The Formula 1 Rejects Teams Association (F1RTA) Thread

[FMecha]

5 drivers per memeber doesn't work. There are some people with F1RWRS, F2RWRS and F3RWRS teams. This adds up to a grand total of seven drivers across all series.

Not to mention the other series. Are the 5 driver cap applies in RWRS series only or in all series?

[AndreaModa]

Aerond, that would work fine, you have one team in each series, so there wouldn't be a problem. It doesn't matter that they aren't tied to each other, that's up to the team owner, whether they want to run the whole thing as one operation, like MRT or Jones Racing, or like you've done, with unconnected teams.

FMecha, as far as I'm concerned, I think the limit should just be kept with the F1, 2 and 3RWRS, but if we're to have greater integration with the Indycar-style championship, the REECS, and others, then something might have to be considered. I'm happy with the limit just being for these three series.

Kostas does raise a good point that I've overlooked, but bear in mind there are a number of forum members who only have drivers, and don't wish to own a team. If we say raised the limit of drivers per member to 7 in all series, the likelihood will be that all the slots would be filled by drivers from members owning teams, because quite often they want their own drivers in their teams (something I'm not much of a fan of, but others are and I don't have a problem with it).



If we limit members to 5 drivers, then what we can have is a bit of a crossover, with members having drivers at other members' teams, for example like tommykl allowing me to run his driver Eric Swerts at Jones Racing in the F3RWRS. If we didn't have that we'd loose a lot of the rivalry, controversies and general banter which makes the series what it is at the moment. It also provides each series with balance, preventing one or two members creating a bit of a monopoly over the driver market, which could become the case if we kept the situation unchanged. Of course, team owners can make their own minds up on who to employ at the end of the day, but they can only employ the drivers out there, particularly with the introduction of the superlicense requirements that will come in for the 2015 season.

I can also foresee in the future that we're going to have issues with drivers in the junior categories with no-where to go in future seasons, because there'll be no available seats. I think we should have a maximum age of competition for drivers in each series, we already have on in the F3RWRS, so why not for the other two? It will be a shame to perhaps loose some of the characters which have built up the series to what it is today, but otherwise we're just going to have a logjam where members aren't going to want to retire their established drivers that have been there for years.

Therefore, along with the 1 team, 5 drivers proposal, I'd also like to put forward a maximum age limit of 45 for the F1RWRS, and 40 for the F2RWRS (the F3RWRS already has an age limit of 35). Therefore any driver born prior to 1969 would be ineligible for the 2014 season, and 1970 for the upcoming 2015 season, should this rule come into effect. Of the existing drivers that have their age on the wiki, this would discount only Jack Christopherson and Francois Albertini for the foreseeable future, the next down the line is Mirko Bosevic, born in 1975, and thus would be ineligible from the 2020 season onwards. Because the vast majority of the current grid were born in the late '70s and 1980s, this may have to be lowered, but that's entirely up for debate. What would need to be established however is ages of all drivers in order for this to be applied. About one third of the current grid don't have a birth date on the wiki.

[Stramala]

I've thought of a better way to implement that. Instead of age restrictions, why not career length restrictions? After 8 seasons drivers must retire? In real life only a handful of Formula One drivers manage over a decade in the sport, so perhaps limiting drivers careers to 8 or 10 seasons would at least force some change, albeit none in the immediate future. But I think it's a useful way to 'clean out the system' occasionally.

And AndreaModa, don't you think it would reflect real-life if junior drivers had nowhere to go? The good ones would get promotion while the rubbish ones would be forced to retire. I intend to get rid of a couple of my junior drivers - the ones who perform worst will be getting the sack. Plus I already did the RWRS a favour by sacking Phil McCracken last week

[AndreaModa]

The seasons idea is a good one, works the same way I guess, I'd be up for either being implemented.

