Correction: the Grimsel isn’t the only true supercar I got for CW7 after all. I did, however, provide detailed explanations as to why I ranked each car in its position.
2 Likes
Out of curiosity, would DCT have made any difference to the coolness of the Gipfe if not analog enough was the complaint? And how much did having 6 cylinders increase it? My car is largely based on the F-Type from sub-zero, which is an i4
Yeah, good call on the coolness. On a challenge based around it, direct feedback there is good to have.
Another suggestion with Coolness: typically the coolness scale works differently than the rest of the points, in that it isn’t relative to the best or worst. The cool wall already sets the standard for what the points are and cars are ranked based on where they’d fall there, regardless of how anyone else does.
So there’s no obligation to make one car 20 and one car -20 just to fill out the ends. If the Quix really was on par with the Nissan Tama or Reliant Robin in Chris’ eyes, it could earn a -20, but if it’s more akin to that Citroen convertible it could’ve also gotten -9;. it doesn’t have to be -20 just because its the worst (and vice versa for the Zephorus; if it and the Venus were on par, for example, they get the same score)
I mean, not that there’s anything wrong with doing it that way. I’m honestly curious what happens when Coolness is a guaranteed 40-point gap. But that’s the expectation many of us had going in, and I wanted to make sure you knew it’d previously worked that way.
Regardless, finally fun to hear back on this! I’m interested where we’ll go from here.
In general, more cylinders = more coolness. And the reason why Chris wanted it to be a bit more analog was his preference for it to be offered in a RWD trim level, and/or with a manual gearbox. Even so, it still managed to place fourth overall on the coolness list.
Also, a high negative score (for being more on the “uncool” side of the spectrum) indicates that the car is is either at odds with the buyer’s tastes, or hasn’t been sufficiently well-executed compared to others.
Could you maybe explain a bit more what you mean on my enty, Im not sure i quite understand
As a follow-up: how about Advanced AWD as the front wheels can be switched off? I wanted that but it went over budget
The ‘75 Starion bodies’ upper front end can be morphed to be nearly parallel to the vertical axis at one extreme, and heavily sloped at the other.
Tell me, is there another way to get this kind of retro modern styling? Or even close?
3 Likes
There might be such a way. By using a certain body set, setting its body material to transparent, and using 3D fixtures to create a whole new body shell and interior, you could get similar results - however, it’s a more difficult method of achieving the same effect, and one that requires a lot of practice to master.
The real reason the Busan Coupe scored so low, however, is that as cool as it was, Chris still found it to be overshadowed by many other entries that outperformed it in sheer wow factor.
I shall note that solution proposed would be…fair bit of an issue.
...due to very varying skill levels regarding 3D modelling inside of community (Example: U S.S. BEHEMOTH)
Skyline_Fox, creator of BEHEMOTH, could be easily regarded as being one of most skilled designers in our community. The fact first top-level example I would find as example of excellent 3D skills is not a car doesn’t matter; if anything, you simply KNOW it is nothing short of 3D build because of its non-car nature.
Basara isn’t fully 3D build, but it’s 3D enough to serve as opposing example. Designer of this car is not particularly highly regarded in terms of his design skills, even if you don’t take his very limited experience on matter of 3D. Car was made for competition regarding early 2000s supercars. It’s not made on supercar body.
2 Likes
It may divide opinion, but there’s no doubt that the Basara counts as an example of the approach I just described.
So the basar would place higher on the coolness scale than the busan?
1 Like
Creating an entirely different car using 3d with no trace of the original throws up more problems than it solves really. You can use a large body to get a comfort bonus but then make it smaller since you are completely making it from scratch
1 Like
I humbly submit my example of a 100% 3D car that looks ok, albeit of the same era as what its based on…
…as well as my opinion that this should never be required, and using an older body as a base for a much newer vehicle should count as retromodernism, not a restomod. This entry to QFC36, for example, in no way should ever be reviewed as a 1956 car:
I sure hope the Mara comment was flavor text and not the actual reason it was considered uncool.
It’s a good time to point out, coolness is a subjective value. “That looks like a restomod to me, I don’t like retro styling” is a pretty petty reason, but pettiness is what we should expect in a challenge about personal preferences; as long as its consistent, it’s fine and part of the fun.
There is one review, though, that I am a bit concerned about looking back at it:
So, did Chris not like this car because it was bad, and you used it being a Mara as flavor text? Or did Chris not like it because Mara made it?
If the latter, using a brand’s IRL reputation is one thing you cannot do in Cool Wall, where all our models are made up (often arbitrarily). There are very few brands on the forums that have earned established reputations; to use these in judging is unfair to the players of those brands, who’s success is now being decided by unrelated past builds they’ve done, and to the vast majority of other players that don’t have such reputations. Hence, each car must be reviewed in isolation of any supposed history.
7 Likes
It’s not that Chris didn’t like it simply for being a Mara, it’s that it isn’t as good as he thought it would be. To be fair, its stats are decent, but the proportions (at least from the side) seem… off, at least in his view (and mine).
Which not everyone can do, or wants to bother doing, as it adds a whole layer of complexity and, unless you’ve developed those skills heavily, it’ll inevitably end up looking janky.
No such penalties are mentioned anywhere in the rules.
Firstly, it’s a 2020 car. Secondly, why then is the sub zero column filled with 80s cars?
3 Likes
As an apology, I’m taking back my comments on the use of the Moore as the basis for your build - in fact, it’s not a bad car, just… overshadowed. More to the point, I misunderstood what it was supposed to represent. I thought that using such an old body would be a hindrance, but it wasn’t, since it suits its mission statement of being a homage to the brand’s past to a T.
Honestly, I’m just glad that a challenge from August is finally getting some results…I submitted to almost all of the challenges since the end of July, 2 of them were cancelled after the deadline closed and aside from this one, the rest are all in limbo with next to no comms…
Thanks, that’s much more useful feedback, so please put stuff like that into the actual post in the future.
(Background: I thought for this round, why not give the Mk1 Paragon a new body, so that they are not going straight to the Aston body. Looks like I will take another look at alternatives then in the future, based on the feedback.)