10-22-2015, 02:08 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-22-2015, 02:09 PM by SzczepanKolaczek.)
Thank you very much for the reply. You have just added a great advantage of Gear City over Automation - you take time and effort to reply to users' remarks and suggestions.
I am very glad that the fuel systems can be implemented. 1/2/4-barrel carbs in sets of 1, 2 or 3, plus mechanical injection plus electronic single/multipoint - that should do it for gasoline engines, while indirect/direct/common-rail injection should be enough for diesels.
As far as the valve train - I think that a sufficient addition would be splitting SOHC and DOHC heads into 2 or 4 valves and adding variable timing to the latter. Would this be feasible, please?
So we are left with cooling systems and brakes. The former should be fine if you include air cooling for single, twin, inline and flat engines, other layouts can be water cooled only. Brakes, on the other hand, are really difficult (after your explanation I understand it now), but in my opinion - they are one of the most important things. Why? Being a classic car freak I have tried several oldtimers on the road, dating from anytime between 1930s and today, and I can tell that it is the brakes which have gone the longest way in the meantime. Engines, transmissions, suspension - the progress is obviously there (especially in suspension), but as far as brakes, it has been a quantum leap. This is why it would be really great to put more emphasis there.
An alternative could be a "tick", similar to the one which makes engines and gearboxes transverse - they should work fine for air cooling, 4 valves, variable timing and electronic components (however, the latter are in fact not necessary, if they cause too much mess). But again, it is not an option for the unfortunate brakes...
Planetary transmissions: if preselector type is there, it should be enough, however, planetary is something completely different than non-synchromesh - shifting is extremely easy here. In the Model T the reverse gear and the first gear could be engaged by separate pedals, and the second gear - by a hand lever which also operated the brakes, but it was not necessary to use the brake in order to shift (it was just the same lever which engaged brakes after disengaging the 2nd gear). The 1st/reverse gear pedals could "override" the second gear, so it was all very simple and did not require any skill (contrary to the non-synchronized "crash boxes"). But if it is a big problem, let's forget about planetary transmission.
And one more thing about the bodies: I know it is far too late now, and probably most users would disagree with me, because nowadays everyone wants fancy 3D models, etc., but in my opinion they are not worth the developers' effort. In such a game one will never be able to reflect the diversity of automotive desing over 12 decades. This fact lets me think that the best body-designing system was the one from... Detroit. That game had a lot of limitations and as far as mechanical components it was a pure joke, but simple, 2D drawings and choosing separate front/mid/rear part of the body, divided into 10-12 "body levels" with maybe up to 10 body styles in each of them - this was as close to being a body dessigner as you can probably get in a computer game. All the other games only propose a limited number of ready, only marginally customizeable bodies, which is understandable given the developers' effort necessary to create them, but is not very rewarding for the player. Of course, this is just my thought and I am not suggesting anything here, because I understand that nothing can be changed in this regard. I simply think that the system from Gear City / Automation takes you too much effort in relation to value for the player.
Again, thank you very much for taking your time to respond, and above all, for creating this wonderful game!! (unfortunalteu, I ony learnt about it last week, so could'nt give you my thoughts any earlier...)
I am very glad that the fuel systems can be implemented. 1/2/4-barrel carbs in sets of 1, 2 or 3, plus mechanical injection plus electronic single/multipoint - that should do it for gasoline engines, while indirect/direct/common-rail injection should be enough for diesels.
As far as the valve train - I think that a sufficient addition would be splitting SOHC and DOHC heads into 2 or 4 valves and adding variable timing to the latter. Would this be feasible, please?
So we are left with cooling systems and brakes. The former should be fine if you include air cooling for single, twin, inline and flat engines, other layouts can be water cooled only. Brakes, on the other hand, are really difficult (after your explanation I understand it now), but in my opinion - they are one of the most important things. Why? Being a classic car freak I have tried several oldtimers on the road, dating from anytime between 1930s and today, and I can tell that it is the brakes which have gone the longest way in the meantime. Engines, transmissions, suspension - the progress is obviously there (especially in suspension), but as far as brakes, it has been a quantum leap. This is why it would be really great to put more emphasis there.
An alternative could be a "tick", similar to the one which makes engines and gearboxes transverse - they should work fine for air cooling, 4 valves, variable timing and electronic components (however, the latter are in fact not necessary, if they cause too much mess). But again, it is not an option for the unfortunate brakes...
Planetary transmissions: if preselector type is there, it should be enough, however, planetary is something completely different than non-synchromesh - shifting is extremely easy here. In the Model T the reverse gear and the first gear could be engaged by separate pedals, and the second gear - by a hand lever which also operated the brakes, but it was not necessary to use the brake in order to shift (it was just the same lever which engaged brakes after disengaging the 2nd gear). The 1st/reverse gear pedals could "override" the second gear, so it was all very simple and did not require any skill (contrary to the non-synchronized "crash boxes"). But if it is a big problem, let's forget about planetary transmission.
And one more thing about the bodies: I know it is far too late now, and probably most users would disagree with me, because nowadays everyone wants fancy 3D models, etc., but in my opinion they are not worth the developers' effort. In such a game one will never be able to reflect the diversity of automotive desing over 12 decades. This fact lets me think that the best body-designing system was the one from... Detroit. That game had a lot of limitations and as far as mechanical components it was a pure joke, but simple, 2D drawings and choosing separate front/mid/rear part of the body, divided into 10-12 "body levels" with maybe up to 10 body styles in each of them - this was as close to being a body dessigner as you can probably get in a computer game. All the other games only propose a limited number of ready, only marginally customizeable bodies, which is understandable given the developers' effort necessary to create them, but is not very rewarding for the player. Of course, this is just my thought and I am not suggesting anything here, because I understand that nothing can be changed in this regard. I simply think that the system from Gear City / Automation takes you too much effort in relation to value for the player.
Again, thank you very much for taking your time to respond, and above all, for creating this wonderful game!! (unfortunalteu, I ony learnt about it last week, so could'nt give you my thoughts any earlier...)