CSR169 - L'Art D'Arriver [Rules Deliberation]

It hasn’t been updated here, but you should probably be aware that there was an announcement on the official Discord stating that:

any content that is either AI-generated, or AI-enhanced, will no longer be welcome in any Automation-related areas of the official Automation community spaces. This also includes, for those of you who are present in them, our official forums… Posts with content of this nature will be deleted without warning, and habitual posters of AI-generated or enhanced content will be subject to disciplinary measures, up to and including bans for repeat offenders.

This is a brand new change, and I can’t see any public-facing announcement or change to the Community Guidelines or the Terms of Service, but it’s something to be aware of.

8 Likes

Yes to 2 barrel carbs. The 1932-33 Ford V8 is a good example, they didn’t really get it to run well with the 1 barrel carb, in 1934 it got a 2 barrel which made it a much better engine. So it is absolutely a period correct thing.

3 Likes

Recommend allowing ATS for everything except tread width, overall diameter, camber, and wheel diameter.

Non-steering solid axles should not allow any toe adjustment.

Roots blowers were around at the time. Looking into CF, not sure yet.

Given the magic I’ve seen you create, I’m surprised to see you prohibit bodies just because of odd proportions out of the box. Unless there really are stat advantages to later bodies, why care about what body someone used, as long as it looks right in the end?

My thoughts on interiors: I’m ok with (and would prefer) them being mandatory and thoroughly reviewed. I’m also ok with a lesser standard that I think is a good compromise for those who dislike them: that only those parts that are readily visible from the outside are required, because they contribute to the overall appearance of a car from the outside. Blacked-out limo tint is sometimes appropriate, but not here, and empty shells never look good. So a typical car with a roof should get a dashboard, upper seats, a steering wheel, and pillars at minimum, while a convertible should get more. But you don’t need to get into how well the armrest stitching matches the seat bolsters, unless you declare that level of scrutiny beforehand.

1 Like
  • Are full 3D builds ok to use?
  • im guessing the Merlin, Sochaux, Teardrop, T57 & Model Ace bodies are all viable options?
  • in terms of the Merlin body, since it unlocks in 1945 will it be allowed?
  • should the techpool be -5 across the board?
  • Strict 2 seater or 2+2?
3 Likes

Could an exception be made for the Rolls Royce body that recently got added into the game? While I and many others are willing to put in the amount of 3D effort to get the mod bodies earlier than that to work, I also know that there are others less inclined that may still want to participate and lines of said body lend themselves nicely to this era.

6 Likes

Distinctly not. While the impression that 30s cars were less technologically advanced is common, this class of vehicle was usually on the cutting edge of what could be done at the time. Much of what they were using didn’t make it into standard cars until the 40s, so no need to nerf options with techpool. The only caveat to this is a negative in aerodynamics quality commensurate with the age gap. (I.e. like -7 if we’re going default game year). This would mimic how even through these cars do look streamlined, they’re still bricks aerodynamically.

2 Likes

I’ve even seen it argued/demonstrated that aerodynamically, some cars of this era are even more efficient in reverse than forward.

2 Likes

Would not consider them too far advanced. They are also the only “side draft” carbs we have in game, which definitely existed in the 30s.

With all of these, i’d consider including them purely doe to the class of car you’re asking for. Higher end stuff was not unlikely to use racing tech in their road cars(much of the impetus for buyers was a brand’s racing pedigree at the time) and to make engines that even remotely function in automation like what their 30s counterpoints did, you have to dump tons of quality and slightly incongruent materials. Automation doesn’t have the capacity to simulate just how beefy some of these engines were in terms of cylinder wall thickness and build quality.

should be fine to use. from what i know, even if they weren’t called that, there was an obsession with quietness and smoothness in the era, so having a muffler that is very effective wouldn’t be out of the question.

i highly suggest against this, purely due to how long most of the companies in the inspos have been operating at this point. Most of them have been operating since the 1910s or earlier, so have had time to invest at least some techpool. It would make sense for our companies to have done the same. And from a gameplay standpoint, as has been shown, to get even close to the build quality and function of these 30s high luxury cars, we need either an astronomical budget(100k+) and/or large chunks of techpool.

2 Likes

ew AI generated images.

image

Aint it funny to see the “most prestigious” challenge resorting to AI generated images in the wake of the big ol’ announcement yesterday in the discord about AI being banned in the community.

I assume this counts as an “official Automation community space,” so it’s funny to see no one else has pointed it out yet for the challenge itself.

12 Likes

I mean what’s the matter with the image of a person? its only being used to set the mood in a sense and has zero bearings on the actual CSR itself, its almost like your trying to spark drama for the sake of drama. Honestly i think we shouldn’t further let the AI thing overwhelm any and all future comps and just let it be. Besides if there is an entrant that uses AI then said person would have to submit a .car file as proof for their submission so that takes care of itself.