And yeah I totally agree with you, and I think that'll happen anyway, but members may be reluctant to retire some drivers, and we could end up in the situation of junior teams employing the same drivers for a number of seasons simply because they don't want them to retire, and they can't get seats elsewhere, thus being totally counter-productive to the idea of junior categories developing the talent of the future.

[Warren Hughes]

With regards to what has already been discussed, I agree that numbers of drivers and teams per member should be limited to an extent, and I like the idea of limiting the number of seasons that a driver can do. Although that will result in a mass exodus in a couple of years time when none of the original drivers are allowed to remain in the series. I'm planning to retire Gary Cameron pretty soon anyway.

Now, to stir up even more issues.

In my opinion, there needs to be more information given to team owners regarding the status of their chassis, engine, drivers, how many credits they have and how they are spending them. What happens at the moment is that we ask for upgrades without any idea when they have been implemented, or even if they have at all. I'm not saying these should be posted on the thread, as that would clutter the thread and perhaps give our opponents too much information, but to run our teams properly this is information we need to know, and should be informed of before every race.

In the early days of the F1RWRS, we gave Rhys a name, told him what team he drove for, and nothing else was needed. But as Aerond has brought in more involvement for team owners, so team owners need to be kept abreast of all the developments in their team. At the start of the season, I had 80 credits (I think). Having asked for various upgrades on 3 separate occasions, I now have 100 credits (as far as I have been informed). Given that Prospec are yet to score a point and I have only received one race's worth of pay-driver money, I don't see how this could have happened unless Aerond had failed to give me the upgrades I asked for.

Please be aware, Aerond, that I'm not accusing you of anything untoward, but how can we be sure the game is being run fairly when we get no information?

[Stramala]

With regards to what has already been discussed, I agree that numbers of drivers and teams per member should be limited to an extent, and I like the idea of limiting the number of seasons that a driver can do. Although that will result in a mass exodus in a couple of years time when none of the original drivers are allowed to remain in the series. I'm planning to retire Gary Cameron pretty soon anyway.

Now, to stir up even more issues.

In my opinion, there needs to be more information given to team owners regarding the status of their chassis, engine, drivers, how many credits they have and how they are spending them. What happens at the moment is that we ask for upgrades without any idea when they have been implemented, or even if they have at all. I'm not saying these should be posted on the thread, as that would clutter the thread and perhaps give our opponents too much information, but to run our teams properly this is information we need to know, and should be informed of before every race.

In the early days of the F1RWRS, we gave Rhys a name, told him what team he drove for, and nothing else was needed. But as Aerond has brought in more involvement for team owners, so team owners need to be kept abreast of all the developments in their team. At the start of the season, I had 80 credits (I think). Having asked for various upgrades on 3 separate occasions, I now have 100 credits (as far as I have been informed). Given that Prospec are yet to score a point and I have only received one race's worth of pay-driver money, I don't see how this could have happened unless Aerond had failed to give me the upgrades I asked for.

Please be aware, Aerond, that I'm not accusing you of anything untoward, but how can we be sure the game is being run fairly when we get no information?

I even started a seperate thread for this exact purpose (plus another for rules & regulations). It was roundly ignored by all in a position to do something about it. If I remember correctly Phoenix was the only person to reply - agreeing with the idea and suggesting it should be implemented.

See here viewtopic.php?f=8&t=4653

[Warren Hughes]

With regards to what has already been discussed, I agree that numbers of drivers and teams per member should be limited to an extent, and I like the idea of limiting the number of seasons that a driver can do. Although that will result in a mass exodus in a couple of years time when none of the original drivers are allowed to remain in the series. I'm planning to retire Gary Cameron pretty soon anyway.

Now, to stir up even more issues.

In my opinion, there needs to be more information given to team owners regarding the status of their chassis, engine, drivers, how many credits they have and how they are spending them. What happens at the moment is that we ask for upgrades without any idea when they have been implemented, or even if they have at all. I'm not saying these should be posted on the thread, as that would clutter the thread and perhaps give our opponents too much information, but to run our teams properly this is information we need to know, and should be informed of before every race.

