That’s a really cool and good car.
1 Like
Maybe I should have gone more in-depth in my thoughts on this CSR’s rules:
First, the elephant in the room:
-Must score over 110 in at least 3 Gasmean non-track markets @0%
Markets in this game are NOT optimized for sandbox mode and tend to be highly dependent on factory settings and raw scores. This leads to a tactic called “min-maxing”, which is using oddball choices in order to maximize competitiveness in any particular market. One example is using launch control on almost everything, even when it is completely unnecessary, thanks to it’s arbitrary sportiness bonus for low cost.
Having the barrier at 110 in 3 markets in particular will strongly encourage min-maxing by restricting engineering decisions to those necessary for meeting the market requirements, in a way that stifles both creativity and the realism of the challenge. You’ve also left a loophole in the market rules by allowing any market outside the track market, this could lead to an entry that follows the letter of the rules while clearly violating the spirit of them (such as entering a van in this challenge). All of what you intended to do with this rule could simply have been better served with a simple minimum sportiness of say, 30. That would not only lead to more creativity in the entries and much less minmaxing, it would also make the rules more focused on something that’s actually sporty.
The rules that probably only existed because of the in-game markets having weird choices
I am talking about these rules:
-Min Power 169kw (226.6hp)
-Max speed must be over 130kph, 0-100 under 10seconds
These rules would probably not need to exist if the market rule was removed, as sportiness mostly takes place of these.
The unnecessary rules
I am talking about these in particular:
-No terminal flags for oversteer, bottoming ect (yellow warnings are fine)
-No more than 3 degrees +/- camber
-No limited production or no mass production flagged parts
-Suspension must be >99mm ride height
-Must have at least 2 seats
Most of these (except no limited production or no mass production parts) can be rolled up into a basic “use common sense” suggestion. As for the no limited production/no mass production rule, all vehicles using such parts get a high production units penalty for using them, making them less viable anyways.
Flawed rules that are still viable with possible changes
In particular, I am talking about these rules:
-Min Safety 50
-No mod bodies
Sorry to break it to you, but anyone looking for a sporty car probably doesn’t care too much about safety, 50 also tends to be rather high for a small 2 seater. (Gasmea’s minimum is 35, and Fruinia’s minimum is 40)
Onto the the rule banning mod bodies, while there was one body in particular (the not-cayman body) that had a super low drag coefficient that lead to it being very OP in top speed and fuel economy, that body has been pulled from the workshop and there is no reason to ban all mod bodies when a simple rule banning the not-cayman would work.
15 Likes
I’ll ask again; what’s with the Cayman body?
The rules that probably only existed because of the in-game markets having weird choices
I am talking about these rules:
-Min Power 169kw (226.6hp)
I think part of the reason that that rule exists is because the RX8 had at most 168kw of power (according to wikipedia). That being said, I’m surprised the OP let the max 0-100(km/h?) be 10 seconds instead of closer to the RX8’s 6.4 if he meant to theme the comp to be looking for “the next RX8.”
Unless its been fixed that has really low drag… but no mod bodies is the rule, not no caymans.
Can you please give us a reason why no mods?
4 Likes
One more thing; could it be a 2015 because the family is a 2015 and I reeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaally don’t want to make a brand new model?
That may be true, but why have that as a rule? If someone wants to enter a car that has 167kW of power and weighs 1000kg, then it would be disqualified, yet someone entering a car with 169kW of power and weighing much more is not.
Well part of the reason that rule doesn’t work well is because the max 0-100 time is too high, so those rules don’t work together to force certain types of cars (sooo van meta?). The only reason I see that that rule is in place is to keep a loose theme to the challenge. (but none of the other rules really keep to that theme as strong as the min power rule)
It would be better to scrap most of these requirements and only keep the fundamental ones - this way it gives more freedom (and less rule checking) to design what you want. If it doesn’t meet the basic challenge goal (RX replacement), then it gets cut in shortlisting anyway…
I’d recommend only keeping the following:
Cost/Engineering Restrictions:
-Trim year must be 2014
-Max cost $20,000 @0%
-Max Production Units is 140, including both engine and trim
-Max Engineering Time is 50 for engine, 50 for trim
Road Legal Restrictions:
-No semi slick tires
-Engines need a catalytic converter and less than 50 loudness
-Min Safety 50
-Suspension must be >99mm ride height
1 Like
Your not being scored by markets other than a small bonus if it does really well in a lot of them even internationally… the markets limitation is to prevent a car purpose built for one low budget customer… this needs to be something a company would already be selling at a profit, and 110 at launch year with 0% market seemed a achievable bar to control that. Like a lot of these rules, I won’t sweat it if your car is 109.x or simlar. I feel creativity would be greatly hampered if I selected the markets, but as is there are many possible demographics in game around this customer. Current entries are already diverse, even ignoring the ones that are shitposts in more than looks.
Min power is firstly for market balance, secondly to reflect Autostraylias muscle car thinking that puts >300kw into any of the slightly sporty sedans\utes\suv’s without much regard to total weight (which notice, is not scored beyond markets, and thirdly as a show of one upping the car the client original wanted, but can’t have.
