Auto Modify

[Thor446]

I think it would be useful to have an option where we can set when and how much each part should be modified automatically. For example, I can say that every 3 years I want my engineers to remodify my chassis, engine, and gearbox for a specific model, and then make a new model year for that model. That way, managing larger numbers of cars is made easier, and you don't have to worry about modifying them yourselves, unless you decide to redesign everything from the ground up. But still, I find myself working on 2-3 other car models, then I look back, and its 1972 and I still have a 1960 car on the market, because I just haven't had the time to modify it.

[Eric.B]

I'm not sure about this feature as the modification system is supposed to exponentially grow more expensive thus forcing you to design new components. Likewise the game can't automatically create vehicles as player vehicles requires bodies and the AI can not design bodies yet.

So I'm not sure what the solution to this would be. From the sounds of it, the modification system is not doing its job in that it should become more and more expensive to use. And increasing the age penalty on vehicle designs would probably go a long way into forcing you to make time for updates. Which version of the game are you playing?

[Thor446]

I'm running 1.19.3, the newest update. Everything has been running smoothly, and I like all the new features that were added in, and I haven't had a crash in atleast 2 versions

The problem with upgrading now is that it takes too long to redesign parts. If I create an engine, and then wait 4-5 years, that engine's rating will be almost useless. Then I hit redesign, pop out the exact same engine, and it takes a good 8-10 or so months to redesign, which is valuable time. I don't really see the point of an age penalty in a lot of cases, as well. Let's say I build a 5.7L V8 with 400hp, 400lb/ft of torque. A good 10 years later, that engine should still be good, because that will always be a great output. It is more expensive to modify the engines, and it usually throws me into a 1 turn deficit because I click it so much until it just doesn't raise the stats at all, but I don't see the point of having to redesign a part entirely.

If the game were more in depth (like Automation) I could see a use for an age penalty, like using a cast iron engine head, then when you're able to use aluminum, the rating drops, but because the game doesn't go that in depth, the age penalty doesn't really make sense. If anything, the ratings should rise over time. For example, you can release a partwith only so much reliability, then over time as issues pop up, the reliability rating should rise as your engineers fix the issues. It wouldn't make sense to drop the reliability over time, unless you're using an engine designed in 1920 in 1980, then it would make sense. But I like keeping things simple and sticking to a few tried and tested parts. Much like how Ford has had the 5.0L V8 for just about a decade now, and Toyota has had the 5.7L V8 for nearly a decade or so, and they're just about the most reliable pickup engines out there.

Also, what's up with pickups never having enough torque? In real life, an F-150 can tow about 8,000 pounds, and I push out 500lb/ft trucks that can tow 32,000 pounds but when I go to make the truck, the power rating is only like 3.5 stars, and it says "Engine could use more torque." That does get a bit annoying, especially if you're creating different classes of truck.

[Eric.B]

I'm running 1.19.3, the newest update. Everything has been running smoothly, and I like all the new features that were added in, and I haven't had a crash in atleast 2 versions

Good to hear!

The problem with upgrading now is that it takes too long to redesign parts. If I create an engine, and then wait 4-5 years, that engine's rating will be almost useless.

So the ratings are declining while designing in late game? I have not noticed that. If so then this is a bug.

I don't really see the point of an age penalty in a lot of cases, as well. Let's say I build a 5.7L V8 with 400hp, 400lb/ft of torque. A good 10 years later, that engine should still be good, because that will always be a great output.
...
If the game were more in depth (like Automation) I could see a use for an age penalty, like using a cast iron engine head, then when you're able to use aluminum, the rating drops, but because the game doesn't go that in depth, the age penalty doesn't really make sense. If anything, the ratings should rise over time.

The reasons for the age penalty is:

1) It's realistic. Very few people go into a dealership looking to buy old technology/vehicle designs. I don't believe there are many people going to a dealerships now looking for new car with a hand-cranked car and a carburetor. (Excluding lawn mowers of course.)

2) Prevents someone from building an engine/chassis/gearbox/vehicle in 1900 and then using it for the rest of the game. This used to happen before the age penalty was introduced. It doesn't matter how much the ratings declined, you could still sell a 1900 model in 2010 if the AI bankrupt or you bought them out.

3) Just because we don't have a 7-figure budget like Automation doesn't mean things like "cast iron heads" etc are not simulated. They're just abstracted through things like the material slider. In any case you designed something in 1930s with top sliders, you're using cast iron, if it's 1970 and you're using top sliders, you're making something aluminum.

It is more expensive to modify the engines, and it usually throws me into a 1 turn deficit because I click it so much until it just doesn't raise the stats at all, but I don't see the point of having to redesign a part entirely.

Sounds to me more like spamming of the modification system. Thus why it's taking up all your time. It's not designed to be used over and over and over all at once. It's more to prolong the life of the component. A once per year thing. Perhaps I should put some sort of time limit on it.