In the early days of the F1RWRS, we gave Rhys a name, told him what team he drove for, and nothing else was needed. But as Aerond has brought in more involvement for team owners, so team owners need to be kept abreast of all the developments in their team. At the start of the season, I had 80 credits (I think). Having asked for various upgrades on 3 separate occasions, I now have 100 credits (as far as I have been informed). Given that Prospec are yet to score a point and I have only received one race's worth of pay-driver money, I don't see how this could have happened unless Aerond had failed to give me the upgrades I asked for.

Please be aware, Aerond, that I'm not accusing you of anything untoward, but how can we be sure the game is being run fairly when we get no information?

I even started a seperate thread for this exact purpose (plus another for rules & regulations). It was roundly ignored by all in a position to do something about it. If I remember correctly Phoenix was the only person to reply - agreeing with the idea and suggesting it should be implemented.

See here viewtopic.php?f=8&t=4653

Yeah, I agree with that as well, but I think my queries and suggestions go a little further. It's a problem that needs to be addressed.

[Wizzie]

I've thought of a better way to implement that. Instead of age restrictions, why not career length restrictions? After 8 seasons drivers must retire? In real life only a handful of Formula One drivers manage over a decade in the sport, so perhaps limiting drivers careers to 8 or 10 seasons would at least force some change, albeit none in the immediate future. But I think it's a useful way to 'clean out the system' occasionally.

Problem: Kay Lon is in his 5th season right now. If he's forced to retire after his 8th season, he'ld be retiring at 26 which just simply isn't right, especially for someone of his calibre (As much as I don't like his character ). And I'm sure there are dozens of drivers which will be in exactly the same boat after 8-10 seasons.

[Wizzie]

And yeah I totally agree with you, and I think that'll happen anyway, but members may be reluctant to retire some drivers, and we could end up in the situation of junior teams employing the same drivers for a number of seasons simply because they don't want them to retire, and they can't get seats elsewhere, thus being totally counter-productive to the idea of junior categories developing the talent of the future.

I've partially alleviated that problem by implementing the driver development scheme in the F2RWRS so after 3 seasons, a team is much better off either firing their driver or promoting him rather than keep him.

[Aerond]

In the early days of the F1RWRS, we gave Rhys a name, told him what team he drove for, and nothing else was needed. But as Aerond has brought in more involvement for team owners, so team owners need to be kept abreast of all the developments in their team. At the start of the season, I had 80 credits (I think). Having asked for various upgrades on 3 separate occasions, I now have 100 credits (as far as I have been informed). Given that Prospec are yet to score a point and I have only received one race's worth of pay-driver money, I don't see how this could have happened unless Aerond had failed to give me the upgrades I asked for.

Please be aware, Aerond, that I'm not accusing you of anything untoward, but how can we be sure the game is being run fairly when we get no information?

Regarding that, I always update the teams before the next race. So if you ask now for an upgrade, it will be ready for the French round. Now, I may have failed to see your message and not updated your car... I´m human after all.

Any ideas regarding this are more than welcome, as I feel many users want more information on what´s going on with their teams. I don´t know how to implement it anyway.

[Aerond]

I've thought of a better way to implement that. Instead of age restrictions, why not career length restrictions? After 8 seasons drivers must retire? In real life only a handful of Formula One drivers manage over a decade in the sport, so perhaps limiting drivers careers to 8 or 10 seasons would at least force some change, albeit none in the immediate future. But I think it's a useful way to 'clean out the system' occasionally.

Problem: Kay Lon is in his 5th season right now. If he's forced to retire after his 8th season, he'ld be retiring at 26 which just simply isn't right, especially for someone of his calibre (As much as I don't like his character ). And I'm sure there are dozens of drivers which will be in exactly the same boat after 8-10 seasons.

