while upgrades exist pure balance will be hard to achieve.
OP mentions project cars, omits no upgrade paths.
Upgrades certainly do make things complicated as they are now, but it wouldn’t be hard to revise them to go with the category system. Production cars would have a certain set of upgrades based on what they come with stock in real life, so for example a BRZ would have a slew of upgrades in all areas, while a P1 would probably have a small selection of suspension and engine upgrades, since the car is so advanced on its own. Full-on race cars should not have any upgrades for them whatsoever, and that would be fine since they’d be in their own class so it would still be balanced. The whole aim of this is to get people driving essentially the same car, so if everyone is driving, let’s say, in modern muscle cars, everyone would have similar builds so driver skill and tuning prowess would have greater importance.
I think PI is a flawed system. There’s no real restrictions which allow missle cars, super slow handling cars and everything in between
Each class should have a restriction from 1 thing to everything. Minimum weight, tire width, power, aero package and whatever else can be restricted from upgrades given in the game. Although I know it’s not that simple and I don’t feel like fleshing it all out.
I would be happy if they do something against the op awd… It´s the same nightmare in Horizon 3 as it was in Forza 3. This completely ruined the multiplayer for me.
1 Like
Forza Motorsport titles haven’t been dominated by AWD cars since Forza Motorsport 3. The key to building a strong car in these games instead is to convert it to RWD, reduce the weight as much as you can and find a good balance between power and grip.
1 Like
I know that AWD were out of control in FM3, but there were still very competitive RWD cars too. I would still win races online with RWD cars. I believe FM3 had the best PI system. It seems that ever since FM3 I could never find a sweet spot for the car. In order to get good handling…no speed. and vice versa. I don’t run TCS STM or ABS so I need a well balanced car. Just my opinion
Do you not remember the Mosler? Once that car was released it was basically the only car to use in R3 and R2 classes. Nothing else came remotely close to it!
Will be very interesting to see how this homologation works in the game and how much of an impact it has on balancing the races. Here’s hoping they share this information soon!
2 Likes
I’d rather they just group by Division which would by nature have cars that are of similar performance, then you won’t need 1,000 PI classes to attempt to balance everything.
-k
No matter how well you balance the PI system there will still be a dominant car or car class for every track. The car that wins on Lime Rock will not win on Daytona or any other high speed track. Cars that do well on Bernese Alps might do well on Prague but they will struggle on tracks with long straights and tight bends.
There are too many variables to truly balance out the class system, especially when there are 700 cars, engine and drivetrain swaps, and more. There is no effective way to balance such a broad and varied field without removing many things that sets Forza apart from its competition.
If players that can post top 10 times are in a lobby running the car they put up on the leaderboard, you’re going to lose. But I race in D Class and most of the players that can take a crack at a number 1 time on a leaderboard will purposefully drive something slower to allow for more interesting competition. And even if they don’t, fighting for third or fourth is just as fun as fighting for first if the racing is clean and fast. So I really don’t think it matters too much if classes are not balanced. There will always be a standout star for every track, just like there is in real life when there are fewer regulations and more options or manufacturers to make improvements.
NASCAR and Formula 1 suffer IMO because everyone is essentially running the same car with some stickers on it. Yes, that is how you can get a true test of “driver skill” but there is so much more to racing than that.
We do that cause its a band aid to the actual problem.
It isnt fun for us. Dont get me wrong its not that we want to use that one car, we’d much rather have HP restrictions or some other better balancing tool.
2 Likes
HA! Talking like you’re one of them. <3
But seriously, you’re right there needs to be more restrictions than just Turn 10 balancing upgrades to PI.
Yes, Im garbage. Such Slow. I’ll show myself out. 
#nofasttimes
1 Like
For me personally I enjoy racing something terrible because it sharpens my skills. Like using the Lotis Elise downgraded to D Class on lime rock or short rio layouts because it bites back if you let it. Of course I could grab a 53 vette or a Mazda Cosmo and win without any effort but I don’t find that enjoyable.
I run a 69 Nova (I know this is a top tier car for D class) but mine has zero handling upgrades, a blown Hemi pushing out nearly 560 horsepower and has a 3.2 braking stat. It handles like a freight train but getting 1:50 lap times on Daytona short circuit is super rewarding and very challenging.
