Visual Entertainment and Technologies Forum

Fairly simple question. When you update a component does that update automatically get applied to any vehicles that use that component or do you then have to go and make a new model year to take full advantage?

Bump
Hoping to get an answer to this one, as i wish i knew myself.
If its answered, im tempted to add a question on the Modify area of R&D to my FAQ.

You would have to redesign the vehicle in order to take advantage of the modifications.

(03-15-2014, 09:52 PM)Eric.B Wrote: [ -> ]You would have to redesign the vehicle in order to take advantage of the modifications.

Ive got a follow up question, which ill try to lay out clearly.
I design and build a vehicle, which i sell for lets say a year
After that year I go into the R&D screen and modify one or more of the components
I then build and sell more of the same vehicles, using the same design from a year ago.

So from what youve said, the vehicles that are built from the same design after that date wont take advantage of any improvements to the design through the modify button?

I never thought of the modify button as something which would cause major enough design changes that would require you to redesign a vehicle.
I was thinking of the manufacturer making changes based on customer and mechanic/technical feedback on the vehicle, like changing a seal, modifying timings etc..

If you can think of an example of where/how this happens in real life and to what part of the vehicle, id be much appreciated. As you can see im having some difficulty following it

(03-16-2014, 11:19 AM)Arakash Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-15-2014, 09:52 PM)Eric.B Wrote: [ -> ]You would have to redesign the vehicle in order to take advantage of the modifications.

So from what youve said, the vehicles that are built from the same design after that date wont take advantage of any improvements to the design through the modify button?

I believe that is what he is saying.
This discussion is just reinforcing me feeling that component modification is:
a) Way too expensive
b) needs an overhaul

Quote:I never thought of the modify button as something which would cause major enough design changes that would require you to redesign a vehicle.
I was thinking of the manufacturer making changes based on customer and mechanic/technical feedback on the vehicle, like changing a seal, modifying timings etc..

If you can think of an example of where/how this happens in real life and to what part of the vehicle, id be much appreciated. As you can see im having some difficulty following it

I'll give it a go but I'm not 100% sure exactly what you're asking.

Commodore (an Aussie car for you non-Aussies playing along at home) would be a good example of a car undergoing minor changes based off experience learned in the marked and being re-released as a new year model. Ever heard the term "Series II"? This is what Holden does to keep their cars up to date between complete model overhauls. They generally make any necessary changes as one big alteration and put it out as a "Series II" then leave the car mostly alone until the next model.

BMW would be a good example of the opposite. Every time I took my Bimmer into my mechanic with a failed part he's complain about how BMW constantly change things on their cars and it made it hard for him to know which part he needed. This was generally smaller components like oil pumps, powered window winders, fuse boxes etc. The overall car was basically the same through out it's life but but there were constant component upgrades going on under the skin.

(03-16-2014, 03:20 PM)Frankschtaldt Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-16-2014, 11:19 AM)Arakash Wrote: [ -> ]I never thought of the modify button as something which would cause major enough design changes that would require you to redesign a vehicle.
I was thinking of the manufacturer making changes based on customer and mechanic/technical feedback on the vehicle, like changing a seal, modifying timings etc..

If you can think of an example of where/how this happens in real life and to what part of the vehicle, id be much appreciated. As you can see im having some difficulty following it

I'll give it a go but I'm not 100% sure exactly what you're asking.

Commodore (an Aussie car for you non-Aussies playing along at home) would be a good example of a car undergoing minor changes based off experience learned in the marked and being re-released as a new year model. Ever heard the term "Series II"? This is what Holden does to keep their cars up to date between complete model overhauls. They generally make any necessary changes as one big alteration and put it out as a "Series II" then leave the car mostly alone until the next model.

BMW would be a good example of the opposite. Every time I took my Bimmer into my mechanic with a failed part he's complain about how BMW constantly change things on their cars and it made it hard for him to know which part he needed. This was generally smaller components like oil pumps, powered window winders, fuse boxes etc. The overall car was basically the same through out it's life but but there were constant component upgrades going on under the skin.

I was rambling a bit there But you gave me basically exactly what i was looking for there, thanks.
These are the kind of examples i was hoping would be brought up.

The thing that i was wonder/had me confused was that i thought companies, like Holden as you mention, made minor changes to their production models during their production run, which were basically applied to that design as it was still being produced. You gave some good examples of that there.
So if that was in Gearcity, i assume it would look like:
The same design produced 3 years later would have undergone some minor improvements while being produced at factories without requiring a redesign.
After this discussion, I believe the modify system for whatever reason doesn't do/cover this. This raises the question of exactly what it(the modify system) was supposed to represent in Reality.

