers as well as company spokespersons and devs.
As fans and purchasers of your product, we'd love to see someone like Sean Wilson pop in every now and then to interact with our community. Several devs from 2K Sports (NBA 2K) and Sony San Diego (MLB The Show) frequent these forums and are constantly listening to and implementing the feedback that this mature gaming community provides.
We currently have a lengthy topic on NHE AI and exactly how the various settings work. There is very little information about this on the web so we are doing the research and analysis ourselves.
http://www.operationsports.com/forums/racing/
# 259
bravesfan1984 @ 02/22/17 01:54 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 260
bravesfan1984 @ 02/22/17 02:00 PM
He doesn't accept DMs on twitter but I sent a tweet to him asking if he'd join us over here for some direct interaction to help improve the game going forward. We'll see what he says.
Post A Comment
Working...