For example, you can release a partwith only so much reliability, then over time as issues pop up, the reliability rating should rise as your engineers fix the issues.

This is what the modification system is for. Your engineers making new, improved versions of older parts.

It wouldn't make sense to drop the reliability over time, unless you're using an engine designed in 1920 in 1980, then it would make sense.[quote]

The reason for the drop is that technology changes over time. New technology (or improvements on old technology) typically makes older technology less reliable. A 1980s fuel injector is the same part as a 1990s fuel injector, however the 1990s injector is much more reliable.

These changes are not automatically applied to old engines. We want you to build/modify/redesign your engines, creating new versions of them even if they're in the same family. Much how it's done in real life.

[quote]But I like keeping things simple and sticking to a few tried and tested parts. Much like how Ford has had the 5.0L V8 for just about a decade now, and Toyota has had the 5.7L V8 for nearly a decade or so, and they're just about the most reliable pickup engines out there.

Age penalty is designed for this. We give you 15 years penalty free. After that you need to use the modification system or redesign to extend its life. Using your Ford engine as an example, the 302 Windsor came out roughly 1968. Around 1978 it got an aluminum intake, 1981 Some versions got a 351W camshaft. In 1985 they got roller tappets and steel camshafts and 1986 they got fuel injection and fast-burn cylinder heads. The engine was phased out of production in the late 90s and finally ended in 2000. So 32 years. If you used the modification system on each of those years mentioned above, you'd have no years in age penalty (Should also note the Boss 302 is not the same engine. Very few parts are interchangeable between the two. And 2011 302 and on are actually Ford Modular engines which are a different design from the early 90s.)

This doesn't mean the Ford engine wasn't old and outdated and "low ratings" (by our game standards) in the 1990s. Just that both GM and Chrysler were doing the same things. There was practically no foreign competition in the mid/full size truck, SUV, Cheap v8 Sports Cars, categories in the US at the time. So they got away with it. Now all three companies design new engines at a much more rapid pace because they have to keep up with other companies.

On the topic of Toyota, I'm not too familiar with their engines/history as the only Japanese vehicles I really had to work with were Mitsubishi. (Unless I was sourcing parts for Niche European cars, for instance a 80s Rolls Royce Silver Phantom uses the same brake pads as a Toyota R22) From a quick glance, the 5.7L has only been around since 2007. So well within our 15 year age penalty for components. Also upon further inspection of Toyota's v8's it proves my point above about Ford/GM/Dodge... Toyota does overlap it's products some, but the families are pretty much redesigned every 20 years. And the individual engine designs in those families are only used for 12 years.

Also, what's up with pickups never having enough torque? In real life, an F-150 can tow about 8,000 pounds, and I push out 500lb/ft trucks that can tow 32,000 pounds but when I go to make the truck, the power rating is only like 3.5 stars, and it says "Engine could use more torque." That does get a bit annoying, especially if you're creating different classes of truck.

F150 getting 3.5 stars sounds about right. How would you compare it to a Ford Pinto and a Ford F650?

[Thor446]

So the ratings are declining while designing in late game? I have not noticed that. If so then this is a bug.

If I design a part, in a few years, the rating will drop to a low level. That's before the 15 year age penalty mark that you mentioned below. For example, if I push out an engine rated 75, in just a few years, its rated 20-30 overall.

The reasons for the age penalty is:

1) It's realistic. Very few people go into a dealership looking to buy old technology/vehicle designs. I don't believe there are many people going to a dealerships now looking for new car with a hand-cranked car and a carburetor. (Excluding lawn mowers of course.)

2) Prevents someone from building an engine/chassis/gearbox/vehicle in 1900 and then using it for the rest of the game. This used to happen before the age penalty was introduced. It doesn't matter how much the ratings declined, you could still sell a 1900 model in 2010 if the AI bankrupt or you bought them out.

3) Just because we don't have a 7-figure budget like Automation doesn't mean things like "cast iron heads" etc are not simulated. They're just abstracted through things like the material slider. In any case you designed something in 1930s with top sliders, you're using cast iron, if it's 1970 and you're using top sliders, you're making something aluminum.

I'm not talking about using a 1900 model in 2010, and I know that the game does simulate better parts in later years, but I mean I'm finding myself have to redesign a part every 3-5 years, which takes 10 months to research, then I have to take even more time to redesign the car it's going in.

Sounds to me more like spamming of the modification system. Thus why it's taking up all your time. It's not designed to be used over and over and over all at once. It's more to prolong the life of the component. A once per year thing. Perhaps I should put some sort of time limit on it.

This is what the modification system is for. Your engineers making new, improved versions of older parts.