I suppose ill have to see what Eric says about it when he has time to make a post.

Based on your examples, I'd say the improvements should be included in a new trim.
It's something we normally see with facelifted models today as well. (improved parts).

I don't think it should go straight into existing models/trims/production, as you'd suddenly have the same car, but with different properties.

(03-17-2014, 01:31 AM)Sarchez Wrote: [ -> ]Based on your examples, I'd say the improvements should be included in a new trim.
It's something we normally see with facelifted models today as well. (improved parts).

I don't think it should go straight into existing models/trims/production, as you'd suddenly have the same car, but with different properties.

You bring up a good point about why it couldn't automatically effect existing models. Unless the cost were to be based, in part, on how many vehicles that used the component you already had in stock. That way you do the upgrade and roll it out to all of your stock as well but pay for the labour involved in the retro fit.

I'm about to post an idea this discussion has given me. Look in the beta suggestions thread for it =)

(03-17-2014, 01:31 AM)Sarchez Wrote: [ -> ]Based on your examples, I'd say the improvements should be included in a new trim.
It's something we normally see with facelifted models today as well. (improved parts).

I don't think it should go straight into existing models/trims/production, as you'd suddenly have the same car, but with different properties.

(03-17-2014, 02:26 AM)Frankschtaldt Wrote: [ -> ]You bring up a good point about why it couldn't automatically effect existing models. Unless the cost were to be based, in part, on how many vehicles that used the component you already had in stock. That way you do the upgrade and roll it out to all of your stock as well but pay for the labour involved in the retro fit.

I think the current modify system is quite expensive already, almost prohibitively so.
I cant speak for everyone, but i dont think ive done it more than once for each component, certainly not for engines at 1mil a upgrade.
At the rate components deteriorate, that level of improvement is quite quickly overcome, so i dont think having it effect current models being produced is unbalanced in any way.

Onto the practical side of it in reality, having "the same car, but with different properties" is exactly what you get when you make an improvement to a vehicle that is being produced based on feedback. This is especially true when the improvement is based on feedback from the engineers and users of the vehicles. I know this is true for quite a few products, everything from software to tanks.

I would rather keep the Trim system for purely cosmetic changes as i think was the original intention of that system.

(03-22-2014, 10:37 AM)Arakash Wrote: [ -> ]I think the current modify system is quite expensive already, almost prohibitively so.
I cant speak for everyone, but i dont think ive done it more than once for each component, certainly not for engines at 1mil a upgrade.
At the rate components deteriorate, that level of improvement is quite quickly overcome, so i dont think having it effect current models being produced is unbalanced in any way.

I totally agree, I've only ever done it once to see how it worked and came to the conclusion it was a waste of money.
My suggestion to have its cost go up base off the number of vehicles you had in stock was based off the assumption the base cost would come down considerably. I probably should have been clearer on that.

I personally think that the "Modify component" system should just be changed to be like the "New year model" system and just give you your original component to tweak.
My second choice would be to simply have it change to components design date so it doesn't actually change any stats, it just modernises it.
For the purposes of this discussion I'm assuming it'll stay as is and I'm just offering suggestion on how the current method could be tweaked.

(03-22-2014, 10:37 AM)Arakash Wrote: [ -> ]I would rather keep the Trim system for purely cosmetic changes as i think was the original intention of that system.

I'm not sure I agree with you on what the Trim system is supposed to do. I always saw it as a way of creating fairly significantly different variants of the same vehicle.
For a real world example, the E36 BMW 3 series came in 316i, 318i, 318is, 320i, 323i, 318dts, 325td, 325tds and M3 and that was just in the sedan. Each one of these had a different engine and many of them had different interior options and gearboxes etc. but they were all built off basically the same car. There were nearly as many Coupes, convertables and wagons as well as a hatch. This kind of thing is actually very common.
I think this kind of thing is what the Trim system should be trying to mimic.
Ideally, I'd like the Trim system to allow you to change the body style (within certain limitations, eg, you shouldn't be able to make a Full sied van into a Micro car with a new trim) as well as engine, gearbox and the various sliders. Logically, it might actually make sense to have the chassis locked for trim changes though.

Thins should probably be in another thread really. I have to go shopping though. Feel free to start up a new thread if you want to keep discussing it and I'll join in when I get back =)

(03-22-2014, 06:32 PM)Frankschtaldt Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-22-2014, 10:37 AM)Arakash Wrote: [ -> ]I think the current modify system is quite expensive already, almost prohibitively so.
I cant speak for everyone, but i dont think ive done it more than once for each component, certainly not for engines at 1mil a upgrade.
At the rate components deteriorate, that level of improvement is quite quickly overcome, so i dont think having it effect current models being produced is unbalanced in any way.