10 seasons should be enough in my opinion. It could happen as well that there´s no limit on seasons, but after the 8th season a driver starts losing points in their stats at a rate of 10% and more progressively each year. (For example, 10% the 9th year, 11% the 10th, 12% the 11th and so on)

[Wizzie]

I've thought of a better way to implement that. Instead of age restrictions, why not career length restrictions? After 8 seasons drivers must retire? In real life only a handful of Formula One drivers manage over a decade in the sport, so perhaps limiting drivers careers to 8 or 10 seasons would at least force some change, albeit none in the immediate future. But I think it's a useful way to 'clean out the system' occasionally.

Problem: Kay Lon is in his 5th season right now. If he's forced to retire after his 8th season, he'ld be retiring at 26 which just simply isn't right, especially for someone of his calibre (As much as I don't like his character ). And I'm sure there are dozens of drivers which will be in exactly the same boat after 8-10 seasons.

10 seasons should be enough in my opinion. It could happen as well that there´s no limit on seasons, but after the 8th season a driver starts losing points in their stats at a rate of 10% and more progressively each year. (For example, 10% the 9th year, 11% the 10th, 12% the 11th and so on)

I still think 8 seasons is too soon to have driver decay to kick in. Mark Webber and Fernando Alonso both had some of their best driving in their 8th and 9th seasons in Formula One, Jenson Button's just had the best season of his career in his 12th year and Sammy Jones' absolutely brilliant 2008 campaign was in his 9th (10th depending on what the hell he was doing in 2005 ) season. And 10% seems much too high a rate if we are starting that early. 5% for the first year and then increasing more with every year sounds more plausible.

[Aerond]

I still think 8 seasons is too soon to have driver decay to kick in. Mark Webber and Fernando Alonso both had some of their best driving in their 8th and 9th seasons in Formula One, Jenson Button's just had the best season of his career in his 12th year and Sammy Jones' absolutely brilliant 2008 campaign was in his 9th (10th depending on what the hell he was doing in 2005 ) season. And 10% seems much too high a rate if we are starting that early. 5% for the first year and then increasing more with every year sounds more plausible.

I know it´s not too realistic, but we´re talking about quicker and effective driver rotation in the future here, not being totally realistic.

[Klon]

What? Forced retirement?
First off, you know one of my favourite drivers so you can guess what I generally think about that concept. As Wizzie rightfully pointed out, some drivers would be unrealisticly young when they are forced to retire if we go by career years. Hell, I'd accept the age thing, although that would still be awfully silly (and would rob me of another point of Lon's rants).

I'd propose the following system:
*1 user-controlled team per series
*4 user-controlled drivers to be freely spread amongst each series with no limitations except the 35 years-limit of F3RWRS. These four drivers can be swapped out at wish, but only four or less may be actively racing at any given moment.
*If needed forced release (not retirement) of F1RWRS drivers controlled. Should a user find it absolutely impossible to enter any of their characters in F1RWRS in an acceptable space of time (2 "years" from gaining Reject License?) in any driving seat at all - no, just because you don't want your guy to go to Shonan DMS it doesn't mean there are no spaces on the grid - the user who controls most drivers in the F1RWRS will be forced to either remove one of his guys or gals from the game, make him a reserve driver or, if still possible, send him to the minor leauges.
* To encourage driver rotation, each driver loses 5 grip points for each season he has been in F1RWRS. For those that were there from the beginning this would make for the 2015 season 30 points, something that can be offset by throwing a bit of money at it but still faces the bosses with a new challenge.

[Aerond]

* To encourage driver rotation, each driver loses 5 grip points for each season he has been in F1RWRS. For those that were there from the beginning this would make for the 2015 season 30 points, something that can be offset by throwing a bit of money at it but still faces the bosses with a new challenge.

You well know that for Gp2 standards 30 points is absolutely nothing.

[Klon]

* To encourage driver rotation, each driver loses 5 grip points for each season he has been in F1RWRS. For those that were there from the beginning this would make for the 2015 season 30 points, something that can be offset by throwing a bit of money at it but still faces the bosses with a new challenge.

You well know that for Gp2 standards 30 points is absolutely nothing.