The reason for the drop is that technology changes over time. New technology (or improvements on old technology) typically makes older technology less reliable. A 1980s fuel injector is the same part as a 1990s fuel injector, however the 1990s injector is much more reliable.

These changes are not automatically applied to old engines. We want you to build/modify/redesign your engines, creating new versions of them even if they're in the same family. Much how it's done in real life.

What I mean is, the modification system only boosts the ratings by a tiny amount, not enough to put out a more reliable part. After a few years, if that part drops to an overall rating of 20-30, it usually has 3 star reliability, and I try to release all of my parts with 4-5 star dependability, and if I try to modify it, I can never return to that, no matter how much I spend.

Age penalty is designed for this. We give you 15 years penalty free.

What exactly does the age penalty do then, drop the ratings? Because like I said above, my parts all drop massively in rating after just a few years, there's no way it's 15. If it were 15 years, this wouldn't be a problem at all, but I'm having to modify the parts every 3-4 years, and if I redesign them, it takes another 10 or so months to make a new one.

F150 getting 3.5 stars sounds about right. How would you compare it to a Ford Pinto and a Ford F650?

Would it be possible to add a sort of class system to cars? So if you choose a pickup, you can choose light duty, medium, etc, and that way you can max out all the stars you want, and not be having to tow a ridiculous 32,000 pounds for your mass produced flagship model? It just triggers me to have to get any less than 5 stars

[Thor446]

It turns out you actually do have the feature I'm looking for already. I went under View>Chassis/Engine/Gearbox, and checked off Refit old design, and then it automatically did exactly what I was looking for

[Eric.B]

If I design a part, in a few years, the rating will drop to a low level. That's before the 15 year age penalty mark that you mentioned below. For example, if I push out an engine rated 75, in just a few years, its rated 20-30 overall.

Yes, this is by design. You start to lose rating points the moment R&D is finished. I miss read you and though you were losing rating points while in R&D.

That being said, stat wise a 50 rated engine in this game is average. However realistically 20-30 rated is average when it comes to actually pricing a product people can buy. You can't design a top of the line product and expect it to be the best for decades. Technology doesn't work like that.

To borrow a concept from computers, Moore's law states a doubling of transistors every 18 months. (Meaning every 18 months CPUs are twice as fast.) While the numbers may be different, vehicles are still a piece of technology and the concept of always getting better still applies.

The rate of decline you state is wrong. To test numbers, I built a car with 75 rated smoothness. Simulated 36 months and the rating dropped to 59. That's a 22% decline, or 11% every 18 months. Far slower pace than Moore's law. In 6 years this rating is down to 46. And in 9 years you're at 36. Which is average compared to your peers (Check what they're offering to sell in the Licensing system.)

In that 9 year period overall rating went from 52 to 25. With a 9 year period game, a 25 rated engine is 147th out of 412 engines. 253 of which are newer designs.

At about 9 years is roughly the same time Toyota does an engine redesign: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Toyota_engines#V8

I'm not talking about using a 1900 model in 2010, and I know that the game does simulate better parts in later years, but I mean I'm finding myself have to redesign a part every 3-5 years, which takes 10 months to research, then I have to take even more time to redesign the car it's going in.

Removing age penalties results in people using 1900 models in 2010. This is why they were implemented in the first place.

Components have a 5-15 year life cycle. This is true in game as it is in real life. I already mentioned real world examples. Each instance of 5.0L Ford engine you mentioned as well as the 5.7 Toyota engine. You design a Great 75 rated engine, and in 10 years it's average, 15 years it's below average.

This is what the modification system is for. Your engineers making new, improved versions of older parts.

Yes, this is what it is for. However it's designed to be used once every couple of years to keep a component "fresh." This is why it has diminishing returns. If you're using it 5 times in one month, it's no wonder you can't keep a component average for a longer period of time.

Again I point to my timeline I gave you of the 5.0L Ford 302 Windsor engine. They made adjustments to the engine every few years.

The reason for the drop is that technology changes over time. New technology (or improvements on old technology) typically makes older technology less reliable. A 1980s fuel injector is the same part as a 1990s fuel injector, however the 1990s injector is much more reliable.



[quote]What I mean is, the modification system only boosts the ratings by a tiny amount, not enough to put out a more reliable part. After a few years, if that part drops to an overall rating of 20-30, it usually has 3 star reliability, and I try to release all of my parts with 4-5 star dependability, and if I try to modify it, I can never return to that, no matter how much I spend.

It may be easier to think of it this way, Modifications = tweaking. Adjusting timing rates, putting hotter plugs in, that sort of stuff. Putting a redesigned fuel filter in to improve fuel flow. Etc. It's stuff to do to prolong the life of your engine a couple of years. If you're looking to increase reliability, use redesign. It will be the same family of engine, same sliders, but with more modern/drastic changes done to it. Will it take few months? Yes, but you have to plan ahead.

