thats my point though - it should not just drop for the sake of it!
Lets say i have an excellent rated part and no one in the division develops for 4 weeks and neither do i. One other team has a good rated part and develops it just before the drop getting it up one level to very good. - but then everyone else's drops down to the same level because they hadn't done a development yet. i dont see how this is fair? it just penalises those with better parts who try to save money for a bit - its not realistic but i understand the aim behind it to keep development going
It has made no difference to anything except we just keep developing over and over, whether your max rating is superb or okay, your development rating will drop. Its a total waste of time and very unrealistic.
In F1, the development rating doesn't get worse, the teams around you get better.
The only thing that should be dropping is the rating on the parts.
Those with superb parts should have have a quicker drop off rating since their performance is higher and can become less reliable.
I am not talking about random failures, which would be unfair to the people who have made it to the superb level, but have a rating drop after 1 or 2 races, depending on the part.
This will force people to keep building parts after each race instead of (e.g - using the same suspension with an excellent rating for 3 straight races.) Now that's unrealistic.
With the system we have, the top team of a certain part can't make it better, they can only make the others worse. If the system allowed parts to get better and better, then we would get unrealistic lap times.
You say it's unrealistic for teams to use the same suspension part for 3 races without much of a drop, well in real life, teams use these parts for multiple races. Plus, parts in this game do deteriorate after doing so many Km's as they would in real life.
Besides, building new parts is easy to do for each race and doesn't cost that much.
I think the issues are just bouncing between the two extremes.
On one side there is a problem of 'good teams' getting 'too good'. So we try to create measures in the game to stop them pulling ahead too much.
On the other side is the issue of 'lower teams' not being able to progress or catch up.
Trouble is finding the happy medium. We have seen many updates, and every one is always going to pull to one side or the other. I still feel this development and research drop change is just going to hinder lower teams MORE than it hinders the higher teams.
I can see the logic behind the current system of ratings falling faster. And yes, if it happens to everyone it affects us all. However, the constant weekly drops will affect the lower teams a lot more no matter what the defence argument of the system as they will be both financially and staff level restricted more than the current leading pack.
This system will not work successfully across multi-tiered divisions. It just won't balance fairly because whilst the drop rates are the same for all; the recovery rates of improving will vary as they do now. The richer teams will throw money to stay ahead, even by one or two ratings and the poorer teams will always be two steps playing catch up because they can't spend the same.
Which renders the whole thing a bit pointless, does it not? Isn't it just a massive complicated change that is essentially a money pit?
I don't intend to create friction with suggestions and debating ideas of the game, but I do try to think for the lower ranked and smaller teams hopes of climbing. I just think this is one of those things that is going to just keep those at the top at the top.
I think the research drop would be better if done, say, once or twice a season in one update hit. In the mid season break; and at the end of season.
This keeps two halves of a season fresh (just like the proposed level drops); but also allows some sort of consistency (which is needed to stop people chasing tails).
If you get a good part, and you are a crap team, to know it will drop by the next race or two is insane. The amount of effort to get there makes it not worth it. People will just not bother so much. The constant dropping of ratings is just going to send teams in circles and make people very frustrated.
The other option is to implement different drop rates per division to consider the recovery and development/costs between Div 1 and Div 3.
It's the same sort of thing as being taxed in real life. 10% tax to a family living off £20k is a much bigger burden than 10% tax to a family living off £250k a year.
The same thing for team drop values.
An idea, say, Div 2 drop rates being 50% less than Div 1; and Div 3 rates being 50% less than Div 2.
Remember, that there's always the chance that people are sitting in lower divisions with awesome cars (don't know who might do this, no naming names ).
I think it's fairer for the drop rate to be based on the current rating rather than what division the team happens to be in.
But you've just highlighted the problem of newly promoted teams being a fish out of water going up as they have little to prepare with this system. They'll just sink.
Relative drops to the whole of teams is biased towards the rich and upper divisions. If you give the same drop rates, then why do division 3 teams get a lot less prize money but are burdened with the same development costs and penalties?
That isn't fair. If you equalize the drops, then you need to equalize the rewards too. It will only keep the rich and current top crop at the top.
).