Then let's make it 20 points p.a. - then 2010 drivers would be at a 120 grip disadvantage which would cost 60 credits to offset compared to a rookie starting in F1RWRS.

[Aerond]

* To encourage driver rotation, each driver loses 5 grip points for each season he has been in F1RWRS. For those that were there from the beginning this would make for the 2015 season 30 points, something that can be offset by throwing a bit of money at it but still faces the bosses with a new challenge.

You well know that for Gp2 standards 30 points is absolutely nothing.

Then let's make it 20 points p.a. - then 2010 drivers would be at a 120 grip disadvantage which would cost 60 credits to offset compared to a rookie starting in F1RWRS.

that would be more acceptable, but anyway, I was going to add to my last post that it is effective driver rotation what we´re discussing here, not realism applied to this idea. I like more the idea of discounting grip at a rate from a certain season, rather than discounting points every year, even if it´s a rookie or a driver in his 3rd or 4th year.

[Klon]

That would be more acceptable, but anyway, I was going to add to my last post that it is effective driver rotation what we´re discussing here, not realism applied to this idea. I like more the idea of discounting grip at a rate from a certain season, rather than discounting points every year, even if it´s a rookie or a driver in his 3rd or 4th year.

Well, I don't like the idea of completely destroying (there is literally no use at all for a driver that has lost 10 % of his grip, nothing could undo that damage - neither the low random grip range, nor the best car on the grid) merely to get - this is going to sound horribly offensive to kostas22, but whatever - random footballer name #264 on the grid. If we were to do that, we might as well make a fixed point for retirement, at least that wouldn't be nonsensical. I would like to emphasise that my proposal was to encourage driver changes, not to enforce them as would happen with that idea.

[Aerond]

That would be more acceptable, but anyway, I was going to add to my last post that it is effective driver rotation what we´re discussing here, not realism applied to this idea. I like more the idea of discounting grip at a rate from a certain season, rather than discounting points every year, even if it´s a rookie or a driver in his 3rd or 4th year.

Well, I don't like the idea of completely destroying (there is literally no use at all for a driver that has lost 10 % of his grip, nothing could undo that damage - neither the low random grip range, nor the best car on the grid) merely to get - this is going to sound horribly offensive to kostas22, but whatever - random footballer name #264 on the grid. If we were to do that, we might as well make a fixed point for retirement, at least that wouldn't be nonsensical. I would like to emphasise that my proposal was to encourage driver changes, not to enforce them as would happen with that idea.

Oh, sorry, I think I made a mistake here with numbers. What I meant in terms of numbers was around 1% from 9th season, then 1,1% 10th, 1,2% 11th ...
effectively, 10% would be totally crazy. If it was from 1%, when arriving at a 1,5% it would be coming to a point where it would be expensive to retain a driver at his peak. If we feel 1% is not fast enough, we can either start at a higher number (1,5% or 2%, although I find 2% too much to start) or increment 0,2% each year instead of 0,1%

[Klon]

Oh, sorry, I think I made a mistake here with numbers. What I meant in terms of numbers was 1% from 9th season, then 1,1% 10th, 1,2% 11th ...

Well, then I like your idea. That sounds way more reasonable.

[Wizzie]

The only reason I'm against limits for drivers per user is that I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place with my drivers. I currently have 4 drivers in the 3 series (Melrose, Macklin, A. Reyna-Sanchez and Cavalcanti) BUT the big problem I have is I've basically assumed responsibility for the two current MRT drivers (Spencer and Nicolas) as the two users who originally owned them have gone AWOL. So now, I'm stuck with 6 drivers, of which two aren't even mine to begin with. TMLW is also in exactly the same boat with Watkinson in the second HRT seat.

