If they're same car it doesen't make lot's of sense to selling them both separately, does it? Besides that, info in store says 330+ hp for GrA and 350+ hp for DTM version. They are not, or should not be same car. But now their performance is similar. In real life, DTM and "regular" GrA cars were quite different even if both were same year cars.
From what I've read top notch GrA M3s produced 290+ hps at 8000rpms, while the DTM version produced 350+ hp at 9000rpms, and had a stiffer chassis. Also the latter had ABS, and one more gear (6th). So no, they were not the same car.
I don't get it. Back when the Touring Classic class was good and had some sense in it, if I were to drive the Volvo 240, I wouldn't expect to compete vs a BMW E30, only vs the others Volvo, so of course it's not "Pay2Win". And I most definitely wouldn't expect to compete vs a DTM car. That would be silly. Beside, you have to buy the car anyway, it's not like of them was free to begin with. Come S3, give us back the cars we paid for.
What I believe is that BoP doesnt do justice when car are so different.It is OK when cars are pretty similar spec wise(like DTM or ADAC GT) but here you cant really make a 250hp car like the Volvo equal to a 650hp like the Nissan.Well ,I am aware that this was the point of Group A regs but it never worked in real life.And its not only hp there is also weight ,drivetrain, size ,brakes etc.So it will be much more realistic if the touring car pack was broken in two.For example early Group A with 240 ,635,Sierra Cosworth and 1987 M3.And then a late Group A pack with M3 Evo,R32,Sierra RS500 and a Commodore.
Hmmm... TBH I didn't know the Nissan had that much power. The only source for the specs of the race car I could quickly find was this. It claims that the nissan had 543 bhp. That's quite a lot less than you wrote but still a lot more than any DTM '92 car for example. Additionally it had AWD. And the weight was 1260 kg (calculated from the data from the link). In its last season (1992) the Audi V8 quattro DTM had about 1300 kg (320 kg more than the BMW and the Mercedes due to "BoP") and "only" 462 PS (nearly bhp). So no wonder the Nissan won about any event it entered. I haven't read the old group A regulations in detail, I only now the cornerstones of displacement categories and so on. But reading such numbers I can't help but come to this conclusion: while bringing up lots of cool racecars, the group A regulations must have been massively flawed if they allowed for performance differences of this degree. So while I'm still happy with how S3S handles these things, since I know the numbers of the Nissan I can understand that so many people are not happy about it. For me it's still the lesser of two evils. The other evil was to have various classes with a quite small number of cars in each because surely not the whole group A bunch of any given period can be licensed. It is just a matter of money. This way we can race quite a lot of the legends of these times alltogether and balanced so you can compete on even ground, while preserving the characteristics of the cars. And to everybody who thinks not a lot of people always use the fastest car: have you ever played GTR2 online? The amount of F550 in some races was just ridiculous. And looking at the numbers, the Nissan would destroy the rest of the field to a much bigger margin than the F550 did in GTR2. So even more people would be driving it.
I have played GTR2 online (League races), and the solution was quite simple: Weight penalty. So the "real car" was there.
I really don't have a clear opinion on the subject (yet), but doesn't the upcoming sp and mp multiclass feature somwehat negate this problem? When MC feature is implemented, we can have LMPs and Touring Classics in the same race if we just want to, each competing with cars from their own class. Yes, at the moment Skyline would be somewhat alone with its "late Group A" class, but so what? One can create a race with few Nissans and fill the field with other historic touring cars each class competing with each other. My point simply is that where we need this heavy BoPping, if we soon can race multiclass races everywhere and create fields how ever we like? To me, the whole idea of having cars with different performance classes in the same race is fascinating and creating big bunch of cars all performing the same somewhat ruins that idea IMO. I don't get any single reason, why the whole field should be able to compete with each other.
yes its what s3 did to the nissan. (and what atcc did irl) they just put a lot of weight in it that's why you have to break so early. i dont think this is the issue, its more about the volvo being so quick. the e30 and r32 are fine.
I think there is a slight difference between multiclass racing with modern prototypes and classic touring cars on one side and different eras of group A cars on the other side. And again: if you have one car outperforming every other car in its class on a level the Nissan would do, if you don't balance it, there will simply be nearly nobody driving anything else if they have the choice. So there will be no "field" fighting it out behind the Nissans, at best a very small group of enthusiasts getting more and more frustrated about the lack of competition in competetive cars. And if you want to keep people from doing so you will have to balance the cars yourself, just like @Emerson Meyer described. The result will be about the same. But to be honest I'd rather have S3S do the job because they have proven in the past that they do this job really good. But in the end it's a matter of taste which bullet you'd like to bite.
In R3E we have now for example these two classes: DTM 92 and Touring Classics. All are Group A cars, but those two are classes like the game handles them, right? And this is also how we create multiclass races for them, and if we want to have a race with these two classes, that is we set the race with X amount of cars from DTM92 and rest from the Classics. Now, if we'd had Nissan let's say in its own class (perhaps filled with other competitive cars later) away from older classics, wouldn't we now be able to create races with handful of Nissans and rest for example DTM92 and other "early" Touring classics, each competing on their own. So, how the whole field would be now filled with Nissans or is there something that I don't get considering the upcoming multiclass feature in R3E and how it works?
First of all I just realised we seem to be talking about different things here. You seem to be talking about singleplayer, I was talking about multiplayer. Secondly you are splitting hairs. The DTM '92 cars are only in their own class in RRRE because they were licensed through a distinct championship. If this wasn't the case they were in the touring classics class from the beginning. And balanced of course. So if S3S removed the DTM '92 class, put all the former DTM '92 cars into the touring classics class and fit them with generic or at least non-DTM liveries, would that please you more? Would be funny because the result would be nearly the same (apart from the liveries). S3S was just creating a wider variety of classic touring cars to be raced together competetively. Why would anyboy want to break that up? For realism, even if it totally spoils the fun online? Well, I hope for yourself you don't go for maximum realism when it comes to accidents while simracing (j/k). And in the end I'd also like to mention that we do not yet know how the multiclass functionality will work in singleplayer. If we will be able to pick each single car to have in the race or if we can say I'd like to have x cars from this class and y cars of that - we will see.
Not an artificial one, the "real" power/performance/aspects of the car were there. And, you could enjoy it off line. We have now a "fictional" series. Plain and simple. If you like fictional cars, ok. I don't.
except the fact that in GTR2 it is up to the server, but if you want you can use the car with real performance, online and especially offline. at the moment on R3E you can't, forced Bop.
LOL exactly. Seriously it's so blatantly simple that I can't see where is the problem with eliminating BoP and put this in... It's a win-win for both sides (those who wants it and those who doesn't!)