[cir] Wexford

[Qurpiz]

Talk about getting stuck with a track

Started out with just that one corner at the bottom, and wanted the rest of the layout to be really, really fast. And then like in lot of my tracks, had to make some "new" parts for it.

So, yeah

[zgr]

Great track, lovely details, specially love the pit area
IMO I don't like the green "walls", it would be better with Hay Bales or Soft Walls, but that just my own opinion

4,999/5

[Areen]

Left Top as I can see is clearly inspired by my JohnQ Bay You have such a lovely style in making those circuit and great talent in making a great layouts. Good job, as always, Qurpiz!

[Darjo]

I must say that I really really like the style you went for in this track. Normally I felt like your tracks were just a little bit plain, but in this one the dithered areas really make the track a lot more interesting, while still keeping the old Qurpiz clean and elegant style Was this little change in style planned? I hope you understood what I am talking about cos I'm not really sure how to explain it :/

[Qurpiz]

I must say that I really really like the style you went for in this track. Normally I felt like your tracks were just a little bit plain, but in this one the dithered areas really make the track a lot more interesting, while still keeping the old Qurpiz clean and elegant style Was this little change in style planned? I hope you understood what I am talking about cos I'm not really sure how to explain it :/

I've never understood the fixation some people have about dithering. IMO it's one thing to appreciate a good looking Lmap in a track, but some times you see a user judge the trackmakers effort solely on the dithering.

Which to me is such an asinine thing, because there's so many more important aspects of a track, like, the "idea" the layout, the drivability, Hmap, Lmap, object placement, scenery etc etc. And to me, dithering is like the 10th most important thing. So that's the reason I usually don't give much attention to it, because I like to think it doesn't matter. Sadly I'm time and time again proven wrong.

Don't mean to be offensive to you, Darjo, just to people who care way too much about something as trivial as the dithering

[Darjo]

I understand what you mean. Now that you mention it i started thinking about when new trackmakers post their first track and people always tell them as a suggestion to add dithering, when the tracks clearly needs other things to be improved first. I might also be guilty of giving too much importance to dithering and textures, but probably cos the thing I enjoy making the most in a track is the lmap. I am aware of the fact that you can achieve a good lmap even without using dithering, and that sometimes it's even better not to use it, but I still think that a good and not messy dithering can simulate little details in the lmap that you could not recreate as easily otherwise. It's a matter of taste in the end, cos as you said, you give more importance to some things, and I do to some others.
I might have gone a little bit off topic, sorry, but I really like discussing "trackmaking theory" with other trackmakers.

[Qurpiz]

I might have gone a little bit off topic, sorry, but I really like discussing "trackmaking theory" with other trackmakers.

I could talk about that for hours.

[YoNnie]

@Quirpiz, maybe nice would be make the topic "About trackmaking theory" in Off-topic?
However, I have mixed feelings about your track. I really like surroundings in and outside of the track (this lake into the track is pretty beauty ) but the tracks is so empty - I mean it hasn't no "life". About this mentioned dithering - everything is cool, I don't see anything so bad there. Maybe this runoffs could be more "sandy", but it maybe goes from my "school" of trackmaking, where main thing in the runoffs is sand. But it looks good with other colours on this track, it's a little bit sad and it fits quite nice
Also, I have no feeling about the layout. It's fast so you gained what you wanted, but I think this chicanes (mainly this first, after second turn) isn't so necessary. But it's only my thoughts.

[reynaldo123]

I must say that I really really like the style you went for in this track. Normally I felt like your tracks were just a little bit plain, but in this one the dithered areas really make the track a lot more interesting, while still keeping the old Qurpiz clean and elegant style Was this little change in style planned? I hope you understood what I am talking about cos I'm not really sure how to explain it :/

I've never understood the fixation some people have about dithering. IMO it's one thing to appreciate a good looking Lmap in a track, but some times you see a user judge the trackmakers effort solely on the dithering.

Which to me is such an asinine thing, because there's so many more important aspects of a track, like, the "idea" the layout, the drivability, Hmap, Lmap, object placement, scenery etc etc. And to me, dithering is like the 10th most important thing. So that's the reason I usually don't give much attention to it, because I like to think it doesn't matter. Sadly I'm time and time again proven wrong.

Don't mean to be offensive to you, Darjo, just to people who care way too much about something as trivial as the dithering

I don't care about dithering too much. Then you are not alone

[Crazyboy335]

You do realize Wexford is a real city in Pennsylvania, right??

[Haruna]

This is a fun track and all Qurpiz, but there are two things that really annoy me:
- Blue cones! Especially for the pit entries. It makes entering the pits troublesome because the AI cars are guaranteed to knock a few that way, and it's easy to accidentally trigger the limiter. Alesheim suffered pretty hard from this too.
- The way the AI takes the final corner on the historic layout is AWFUL. With cars like the McTurbo or some of my GT cars, they turn in way too early, causing them to slip up on the curbs on apex and smashing the outer wall on exit as a result. The Alternate and GP layouts seem to deal with the different final corner just fine, though.