[the Masked Lapwing]

The only reason I'm against limits for drivers per user is that I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place with my drivers. I currently have 4 drivers in the 3 series (Melrose, Macklin, A. Reyna-Sanchez and Cavalcanti) BUT the big problem I have is I've basically assumed responsibility for the two current MRT drivers (Spencer and Nicolas) as the two users who originally owned them have gone AWOL. So now, I'm stuck with 6 drivers, of which two aren't even mine to begin with. TMLW is also in exactly the same boat with Watkinson in the second HRT seat.

Although I'll probably end up sacking him anyway.

[Wizzie]

The only reason I'm against limits for drivers per user is that I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place with my drivers. I currently have 4 drivers in the 3 series (Melrose, Macklin, A. Reyna-Sanchez and Cavalcanti) BUT the big problem I have is I've basically assumed responsibility for the two current MRT drivers (Spencer and Nicolas) as the two users who originally owned them have gone AWOL. So now, I'm stuck with 6 drivers, of which two aren't even mine to begin with. TMLW is also in exactly the same boat with Watkinson in the second HRT seat.

Although I'll probably end up sacking him anyway.

If watka does come back, he's going to be mightily pissed off at you

And with this post, I am now officially ahead of Phoenix

[SuperAguri]

A simple rule should be if a driver created by another member joins a team and the member does go AWOL then either

A) The driver should retire or be sacked at the end of the season.
B) Another member should be given the chance to run that driver

The same way a team is disbanded if a member fails to say hello at the start of a new season.

Although I am also in favour of just allowing one team owner to have one of their own drivers in the team as it would make it more interesting all round. I mean Kay Lon racing for "Best in the house that Klon lives in motorsports" would not be as interesting as him moving teams a few times.

[the Masked Lapwing]

Something else I want to bring up - a teams' championship in the F3RWRS. I've been trying to figure out how to work it, because we can't have 3 cars scoring for one team, otherwise ZimSport and Scuderia Alitalia would walk it, and Ecurie Albertini and Christopherson Racing wouldn't stand a chance. Any ideas?

[Wizzie]

Something else I want to bring up - a teams' championship in the F3RWRS. I've been trying to figure out how to work it, because we can't have 3 cars scoring for one team, otherwise ZimSport and Scuderia Alitalia would walk it, and Ecurie Albertini and Christopherson Racing wouldn't stand a chance. Any ideas?

Maybe we could implement the old WRC system. On any given weekend, each team nominates the two drivers which will be eligible score teams points.

[Aerond]

This is my "official" proposal to drivers getting old.

Let me know what you think of it: At the beggining of the 9th season, a driver will lose 1% of his grip points, then from then on, he loses and extra 0,2% every year (1,2% in his 10th, 1,4% in his 11th season and so on). By the time it gets to 1,6 it would start to be tricky for a team owner to keep up with the extra lost of grip in terms of credits without compromising car development, that´s if we take for granted a team owner is running just one old driver. With 2 it would be even harder.

[Shizuka]

Sounds good, I never even planned myself to run that long, 8 seasons are probably the most I am thinking about.

[Stramala]

Something else I want to bring up - a teams' championship in the F3RWRS. I've been trying to figure out how to work it, because we can't have 3 cars scoring for one team, otherwise ZimSport and Scuderia Alitalia would walk it, and Ecurie Albertini and Christopherson Racing wouldn't stand a chance. Any ideas?

Maybe we could implement the old WRC system. On any given weekend, each team nominates the two drivers which will be eligible score teams points.

Agreed. But, how do we award the retroactive points? Just give the first two finishers per race the points? The highest two points scorers per weekend? They could well produce two different values. My suggestion is the latter - the two drivers who scored the most points for a team over the entire weekend count for manufacturers.

So, lets say for example Scuderia Alitalia had started F3RWRS at the same time as everyone else. Lucarelli scores two wins in the first two races and then 19th in Race 3. Pazzini scored 3rd, 2nd and 5th. Molinaro scored a win in Race Three. and two DNFs. Molinaro's win would be ignored for the teams championship as over the entre weekend he scored less points than Pazzini.

[AndreaModa]

I like the sound of that for the F3RWRS. The two highest scorers over the weekend count towards the team's total.

