I know you’re working hard, and i really appreciate what you’re doing.
I don’t think I am the only one who think this, but I’ll just speak my mind. Though I don’t dislike it, the “game” and “campaign” part I think is not the core of the play. I like the most building my own car for my own satisfaction. this said, there are some features that are missing… there were produced lots and lots of types of engines but there are only few avaliable in the game. I love flat engines (from 4 to 16 cylinders) so I hope these will be released as soon as possible.
My suggestion for the future is: what if the player himself could choose the angle of how many egrees the pistons are apart? it would really be grateful.
Although I know that is hard to find a fnction with so many variables, I hope this suggestion can bring you some hints on how to make the game better
IIRC, we will have the availability to choose the bank degrees for V8s between 2 options (but I might be wrong on this), but other than think in how much energy and development time it will bring into the game experience.
Adding that feature will increase the amount of calculations, when most of the designs (probably over 90%) will be using a standard banking angle (60° or 90°) so it’s not really worth the effort to add a complex banking mechanism, it will only delay the full release of the game.
It would probably need a complete rebuild of the engine modeling functionality as well as smoothness calculations and maybe sound system too (I’d guess months of work) for… nearly no benefit? Because what would more angles than 60, 90 and 180 degree potentially make better (except for 72 degree V10s)? Better packaging? I’d say 90 degrees are great at this already. Better smoothness? Depending on design, and excluding V10s, 60, 90 and 180 degrees will give the best possible smoothness. I see no point in using time and resources for something as little useful, when there are far more important things yet to do - forced induction revamp, full campaign, filling gaps in available bodies, even such things as CVTs or transaxle would be IMO more important.
As the others have said: no, that isn’t going to happen. Not only would they have to create many more art assets, but it also makes no sense from an engine design standpoint.
The V angle on an engine ties directly to it’s balance. Manufacturers don’t just select an angle from their desires… it has to make sense. All V8s should have a V angle of 90 degrees, and all V6s should have a V angle of 60 degrees. That is because a V8 has a either a 180 or 90 degree crankshaft and a V6 has a 120 degree crank. Anything other than that will make for a disbalanced engine.
Yes, 90 degree V6s exist; because that was done as a cost-saving measure of effectively making a V8 with two less cylinders. That option is already in game though.
I’d rather see more engine configurations in game, that were used in reality, which wouldn’t require too many art assets; basically just new cranks and exhaust manifolds. Those would be the Inline-8, Boxer-8, and V4.
Not quite… it would have still a rocking couple if a 3 throw crank was used. A 3 throw crank with flying arms on a 60 degree V6 effectively makes it like a 6 throw crank and retains an even firing order, but doing the same on a 120 degree V6 would make it odd firing; if I’m not mistaken.
I guess I’m using the word ‘ideal’ in a non-ideal manner. ‘Ideal’ insofar as the most simple crankshaft is used. 60 degrees is the most ‘optimal’ in terms of practical use, at least going by how common it is, and of course a boxer 6 is the most optimal in terms of natural balance (even if boxers aren’t traditionally considered V engines).