Anyone can hop into D class with OG Oldmans 93 civic and any top tier 73 trans am tune and do well, but if it wasn’t those two cars it would be another two. There is no good way to balance PI in forza, it is just too broad. If the limits were placed on HP cars would gain time through handling upgrades. If power to weight was the focus cars that are more aerodynamic will take the lead. If handling upgrades are capped then cars will have horsepower pumped into them until they are about to tear a hole in the ground at launch. And if all areas are limited you might as well run cycled production.
My point is is that challenging yourself in a less competitive car is not a bandaid but a training tool. I have no problem with slower drivers using the best possible car for the track because I can use my driving skill to match a better car with something not as competitive. I only got that way because I pushed myself to be faster.
2 Likes
You would put a limit on all of these factors per class. It would keep the cars pretty even throughout the classes
I do agree with what others have said, about breaking up the classes into smaller sections, every 25 points or so. I do seem to recall at least some of the classes being done like that in one title or another… After spending about an hour on FM on the XBox, the original, the root, I can say FM did that, more or less. The ‘PI’ was hidden, not visible to the player, but buy a new car at the bottom of the class, take it to the upgrade shop, slap some parts on there little by little, and watch it go from D4 to D3 to D2 to D1… Some more upgrade, on into the Cs… I can’t say whether FM2 did the same, as I’ve lost my copy. I don’t think FM3 and FM4 had the classes broken up, though. Would’ve been better if they had, maybe.
I also agree with separating production cars and dedicated racing machines. There should still be the rare event that challenges one class against another from time to time, but ordinarily in career and non-custom matches, the production cars and dedicated racing machines ought not be forced or even allowed to run together, as even at such a high level they are very different. There should be no problem with keeping the cars separate in both class and “division” or “specification” or whatever other term one might use. Again, after spending about an hour on FM on the XBox, the original, the root, I can say FM did that, more or less. Production cars were between class D4 and S1, I believe, while racing machines are basically in R class, with labels being ‘GT’, ‘GTS’, and ‘P1’, possibly others… GT and GTS seem to include cars from several different series, such as JGTC/GT300/GT500, DTM, GT3, GT2, GT1… P1 seems to include various prototypes, like LMP and GTP… After that, it did have certain events for certain cars of similar design and such. FM2, FM3, and FM4 did, as well—FWD events, RWD events, 900HP events, JGTC/GT500 events, DTM events, very specific…in singleplayer, anyway. Basically, if they had thought hard enough, they could’ve balanced multiplayer by using the design/division/classification/specification of the cars, all along.
Still, I keep seeing it—people still keep insisting that so much should ride on the PI… “Don’t let people run vastly different builds…”, is what I see when someone says that. “Don’t let people build their cars out differently…” No, folks. That isn’t right. That isn’t right, at all. Quit looking at PI like that. Stop it.
Go back through your previous Forza titles real quick. Go into your garage, or to the dealership. Hit the X button, or whatever it says down at the bottom, to bring up the ‘sort’ function. Now, scroll left and right. See what different data is kept track of. Now get on a different Forza title and do the same thing.
On FM on the original XBox, I can tell you what you’ll see. Year, Make, Model, Class/Sublclass (D4, D3, C2, A1, GTS, etc), Drive Type (FWD, AWD, etc), Origin (Germany, UK, USA, etc), Car Value, Parts Value, Engine Position (F, M, R, etc), Aspiration (N/A, Turbo, etc), Boost Pressure, Peak Power, Power RPM (peak power is reached at a certain RPM, this is that), Peak Torque, Torque RPM (again, peak power at a certain RPM, this is that), Redline RPM, Number of Gears, Curb Weight, Weight Balance, Front Tire Width & Rim info, Rear Tire Width & Rim info. You’ll also see the various speed, acceleration, handling, and braking stats. In FM2, FM3, FM4, you might see more data; Number of Doors, Body Type (Sedan, Hatchback, Roadster, etc).
As for FM6, you don’t see pretty much any of that, and that’s not right. Now how’s it gonna be in FM7? Is it going to be just a prettier FM6, or is it going to be a return to Forza’s roots, with potential for detailed, somewhat regulated and structured events?
