So for the guys who don't know - In CM's F1 2012 (and previous games as well) the field is in tiers, the higher a car is in a tier naturally it's faster. For example, Red Bull, Mc Laren, Ferrari (I think? Maybe more like "Alonso" because Massa is very weak in the game) in Tier 1; Lotus, Merc in Tier 2; Marussia, Catherham, HRT in Tier 5 (or six? Regardless, the last one). In career the tiers is pre-determined at the start of every season. In season 1 you get the cars in their natural order according to CM. Then at the end of the season depending on the order in the WCC teams get promoted/demoted. Usually Ferrari is very weak in Season 2 because Alonso is the only one scoring consistent strong points. Their place is taken by Lotus/Mercedes (I believe I have seen Ferrari getting demoted by more than 1 tier as Alonso was usually 10-12 in qualy while Felipe Baby Massa 15-17). But my biggest problem with the tier system is at the bottom. The team which finished 9th and the team which finished 10 swap their places. Caterham/Marussia become a midfield team and Toro Rosso/Force India (usually) join the backmarkers (the teams that are 3-5 seconds slower). So basically for each season you get the same difference between the field with drivers the only variable (and I don't believe there is a driver in the game who can make a massive difference to the car's performance). And not only that but for EACH of the FIVE seaons in Career Mode you will always have THREE backmarkers off the pack with no chance of them taking points. And teams performing good at circuts just because their certain tier. I was absolutely appaled to watch Red Bull 1-2 in Monza just because their cars are Tier 1 despite the fact that since the next regulations were introduced in 2009 they have always struggled there (bar 2011 with the off-throttle exhaust diffuser)
So what do you guys think about it? Personally, I find that system ridiculously boring and lazy. I don't want to race every season in pretty much the same field with the difference being that for example one year the 4th best team have the same pace to the 4th best team next year, with the only difference basically being the liveries and the drivers' names. Basically the difference between teams doesn't actually shrink/become bigger but they are swapping places.
For me a much much better way to determine how strong each team is by a huge breaking down of the characteristics of the car. A F1 car is a very complex beast and there could be hundreds of different things that could have values (some of them already exist). Tyre management (could even be broken down to a tyre managment for each of the 4 (6 incl. wets and inters). Tyre temperature (maybe even different values for both in both cold and hot conditions) -some teams like Ferrari had major problems heating the tyres this year like Ferrari, best example being USA GP. Other teams, like Merc in Australia, USA, India (and a lot more places) had major problems because they were cooking their tyres causing more degradation. Both front and rear mechanical grip (suspension) Front downforce (determined by the front suspension and the front wing), rear downforce (determined by the exhaust, the real wing and the engine cover), drag coeffecient. You get the point, there are countless things that form the overall performance of a F1 car. With the possibility of a certain positive part to have an effect a negative to another (like the Coanda exhaust taking away BHP from the engine last season) And by using such method every team could seek different development routes making them faster is specific conditions and specific tracks. And then in the end of the season some kind of an adjustment is made so teams by season 5 we won't see field of 22 super cars. And having an off-chance that the backmarkers have shortened the gap and are battling with the midfield.
So what do you guys think about the current state of things? I'm not saying my idea is perfect, or even possible to implement properly but I regard what we have currently lazy, boring and pathetic programming.
