World Track Championship RWS49: W5 Monday 10th June 2024

{Qualifiers Scoring Explanation}Qualifiers Scoring Explanation

Why?

As a track competition, Racewars historically was run on a pure voting system. This often led to frustration and angry reactions from creators due to subjective voting practices. Some people would vote for feeling and flow, some for technical build, some for creativity (and yes, sometimes people would just vote for their mates). Apart from the last example, we didn't feel there was a "right" way, even if we could practically dictate what it was. So instead we introduced a qualifying score system for qualifying weeks - this means that in Semi-Finals and the Grand Final voting, there really is very little quality difference between tracks objectively, and voters subjective views are generally much easier to appreciate.

How does it work?

Mostly based on the comments we were hearing about tracks and builds over the years, we made a list of 10 scoring criteria. The process is specifically designed to put the most robust tracks through - to be less about overall judgment and more about objectively tallying comparative common criticisms. So rather than award points, each race starts with 3 points for each criterion, and loses points for observable shortcomings.

The 9 jobs with the highest remaining total over the 3 qualifying weeks make it through to the semi-final, where a public vote decides which races go to the season's grand final.

Below is an explanation of each criterion, but very roughly all criteria point deductions works something like this:

If no notable shortcoming is observed, a race keeps 3 points.
If a modestly noticeable shortcoming is observed, it loses 1 point.
If there are several examples of a shortcoming, or one is highly impactful on a race, it loses 2 points.
If there are numerous examples of a shortcoming, it loses 3 points.

At some point after the race we will post a score breakdown in the event thread - it looks like this (3,3,3,3,3, 3,3,3,3,3), each number is the score for each criterion listed below(in order, the 4th number is Containment, for example).

Criteria

1. Route.

Tracks should be creative, clear and without obstacles - they should have engaging flow with good transitions, and be challenging but fair. (tracks with jumps, boosts or cross-overs don't qualify for this event).
Examples of point deductions:
Being too Short/long/flat/basic.
Unclear routes/unexpected or sudden obstacles or bottlenecks.
Copies of other tracks.

2. Checkpoints.

All checkpoints should fulfil at least 1 of 3 purposes: keep players on track, accurately communicate direction of turns or be an important respawn location (less of a concern with GP tracks). Checkpoints that are missing/misplaced, that are unnecessary or misleading will lose points.

Deduction guide for surplus/missing/problem checkpoints: 1/2 = -1pt, 3/4/5 = -2pt, 5+ = -3pt (more than 8 or 9, see Misc)

3. Smooth.

On prop tracks transitions should be smooth - especially in braking zones, on street tracks, curbs or undulations on the racing line that cause unpredictable car handling should be managed.
Score deductions for examples of clunky transitions or problematic street surfaces - depending on severity.

4. Containment.

This covers a bunch of things: High risk objects or falls should be protected by walls or mitigated with run off; Apexes employ appropriate props*; There are no solid objects encroaching the track; Drivers can't shortcut (or just ignore corners).
Score deductions per shortcoming of the listed examples.
(*snaggy apex props, square apex props that can more easily spins a car into other cars, or props that can be launched off/roll a car are assessed on risk)

5. Junk.

This covers all destructible objects - found in the environment or added props. Lampposts, small signs, bus shelters, etc.

Ideally tracks are free of all destructible objects, points are deducted for quantity or general risk of objects impacting a race. Objects that affect other drivers are considered high risk (lampposts, fences, log piles, etc) and objects distance from the track is a factor too (if something very unlikely to be hit, it might not be counted).

Rough deduction guide for high risk objects: 1/2 = -1pt, 3/4/6 = -2pt, 5+ = -3pt. Low risk objects are counted as half or less the count of a high risk object.

6. Snags.

This covers environmental objects and props with strange hit-boxes or that have sticky qualities.

Example point deductions, on or near the track/racing line...
Any rubber prop.
Notable stretch of steel track barrier.
Some outward curved walls and props.

7. Visual design.

Great looking all-track races have a distinctive visual architecture/landscape or other positive distinctive quality to them. The best street tracks have interesting connections that make well used roads feel new as well as looking great.

This is quite subjective, so it's quite unusual to see point deduction of more than 1pt. But examples of a deduction would be chaotically coloured, and roughly prop builds, or street routes left relatively plain.

8. Prop-care.

All the propping has been applied with a high level of care and attention to detail.

Deduction examples:

Snaplines.
Track lines/rumble strips not lining up well.
Props or environmental objects sticking through surfaces in bad places.
Obvious sloppy gaps or joins.

9. Structure.

A lot of creators go to great lengths to give their tracks some sense of realism and some degree of engineering/physics (bridges, for example!). So points are deducted for unrealistic thin/unsupported/floating track or props. This is also where we deduct points for unsightly building work under and around tracks (upside-down track pieces, for example, or surplus prop ends visibly sticking out into space). This Criterion can overlap with Prop-care.

10. MISC.

These are extra points (not limited to -3 points) that might be deducted for:

Unusually egregious/serious/numerous problems with any previous criteria.
Combined issues, multiple "half-points".
Other problems/shortcomings not covered by other criteria.
Overly simplistic/quick creations that technically sidestep criteria rather than mastering it.

Disclaimer note: The QS (Qualification score) should be seen only for what it is - it is NOT, or trying to be, a full quality judgment on a track. Many of the best races don't get the highest scores because they're pushing the boundaries of creativity. Some tracks just have exceptional flow - or fun - but suffer technical deductions. This competition is specifically geared towards competitive GP tracks and sometimes a really great track just doesn't tick that box, but we still enjoy having them to spice up the qualification rounds and give people a chance to play them - most ovals and drift tracks would be examples of this.