Min speed and 0-100 on the other hand prevent exploits I’ve seen, as did camber rules.
Limited\ No Mass production flags address down-force under-bodies, glued aluminum or spaceframes… this is a fairly affordable production sports car, and such flags would normally entail higher markup requirements to remain profitable… which is outside the limited scope of this CSR currently, but I can write a penalty clause for it instead (like rules\judging at 10 or 20 % instead of 0) if enough people want, and current entrants agree to allow it.
Min ride height is the laws of Auto-straylia (actually its 100mm, but automations height steps are pretty coarse so I have a bit of wiggle)… if its lower you can’t drive it on public roads, which the buyer wants to do.
2 seats, and payload\cargo for 2 people, fuel and max allowable checked& carry on luggage is again a buyers need, he won’t consider anything else, and again its a pretty low bar to meet in 2014.
I didn’t have an issue meeting 50 safety my test cars (it took standard option in entertainment and saftey equipment on semi-spaceframe without any body morphs), but I will happily lower that if again lots of people are hitting limits and the current entrants agree on it… and it was supposed to represent the ridiculous laws of Auto-stralya… as a nation it modifies almost all import cars in some way to meet its safety specs, like side intrusion bars ect… only a couple of years after this CSR, they will mandate ESC for any car of a production run more than 10 thats sold locally. The good news is loose emmissions laws (only needs a cat), and the buyer doesn’t care, so go nuts in that regard.
As I have just posted recently, these rules are too restrictive, especially for me. Requiring a very high competitiveness level in three specific markets is unnecessary for the reasons you have pointed out. As it stands right now, I will not enter this round unless a more reasonable rule set is put in place - or if I can find a workaround.
3 Likes
And thats absolutely cool to do, these competitions rounds are only present for those that will find it fun to do, no judgement from here if you’d rather wait for a more open specification. I’ve simply written something I think would be interesting to do, it won’t (and probably can’t) suit all preferences.
In fact to address this exact concerns, I’m thinking of opening another polar opposite (non-CSR, but CSR style) competition that ends sooner to suit some of the people this doesn’t in the mean while… current plan is a half baked idea, but something Eco concept car… max fuel consumption 4L\100km, points equally out of 10 for creativity, looks, and how believable it would be in whatever market it would serve (eg if its luxury it can be more expensive but comfortable and prestigious… if its fun it needs to be sportier… but being a concept it can shoot a little high on everything it shows). This would be frustrating to me as an entrant because its so subjective, but it’d be super quick to judge and appeal to the people this restricted CSR does not, so keen for your thoughts.
Firstly because of balance… there is no standard for setting things like production units vs stats ect for mod bodies. Some are more powerful, some are weaker, and I’m not talking only about the few overtly massively broken ones that would be easy to blacklist.
Secondly because you require the mod in question to use a mod body… yes its a little lazy but with probably half of the stock bodies in a decade that can fit the rules I don’t feel it would really be needed in this. On the other hand if it where say a supercar CSR, then absolutely there are few great choices in any decade, and it would be very bland without them. Its just a limitation of scope on this.
The second challenge mentioned above will be up soon hopefully, and will allow mods, and have unrestricitve rules if this suits you better…
See, the problem here is your attitude to this.
Not much more.
You need to realise something very, very obvious you seem to be missing.
No-one likes your restrictive rules. Simplfy and fix them.
Don’t run a 2nd challenge, just fix this one.
12 Likes
You don’t seem to understand what mod bodies actually affect. Production unit will only change based on the size of the body, and even then it’s minimal. There’s no “powerful” or “weak” bodies, that makes no sense. In short: there’s no valid reason to prevent mod bodies from being used, it’s easy to just blacklist the 1-2 broken mods that have issues.
I also support what pretty much everyone else is saying about the market scores not making sense for the challenge. As I explained several hours ago, the market scores require factory tooling to be used as a good barometer of whether or not a car is good and sandbox mode does not provide that. The markets are also not the best thing to reference in terms of making cars that would realistically sell.
I’ve managed to make a car fit that section of the rules, and guess what? It makes no sense as something to be sold. Premium interior, basic infotainment, standard 00s safety, 7-speed DCT with launch control. How is that not a car made to please only a single individual?
Lastly, making a secondary competition to run alongside CSR to try and satisfy all those who are displeased with the ruleset is in very bad form.
9 Likes
First off the obvious point.
This is creative challenge, the more creative freedom the better the round will be.
You are unnecessarily limiting both the challenge and the entry list by being so stubborn.
And the 2nd point
“yes its a little lazy”
I’m sorry but this is not good enough. If I can pull the stick out my ass to fix WST, which is now way bigger than I could have dreamed of, you can fix this challenge. Accept your rules aren’t as good as they first seemed (Again something I have had to see) and better both the challenge and your own experience.
3 Likes
Why run a 2nd challenge appealing to all our suggestions rather than just adjusting this one?