And Aerond, I like that idea, considering we're in our 5th season at the moment, all the current drivers that have competed since 2010 have another three years before this would affect them, giving us plenty of time to sort out how things would be managed.

So that would solve the potential issue of too many drivers and not enough race seats, but what about a limitation on drivers and teams? It seems a couple of others agree that there should be limit, but we haven't really come to any conclusion on it.

Having suggested it, I'm all for the 1 team, 5 drivers per member policy. Are there any members specifically against this, and if so, what could be done to create a bit of an agreement on things?

[AdrianSutil]

I'm not overly pleased about the 5-driver rule. Look at my drivers: In the F1RWRS I have Valsattis, Mackintosh, Neuberg (pay-driver) and Pchelintsev (owned by The Lukas). And now I've got Torbani and Austin in my F3RWRS. I now can't 'bring in' any more drivers until I permanently 'retire' a previous driver.

It's mainly to do with being stuck in pre-qualifying in F1RWRS and wanting junior teams. No-one wants to give me their driver as they don't want them to be in pre-qualifying all year, so I'm forced to have my own drivers do it. Plus I need more cash to improve the car so I have to add even more of my drivers into the line-up. There's too many members here who are too stubborn when it comes to letting their drivers race for poor teams.

I'm currently 2nd on the reserve list for a F2RWRS team, and given the opportuntiy I will have one. But I can't have Any of my own drivers! People need to relax when letting their drivers go to crap teams. Otherwise there's going to be 10 drivers wanting to race for the best and forgetting about everyone else.

Now this may not apply for every member on here, as I'm speaking purely from experience, but it does rile me seeing members just ignore your request to take a driver on, or reading another members post saying "Dont drive for them, they're crap".

[dr-baker]

Well, I have deliberatly limited the number of drivers I had, to prevent myself getting confused with who's mine and their back stories, etc. (Also explains why two of my drivers are related - although one is not currently racing - and the third is dating the sister...) And I seem to be struggling to introduce a fourth, despite an extensive interview. So a three to five driver limit is fine by me.

[JeremyMcClean]

I'm not overly pleased about the 5-driver rule. Look at my drivers: In the F1RWRS I have Valsattis, Mackintosh, Neuberg (pay-driver) and Pchelintsev (owned by The Lukas). And now I've got Torbani and Austin in my F3RWRS. I now can't 'bring in' any more drivers until I permanently 'retire' a previous driver.

It's mainly to do with being stuck in pre-qualifying in F1RWRS and wanting junior teams. No-one wants to give me their driver as they don't want them to be in pre-qualifying all year, so I'm forced to have my own drivers do it. Plus I need more cash to improve the car so I have to add even more of my drivers into the line-up. There's too many members here who are too stubborn when it comes to letting their drivers race for poor teams.

I'm currently 2nd on the reserve list for a F2RWRS team, and given the opportuntiy I will have one. But I can't have Any of my own drivers! People need to relax when letting their drivers go to crap teams. Otherwise there's going to be 10 drivers wanting to race for the best and forgetting about everyone else.

Now this may not apply for every member on here, as I'm speaking purely from experience, but it does rile me seeing members just ignore your request to take a driver on, or reading another members post saying "Dont drive for them, they're crap".

I come from experience too! I had to hire (at the time, crappy) Nicolas Steele and Jari Kekkonen, who were both my drivers. And yes, I do have another driver who is a pay-driver in a Pre-Q team. And I've had my fair share of DNPQ's with ArrowTech, mind you.

I think the 5-driver rule should only be personal drivers, not including ones with teams in them. (So for example, Bosevic and Martins would not count in my total despite them racing for ArrowTech.) However, five drivers in all series sounds fair.