4 Likes

“In addition, we are going to strongly discourage the use of AI in other areas of the community as well, pending discussion of an outright ban on AI-generated or enhanced content in all Automation community spaces.

This isn’t drama for the sake of drama. This is preventing “Rules for thee but not for me.”

6 Likes

yeah true but u already know they’re probably just gonna say it’s not that deep :rofl::rofl::victory_hand::victory_hand::hiking_boot::hiking_boot::tongue::tongue:

4 Likes

besides the nonsensical disdain for AI use on the main post im not sure if this was asked but is the use of the ATS allowed? mainly the Visibility and Wheels tab?

Rules Discussion:

  • Yes 2 barrels are allowed, I’m just still undecided on the amount of techpool allowed and budget cap - any input on these would be welcome.

  • I’m aware roots blowers exist, it’s just the techpool required for the unlock is quite high (also with the other stuff such as forged parts) - this feeds into the still-undecided techpool allowed and budget cap.

  • Forged pistons require a ton of techpool (+10) to unlock - I’m leaning on ‘forged heavy’ and using a lot of quality to compensate instead. (Forged Heavy vs Forged is using the same material (aluminum billets in-game according to tooltip), just that forged heavy is more overbuilt and crude whereas forged is more refined; for this era I think this should be fine, no? Especially with quality put into this component it should allow supercharged builds and higher RPMs than very low RPM truck-like engines.)

  • I haven’t checked in-game yet but I am planning to allow the Sochaux and Rolls Royce bodies. As for the specific proportions out of the box - I’m just saying that the client is desiring a certain ‘look’ (coupe) and using a sedan boxy back with lots of space at the back (even with 2 doors only) isn’t the same sleek look she is looking for. I think you can still do a lot with these classic luxury proportions of the era (cab-back, long hood) while either going for an upright art deco design or a swoopy moderne aerodynamic design too. I said specifically I wanted to double-check in-game about any stat advantages first and seeing if I need to add a small stat penalty somewhere since previously newer bodies meant better safety score for example. I do know they just ‘reworked’ the body year mechanic (not sure what it meant) but I will check it again.

  • Full 3D builds are totally fine.

  • For interiors, leaning towards “medium quality” (no need for exceptional 3D detail, but also ideally not just seats+steering wheel and that’s it) but I will check in-game for how feasible/practical this is first.

  • Strict 2 seater - you can have space internally in the back rather than seats, but not too much space etiher (think modern day supercar with a tiny space at the rear - still not enough space for a +2). Also most cars would have separate bootspace at the back too.

  • For techpool stuff I’m leaning towards a medium-ish techpool cap (no need to start with negative values, but negative are still allowed) but allow lots and lots of quality. This could allow a brand to specialize and include ‘racing’ inspired tech for their engines such as roots or forged internals or DCOE, but these should still be considered and treated as specialties.

  • Yeah you’re right there was a huge obsession with quietness and smoothness and the reverse-flow mufflers should be allowed.

  • ATS Visibility is free game. ATS Body (ride height, track width, is free, wheelbase offset please don’t go too far). ATS Wheel Materials (tread depth/tyre color/shininess/contrast) are free game.

  • ATS Wheel settings (ie. wheel width, size, rim diameter, tread width) still TBD depending on body limitations (the 3 mod bodies + sochaux + rolls royce) of realistic tyre profiles. (Any input on this is appreciated)

AI Discussion:

I just read the community announcement, and I was under the impression of stuff like this:

Which I fully agree is AI slop - it is designed to mislead and doesn’t provide value whatsoever to the discussion or the community or rewards creativity.

My challenge posts have always used AI imagery. It’s not just the pic of the woman you posted, all the art deco posters are AI-generated, along with all the graphics in CSR165, AGC36, and QFC43. The intention is to enhance the vibes of the post and make it visually appealing, it was not intended to mislead or just be slop with no value-add. “Then go do it yourself or find a pic on Google” - I already spent a lot of time on concepting this idea and working on the post, not to mention finding art deco posters are quite difficult with the exact specific concept or time period you want, so I wanted it to be more fitting to the exact theme, setting and lore of the challenge instead of finding something generic online.

Also next time you don’t even have to check the link - you can literally just screenshot a small part of the image and check on google, it will detect its SynthID.

I myself have used AI to place my cars in different scenes and was - very honestly - surprised at the results:

This was my basis on why I thought it would be okay for a car to be placed under different scenes and scenery, as this is basically what we (already) do with photoshop - find a background image online of the exact scene and camera angle, and just photoshop our car on top of it. However, as said earlier it is extremely difficult to find the exact scene and camera angle that fits, and sometimes it’s impossible (ie. I want a full color 1800s scene or 1900s scene or futuristic cyberpunk setting) so this is the basis of my thinking basically. The Automation car itself is still there, but my thinking was that it’s just helping us ease the process of ‘photoshopping’ our cars into different scenes instead of “hey go make my car look better and mislead everyone”. This also helps me a lot as I don’t have a very powerful laptop too. Not to mention some features doesn’t work such as tire blur.

