Okay, so. I’m very much of the opinion that the manual gearboxes are unrealistically (and undesirably) undesireable in the current game balance.
I very much see the cause in the effect picking a manual gearbox has on drivability.
To demonstrate my point, I’ve prepared this '02 four fixture wonder econobox test mule:
Allow me to show you some interesting drivability figures.
|Adv Auto, but with -15 quality 160 mm drum brakes on full comfort brake pads||40.1|
|Adv Auto, but with rear tires 140 mm wide (instead of 165 mm)||40.0|
Automation seems to think that a manual gearbox is somehow a bigger nerf to driveability than not stopping in any foreseeable time. Or oversteering everywhere.
That does not seem right at all. Like, my mom does think that an auto would be a nice thing to have if she could afford to maintain one. But she certainly would not get an auto but have to not stop in return. The current game balance is absurd at worst, and americentric at best.
Speaking of being able to maintain an auto or not, the service costs of an automatic do not seem right at all.
Let’s use our shitbox test mule again.
That does seem right at all either. Manual gearboxes are practically serviceless. Switching to either type of automatic should not increase the service costs by measly 2%, especially in a car where there’s not much else to maintain.
I don’t know about you, but in my opinion it should be fixed. Like, I personally feel Automation should be slightly more favorable towards manual gearboxes than the reality is, you know, to fulfill the escapism needs for manual circlejerk car nerds like me, but even if you disagree, I also feel it’s actually more unfavorable towards them than real life is.
I feel like some of it is a way to emulate the “some people can’t drive stick” factor, but I feel it should be a region specific penalty and not something that is inherent to the Car Designer’s calculations.
Any thoughs you want to give?