Board Thread:Game Discussion/@comment-2601:484:4200:F20A:414C:2DA2:4D8:BCE1-20180802224345/@comment-28169398-20180805192031

RattleSnack wrote: Amrosa wrote: On the Endurance Champions offline ten lap Le Mans race, I can beat AuralPod by 4 to 5 kilometers and your Nome de Plume by 5 to 7 kilometers, with clean laps and no blatant cutting. I don't run it online because then you get all of the TSM bots that have cut the Ford and Dunlop Chicanes.

It doesn‘t really matter how the TSM bots have originally achieved those times, they will be more challenging. Though admitedly it is annoying that they seem to defy physics sometimes.

If a race is too easy or boring, then crank up the bots! The desire to prematurely end a race because it is too easy is the fault of the player himself IMO. Remember where you start in the Endurance Champions 10-lapper.

You have about 1:08 before you cross the start line for the first lap.

If you consistently lap 2:40, that means your race will be 27:48 in total, running clean laps. Even if you were to consistently lap 2:36, which is a Group A time trial time, in traffic, then you have a 27:08 total race time. If the cutting TSMs have race times under 27:00, you cannot catch them.

The point of mentioning my consistent performance against Auralpod and RattleSnack is that I am using no bot slowing, but want to run a clean race.

Again, to reiterate what I said above. With the damage model as it is, there is no way that you will lose a race you have built up a substantial lead in.

If the damage model was such that you could shunt and it would cost you the race, then sure, run to the end. But what is the point of passing Auralpod lap 7 then completing another 40+ km, when you can only intentionally do something to lose the race?

And why should I then be forced to race against cheat times because the best offline bot isn't challenging anymore? I don't mind if laps are a little ragged, but straight lines through the Ford and Dunlop Chicanes or the cut at Arnage are blatant.