What exactly does the age penalty do then, drop the ratings? Because like I said above, my parts all drop massively in rating after just a few years, there's no way it's 15.

Age penalty effects sales of vehicles and any vehicles using components. For vehicles, base designs older than 5 years (without being new year'd) start to receive the penalty. It increases every year. For components it's 15 years.

Ratings decline regardless as time marches forward always. However putting a year or two hold on ratings decline might be something to think about.

If it were 15 years, this wouldn't be a problem at all, but I'm having to modify the parts every 3-4 years, and if I redesign them, it takes another 10 or so months to make a new one.

Sounds like it is working as is designed. Although you can let your ratings go a little lower. With the above mentioned 75 rated smoothness engine, I would do a modification at about 9 years (36 smoothness rating.) In about 3 more years I'd do it again, by 15th year it's time to retire the engine.

And yes, it takes engineers 10 months to do a redesign of an engine. Hell a little video game like this takes 6 years to get to this point.

Would it be possible to add a sort of class system to cars? So if you choose a pickup, you can choose light duty, medium, etc, and that way you can max out all the stars you want, and not be having to tow a ridiculous 32,000 pounds for your mass produced flagship model? It just triggers me to have to get any less than 5 stars

The system does not work like this. Specs of vehicles, such as towing are comparable through all classes of vehicles. They are just weighted differently for the type of vehicle. This is so the consumer has the ability to jump classes based on what they want.

So while you twitch at not being able to get 5-star ratings for everything, you have to come to the realization that 5-star vehicles do not exist in the real world. The F150 is good at towing. But the F650 is better. You could make an F650 level in towing, but people who want to buy trucks (where towing and cargo are important) won't be able to afford it. The game is not modeled around developing hyper-cars, but making the "bean-counter" choices that go into developing real world cars.

So in short, no, the ratings are not developed around the classes. Nor can they be changed to be without a huge multi-year rewrite of a lot of code. We're way to far in development for that.

That being said, don't focus so much on the ratings. The only important rating is the "Specific Vehicle Type" rating. Yes, this rating comes from all the other ratings, but it is the one you should focus on improving and making "5-Star."

[Thor446]

Yes, this is by design. You start to lose rating points the moment R&D is finished. I miss read you and though you were losing rating points while in R&D.

That being said, stat wise a 50 rated engine in this game is average. However realistically 20-30 rated is average when it comes to actually pricing a product people can buy. You can't design a top of the line product and expect it to be the best for decades. Technology doesn't work like that.


The rate of decline you state is wrong. To test numbers, I built a car with 75 rated smoothness. Simulated 36 months and the rating dropped to 59. That's a 22% decline, or 11% every 18 months. Far slower pace than Moore's law. In 6 years this rating is down to 46. And in 9 years you're at 36. Which is average compared to your peers (Check what they're offering to sell in the Licensing system.)

In that 9 year period overall rating went from 52 to 25. With a 9 year period game, a 25 rated engine is 147th out of 412 engines. 253 of which are newer designs.

At about 9 years is roughly the same time Toyota does an engine redesign: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Toyota_engines#V8

Oh, I see what's going on here. I was being paranoid, wanting the highest rating possible. But if a lower rating like 20-40 is, by design of the game, "good", then that kind of soothes my worries a bit. Every part I build is usually in the 70s or so, and I freak out at how quickly it degrades to the 30s. But, now that I know that's normal, I guess I can deal with it.

Yes, this is what it is for. However it's designed to be used once every couple of years to keep a component "fresh." This is why it has diminishing returns. If you're using it 5 times in one month, it's no wonder you can't keep a component average for a longer period of time.

Again I point to my timeline I gave you of the 5.0L Ford 302 Windsor engine. They made adjustments to the engine every few years.

You actually responded to yourself there, I messed up the quote

It may be easier to think of it this way, Modifications = tweaking. Adjusting timing rates, putting hotter plugs in, that sort of stuff. Putting a redesigned fuel filter in to improve fuel flow. Etc. It's stuff to do to prolong the life of your engine a couple of years. If you're looking to increase reliability, use redesign. It will be the same family of engine, same sliders, but with more modern/drastic changes done to it. Will it take few months? Yes, but you have to plan ahead.

--------

Sounds like it is working as is designed. Although you can let your ratings go a little lower. With the above mentioned 75 rated smoothness engine, I would do a modification at about 9 years (36 smoothness rating.) In about 3 more years I'd do it again, by 15th year it's time to retire the engine.

And yes, it takes engineers 10 months to do a redesign of an engine. Hell a little video game like this takes 6 years to get to this point.

I see how it works now. I was trying to keep my engine at 70-80 rating, and when modifying wasn't getting me to that point, I was redesigning a brand new one after just a few years. I'll try using your strategy, I guess that would make the parts even cheaper to produce as well, then.