If this is also considered AI slop and this is banned then alright, sure, but I’m just saying why I thought that way, thanks.

10 Likes

Expounding on what I’ve already posted in terms of reasoning for rules.

1)Large amounts of Techpool are need to even come close to simulating engines of this era.


an engine with a reasonable, over-square profile that should be able to rev out to like 5000 rpm implodes when run with tech available at base +5 techpool.

to even have a chance at functioning, you need to use forged conrods, something that the game doesn’t allow in 1946 unless you have +10 techpool. even then you barely have any leeway in rpm after that.

And remember, this is a decently over-square engine, something that was less common in the era. If i was to replicate something like a Bentley 4 Liter’s engine, which has and 85 mm bore and 115 mm stroke, It implodes even with forged internals.

This is an engine that makes it’s power irl at 4000 rpm. To achieve that in automation, you have to not only use forged internals, but also +15 quality.

Even making as close to a replica as above, you need forged internals to make it even close to function. Which brings me to my second point.

2)Negative techpool makes no sense for this class of car and era.

I understand the initial jump to negative techpool, given the age of the cars. However, take into account how old the companies used in the inspirations are. Most of of them formed in the 1910s and the more established of them formed in the 1900s or right before. By 1937, they would have between 20-30 years of producing cars under their belt at that point. Not only that, but they’re funded by the largess of the ruling class at the time, so would have plenty of funds to use for R&D. The companies most of us would be using for this challenge will probably have similar origins and at least close to that level of backing from sales. Mandating negative techpool does not make sense in this. We are also dealing with luxury cars here, stuff that would be in the $200k range today if not even more expensive. You’d expect cars of that caliber to have the best tech or at minimum heavily refined versions of slightly older tech. Regardless of any of that, automation itself locks things out that were easily obtainable in the late 30s behind even small amounts of techpool. 2 barrel carbs require +2 techpool, for instance. Unless we want a round that is purely determined by where quality is used and suspension tuning, we need a reasonably large techpool budget to get any sort of engineering diversity even close to what they had in period. In support of this, to get the +10 needed for forged internals already puts total techpool costs over 30M, even with 0 aspiration techpool, which is a common efficiency in most CSR builds.

To achieve anything close to what cars of this class were doing in this era, we’ll need both a generous techpool and overall budget. Luxury cars like this aren’t cheap or simple, so we should stop assuming that they are, even when they’re older.

3 Likes

As i just put in my testing. an accurate to era engine doesn’t even function with forged heavy. it pukes its guts at 3200 even with max balancing and +15 quality

2 Likes

The post very clearly says All AI.

1 Like

Rules Discussion:

  • Alright I will try out different engine mules and see what a good compromise is later when I get back to my laptop, I really appreciate the input, thanks a lot!

AI Discussion:

Hello, I don’t want to flood up the discussion with AI ethics for now. I will wait and can reach out to MrChips later. If you are trying to be litigious, the post says all AI content is not welcome and is strongly discouraged and pending discussions of an outright ban. I hope you understand where I’m coming from instead of kneejerk reaction to what I said including in the past in Roboracer, and I would appreciate if you can stop trying to derail the conversation if possible, thanks.

6 Likes

These aren’t the same thing and are specifically what is being pushed back against in what the post on discord said. While the use of ai imagery in the rules post is a bit different, it’s still repugnant when a google search could find similar images that aren’t ai generated.

It also raises a question of what the host would do with the cars after we submit them for review posts. If they’re willing to feed their own cars into ai, what if they do that with the entrants’ cars? What if the entrants are staunchly against generative ai and don’t consent to their intellectual property being used like that? I understand why you use it Oreo, but in light of the new rules on AI use in official spaces, doing this sort of clean up on cars or scene replacement isn’t a good idea to allow at all in this or any challenge.

Anyways, back to actual rules deliberation plz.

5 Likes

I will leave this as my last post on this matter, but this is an intentional misreading of the post. The post itself specifically mentions banning AI within automation spaces, which the forums non-offtopic regions most definitely are automation spaces. The statement which you quote is specifically focused upon non-automation specific spaces, such as the Forum’s off-topic area, or the non-automation channels in the Automation discord.

The post very clearly mentions that AI will not be allowed in the “Automation-related areas of the official Automation Community spaces. This also includes, for those of you who are present in them, our official forums” (emphasis mine)

This is not me trying to outright stir shit like I was doing in roborace, this is me calling out a very intentional and obvious violation of new community rules in the single largest and most important challenge that many consider to be hosted within the community. Weasling the wording of the post surrounding the ban to your own purpose is intentionally misleading toward the intent of the ban from upper management to suit your own purpose or benefit.

5 Likes