[Warren Hughes]

Responding to an old-ish post:

In the early days of the F1RWRS, we gave Rhys a name, told him what team he drove for, and nothing else was needed. But as Aerond has brought in more involvement for team owners, so team owners need to be kept abreast of all the developments in their team. At the start of the season, I had 80 credits (I think). Having asked for various upgrades on 3 separate occasions, I now have 100 credits (as far as I have been informed). Given that Prospec are yet to score a point and I have only received one race's worth of pay-driver money, I don't see how this could have happened unless Aerond had failed to give me the upgrades I asked for.

Please be aware, Aerond, that I'm not accusing you of anything untoward, but how can we be sure the game is being run fairly when we get no information?

Regarding that, I always update the teams before the next race. So if you ask now for an upgrade, it will be ready for the French round. Now, I may have failed to see your message and not updated your car... I´m human after all.

Any ideas regarding this are more than welcome, as I feel many users want more information on what´s going on with their teams. I don´t know how to implement it anyway.

Maybe we could use the email system, but have it as an opt-in, so that we have to specifically ask you to email us with the information and updates we would like. I might also suggest that we could ask for updates by emailing you Aerond, so that you're even less likely to miss them. However, it's your email account, and if you'd rather we didn't that would be fair enough.

[AndreaModa]

AdrianSutil: In your case however we have a extreme example, because you've already used up all four driver slots with one team in the F1RWRS. There may be a bit of foul play with drivers choosing to go to different teams, but that's what happens in the real world anyway, and wouldn't be the case one the feeder series kick in and drivers start to come through. They'll need teams to go to, or risk falling by the wayside completely. The current situation is just one of transition as we all try and make it work and agree on things.

I think the 5-driver rule should only be personal drivers, not including ones with teams in them. (So for example, Bosevic and Martins would not count in my total despite them racing for ArrowTech.) However, five drivers in all series sounds fair.

Absolutely not! The driver limit would only account for drivers under your direct control (so Martins and Bosevic, controlled by DanielPT and Pointrox respectively, wouldn't count towards JeremyMcClean's total).

[Stramala]

I propose and amendment to the one team rule.

Users can have mutliple teams, but with the exception that only one team may be entered in a singe series. In other words, Scuderia Alitalia and Peroni Parma Corse can both have their own teams and drivers but cannot both be present in the same racing series.

I have actually intentionally stuck to this rule already in F3RWRS, hence why I have sent drivers on loan to teams with only one driver instead of setting up a second team for them. I have five drivers there but only three are driving in my team. And, whichever does the worst will be fired by Scuderia Alitalia and available to anyone. So far I intend to have a lineup of Pazzini-Molinaro-Crescenzi next season, but we will just have to wait and see...

[Klon]

I propose and amendment to the one team rule.

Users can have mutliple teams, but with the exception that only one team may be entered in a singe series. In other words, Scuderia Alitalia and Peroni Parma Corse can both have their own teams and drivers but cannot both be present in the same racing series.

Wasn't that the plan anyhow? One team per series per user. That is the most reasonable solution.

[AndreaModa]

Klon that's exactly it. A member could potentially have three different teams, each in a different series, and that would be fine. For example Aerond has DGN, KitKat and Tociclao, all individual teams (the latter completely unrelated to the other two), and that would be acceptable.

It seems like we're all reading off the same script here!

[DanielPT]

Klon that's exactly it. A member could potentially have three different teams, each in a different series, and that would be fine. For example Aerond has DGN, KitKat and Tociclao, all individual teams (the latter completely unrelated to the other two), and that would be acceptable.

It seems like we're all reading off the same script here!

I have now Sunshine, Licor Beirão and Porto Wine. A fantastic trio. That that should continue to be allowed.

[AndreaModa]

Klon that's exactly it. A member could potentially have three different teams, each in a different series, and that would be fine. For example Aerond has DGN, KitKat and Tociclao, all individual teams (the latter completely unrelated to the other two), and that would be acceptable.

It seems like we're all reading off the same script here!

I have now Sunshine, Licor Beirão and Porto Wine. A fantastic trio. That that should continue to be allowed.

And would be, should this get approved. You have the maximum one team in each series.