You want to balance the game? You don’t ruin it by dictating how people can build their cars in a definitive way, outside of the events. You don’t come along and say, “you can’t build your car for max handling” or “you can’t build your car for max power.” Not in some Draconian, “final solution” sort of way. You leave the balance to the EVENTS. You say, “you want to run that car in this event, you have to build it to fit within this set of regulations/guidelines.” “You want to run your car in this high-level event, you need race tires within a certain size range, race brakes, race suspension, race weight reduction and chassis reinforcement, race aero, rims within a certain size and weight range, etc.” And then you have a wide variety of different events, and let people build their cars differently for so many different events. You make an event for American Muscle on tight, twisty tracks, and make the rules dictate that you can’t have a braking or handling score higher than a certain point value. You make an event for Italian classic supercars, and make rules that dictate no AWD, N/A only, and no race aero. You let your imagination run wild, and piece together guidelines to encourage balanced races of similar machines. “This event is only open to cars costing a total (car +parts) of 5k credits.” “This event is only open to cars x, y, and z, and with only up to 5k credits worth of parts installed.”
You balance the game, the races, by tightening specifications AT the event. Not way back at the dealership or the garage. “You can build your car any way you want it for time trials, rivals, free play, ‘unlimited’ events, but for strict racing events you build it to meet the event’s rules and regulations.”
That all said, okay, sure, I know, I admit, I even said it before, the PI system needs an overhaul still. Numbers need adjusting, still. But, come on everybody, stop acting like PI is supposed to be the final word in balance, because as the OP has said twice at least, it was never intended to be looked at like that, it doesn’t work like that, it can’t work like that, it isn’t supposed to work like that, it shouldn’t work like that.
Now, as Mark points out, in reality just as in the game, there will always be cars that are dominant on certain tracks, that aren’t dominant on certain other tracks. Factors like others and myself have mentioned before make a car’s tendencies fit certain environments. That should be fine, within reason. Balance shouldn’t be such a “100% certain” thing, in the sense that not every car should just be a cookie-cutter-copy of another car. They should all be allowed their differences, their personalities, their individual idiosyncrasies.
2 Likes
Rather than discussing what it should be (it’s far too late down the development path for such a conversation to be fruitful) let’s look at what the PI system currently looks like in Forza Motorsport 7.
Here are some results screens from the E3 demo:
Almost all of the PI numbers we see here match their equivalent cars in Forza Motorsport 6.
That means the PI system is the same as before (though some minor tweaks due to a different track roster a few numbers will vary by 5-10 points).
This also most likely means that the Leaderboard per class will be dominated by similar cars/builds to Forza Motorsport 6.
We don’t know about Car Divisions/Categories yet, but based on what has been published so far, one can assume that cars will fall into the same categories as before.
To sum up: if you liked the PI/Class system in Forza Motorsport 6, you’ll like it in Forza Motorsport 7. If you didn’t; tough luck, you’re stuck with it..
1 Like
Aaaaaah I’m still not happy here huh… back in FM6 there were quite a few cars that had off PI stats and performance and there’s still a few here which I’ll list, all are obviously up for debate but just my opinion.
McLaren 650s
Mercedes AMG GT
Nissan GT-R '12
#3 Corvette C7.R
#60 12C GT3
Lamborghini Huracan
#35 SLS AMG GT
#45 Audi R8 LMS utra
All of these cars in FM6 imo were a little slower than there real life counterparts or there competition 1 good example is the 650s. In real life the 650s is much faster in a straight line than the 458 Speciale but in Forza 6 it’s actually a lot slower in a straight line which is unfortunate as both IRL and in Forza the 458 has more grip but IRL the 650s would make up time on the straights but again not in Forza 6.
I also wish we got a PI system separated closer by 50s or 25s
It’s very hard to beat the M8B when someone half decent is driving it. For example I used to drive the Nissan R382, the only ppl that could beat me in a gt car were the likes of LRT Breeze and JSR Rossi but even then they had to work for it.
The lower classes might have lots of ways round this but R, P and X are completly dominated by 1 or 2 cars and nothing will come near them.
1 Like
it’s only really a problem in p/x imo, and i’m not sure T10 can fix it, ‘most’ tracks in lower classes will have 1-2 leaderboard cars but there will be ~15 other cars that top1k drivers will set times inside 2-3 secs, imo this is perfect for those classes.
but as you said in p/x it kind of changes to force you to drive the ‘best’ car… but if you let the drivers irl F! choose they would all choose mercedes. if you allow diffrent cars in a race, 1 WILL be better. the faster the pace the more pronounced it gets.
tbh, if p/x class racing is ‘your thing’(not you but ppl in general) forza may be the wrong meal and stuff like IRacing would be a better fit.
0.02$
edit: not trying to hate on anyone, I just fail to see a solution that would not be indycar, and afaik at least a few of the leagues use that as a system.
[Mod Edit - Abbreviated profanity, profanity and profanity that is disguised but still alludes to the words are not permitted - D]