I totally agree, I've only ever done it once to see how it worked and came to the conclusion it was a waste of money.
My suggestion to have its cost go up base off the number of vehicles you had in stock was based off the assumption the base cost would come down considerably. I probably should have been clearer on that.

I personally think that the "Modify component" system should just be changed to be like the "New year model" system and just give you your original component to tweak.
My second choice would be to simply have it change to components design date so it doesn't actually change any stats, it just modernises it.
For the purposes of this discussion I'm assuming it'll stay as is and I'm just offering suggestion on how the current method could be tweaked.

(03-22-2014, 10:37 AM)Arakash Wrote: [ -> ]I would rather keep the Trim system for purely cosmetic changes as i think was the original intention of that system.

I'm not sure I agree with you on what the Trim system is supposed to do. I always saw it as a way of creating fairly significantly different variants of the same vehicle.
For a real world example, the E36 BMW 3 series came in 316i, 318i, 318is, 320i, 323i, 318dts, 325td, 325tds and M3 and that was just in the sedan. Each one of these had a different engine and many of them had different interior options and gearboxes etc. but they were all built off basically the same car. There were nearly as many Coupes, convertables and wagons as well as a hatch. This kind of thing is actually very common.
I think this kind of thing is what the Trim system should be trying to mimic.
Ideally, I'd like the Trim system to allow you to change the body style (within certain limitations, eg, you shouldn't be able to make a Full sied van into a Micro car with a new trim) as well as engine, gearbox and the various sliders. Logically, it might actually make sense to have the chassis locked for trim changes though.

Thins should probably be in another thread really. I have to go shopping though. Feel free to start up a new thread if you want to keep discussing it and I'll join in when I get back =)

The trim comment was really a minor one, trying to argue against expanding a system that i already believe covers too much already and too easily/cheaply. As i understand its very easy to exploit. The purpose of trims has been discussed in other threads before so I dont think ill go into it here.
In retrospect i suppose i shouldn't have mentioned it as it was likely to derail the thread.

Whats your thoughts on my comments that i think its plausible and practical for the game to improve(5-10%) the stats of existing models in production to reflect changes due to feedback that i explained in my last post?
You seemed to agree with Sarchez on this point but i dont for the reasons i stated here and in my last post.
You said you agreed to a quote of mine but i assume you just agreed that the system is currently expensive

Your idea of allowing us to redesign our components during a modify action to make the feature more in line with "New Year Model" and "Trim" is an interesting one. Ill have to put some thought into how that would work or whether it makes sense. Its quite thought provoking.

On your of having the modify system change the effective date on the component: Depending on how the components degrade, whether its flat decreases in stats over time or just stats that are effected by a date modifier would change whether that is actually something that could be coded imo.

(03-22-2014, 09:55 PM)Arakash Wrote: [ -> ]You seemed to agree with Sarchez on this point but i dont for the reasons i stated here and in my last post.
You said you agreed to a quote of mine but i assume you just agreed that the system is currently expensive

I did just agree that the system is currently too expensive. For the record, I also have a problem with how instant the system is. Giving you the component in a design window to modify like the new year model system does would solve both issues.

But I digress....

(03-22-2014, 09:55 PM)Arakash Wrote: [ -> ]Whats your thoughts on my comments that i think its plausible and practical for the game to improve(5-10%) the stats of existing models in production to reflect changes due to feedback that i explained in my last post?

I'm not sure to be honest. I think I understand what you mean and it basically revolves around the "series II" vs constant ongoing improvement discussion we were having the other day. The reality of it is that the updates you're talking about are like making a new year model but with very few tweeks while the update from AU to BF Falcon or E30 to E36 3 series are more like and entire new model. I think for keeping the game practical it would be a case of when just making tweeks to keep your vehicle modern you make a "New year model" but don't change much but when you make the next major update you go the "new year model" as well but change a bunch of stuff. I guess with the game as it is right now it's really just an RP difference.

Perhaps there could be a "New year model" button as well as a "Modernize" button that simply changes the effective model year but nothing else?

(03-22-2014, 09:55 PM)Arakash Wrote: [ -> ]Your idea of allowing us to redesign our components during a modify action to make the feature more in line with "New Year Model" and "Trim" is an interesting one. Ill have to put some thought into how that would work or whether it makes sense. Its quite thought provoking.

On your of having the modify system change the effective date on the component: Depending on how the components degrade, whether its flat decreases in stats over time or just stats that are effected by a date modifier would change whether that is actually something that could be coded imo.

The more I think about it the more I like the idea of having both these option for both Vehicles and components.