GeneRally International Forum

If no one changed their mind, we're at 11 people ATM. I'm willing to start this thing with at least 2 more!

I also want to take part in this project

Come on guys, just one more person is needed and then we can start.

I know that we were waiting for one more guy but why don't we just start with the people we have now and then someone is going to magically appear? .
Though this really depends on egamad as he is leader of this project . I'd just really like to do this style of trackmaking once again.

Mad Dan wrote:

I know that we were waiting for one more guy but why don't we just start with the people we have now and then someone is going to magically appear? .

Judging from my experience, people are more likely to magically disappear.

I would rather propose a new system, something that Ivo suggested to me some time ago:

Let's announce JET working schedule in advance for each project, 2 projects a year with a set timetable. One project could start around the time school starts (after summer break, when a lot of people are on vacation, and before school work "really" starts) and another one around spring break. Dates would be known for at least one project in advance (approx. 6 months), and signing up would be possible in a decided timespan. This way we could provide trackmakers with actual dates, when they would have to be free for trackmaking, opposed to current chaos. This would probably also decrease opting out of projects due to unforeseen circumstances and implement a more stable trackmaking environment for both trackmakers and me.

What do you say? Any ideas?


P.S. This does not mean, that I want to close this current project. If we have any volunteers, please don't be shy!

Sorry for bumping this thread, but since Joint effort projects seem to run quite well at the moment, why don't we see if anyone would be interested in a new Joint Effort Tree? If you don't know what I'm talking about, see the first post of this thread.

All interested raise your hands!

At the same time I'd like to discuss the point I talked about in my previous post, please.

Hand raised

I'm not sure if your proposal is a good one. What are you going to do if trackmakers quit the project? Nothing, and there's no win in reliability. Furthermore, I think 2 projects per year is a bit utopic (at least if I remember correctly, in 2010 or 2011 we had only three JE tracks and JET is a lot more work). But if someone else likes your idea, why not. At least it would be useful that everyone says e.g. "I can make my square from March to May and from July to August".

I always liked JET So I'm in.

I'm in

XYY wrote:Hand raised

I'm not sure if your proposal is a good one. What are you going to do if trackmakers quit the project? Nothing, and there's no win in reliability. Furthermore, I think 2 projects per year is a bit utopic (at least if I remember correctly, in 2010 or 2011 we had only three JE tracks and JET is a lot more work). But if someone else likes your idea, why not. At least it would be useful that everyone says e.g. "I can make my square from March to May and from July to August".

We managed to publish 3 JETs from end od April to New Years Eve, so it really can be done.

This kind of organisation as I'm (or rather TH is) proposing would mean, that people can schedule their trackmaking in advance. Even though I personally don't believe time management has much to do with creating one single track square within a week, some people might feel better knowing when their turn will be weeks beforehand.
Also, if people would get used to the idea of having this project going on all year long (counting the signing up part), it might get us a better attendance in the long run.

I'm not arguing neither for nor against this new setup, I'd just like to hear people's opinions.

If a clear time planner is of any benefit, then perhaps give it a go.

Anyway, I'm certain I can find time, sign me on (again)!

Bouncebackability wrote:sign me on!

Me too!

I am in too!

I think we might try scheduling the next project then.

But for now, we need more participants!

• egamad
• XYY
• Mad Dan
• Mr.J
• Bouncebackability
• FRUKIScze
• cocney
• Trigger Happy
• puttz
• Scholl
• CamrosX
• Paw
• ACM
• Areen
• Emil the ZZW
  
  

Everyone is welcome to join, regardless of your trackmaking skill. It's only 1 square, why not give it a shot? We have made great trackpacks before (1) (2) (3), let's make this project awesome!

Count me in.

I'm in!

I´m in as well!

I'm in

The team is forming nicely, welcome aboard! We need just a few more people, don't be shy.

Now would be the time to decide on the track type. We've had [cir], [stc] and [ral] so far.

We don't have [ovl] but this is impossible IMO. What about [rwl] ? I mean getting together some parts of rwls? e.g. One square will be Uphill Austin turn, second square will be Suzuka multi-chicane, ...
What do you thing?

Oval would be boring to make . Maybe the same as Real World Track . What about stunt track?

Actually an oval may be a good idea, if it would not be just a try self-locked by some rigid rules - e.g. only to replicate style of average 1 and half mile nascar track. You can see several nice pieces in JE and work in team of 4 may fit even better to this type of track that in 9, at least lower is the danger of roval as a multi-layout mess with no logic and almost no landscape with sense around it.

I think an oval would be an interesting challenge. If the first person made just the start straight then we could have various types of oval produced thereafter. But this is a slight issue in a 4 square grid where there isn't a whole lot of room; although if the track was set to 45º it may work

An oval could be a fun challenge, at least the roval versions should come out different, and perhaps some of the oval layouts as well

I'm not too excited about oval.. Do we really want to end up with 8 oval tracks? The main idea of creating diverse tracks seems kind of distant in this case, especially because the starting square would pretty much define at least 1/4 of all corners.

I'd much rather see something "safer", like [roa] or maybe a repetition of one of the previous styles. If you guys want something exotic, then perhaps a track with a strong [oth] or [stu] factor. If the majority is still for an oval though, then we can go with that too.