Maybe something even simpler, by just having categories but no subcategories.
Although it all depends on exactly how Vic’s formulas work.
If y’all have been paying attention, they’re based on Zabhawkin’s original “Best car” formula, which uses a lot of square roots. It’s very similar to his current “Adapt or die”.
Because of all them square roots, plus the fact that I weight things with multipliers, “simply” posting the formula at the beginning of the competition is actually a bit of a nightmare. But also because the scale between different stats (ex: comfort, practicality, and economy) are all different, a “normal” weight on one stat may carry more or less weight than another. For instance, a “normal” weight on practicality, whose scale is 2-3 times higher than comfort, makes it worth more than a “heavy” weight on Comfort.
You can be rest assured that there IS a mathematical formula before I ever post, the SAME mathematical formula is applied to all cars in a given competition, and that I don’t fudge anything based on how much I like/dislike a specific design. You can also be assured that I have designed at a minimum 3 different vehicles in a balancing exercise to make sure that different approaches will yield similar results. Yes, not testing the not-Defender body this time around (because I had forgotten about its existence) was an oversight on my part. If I were to find a similar disparity in the future, I would either handicap or ban the specific body beforehand.
If that’s not enough for you all, I suppose I COULD post the individual competition-specific spreadsheet in the original post, going forward. But… IMO that takes away some of the “magic” of engineering a solution through a relatively quick design process, and turns the thing into a slugfest of who has the most time to devote to tweaking their individual car for every single bloody point.
One of the things I’ve heard repeatedly as a good point of this series that I’ve been running is how quick and fun it is. I DON’T want to mire it down by making the individual designers focus so much on mathematics that they forget about or ignore the design element, or take hours on end tweaking it. That would not be personally fun for me if I were an entrant in a competition (and, for the record, when I created my car’s for Zab’s Adapt or Die… I only made sure the fleet made the minimum fuel standards, as well as the individual stat minimums for each demographic. I didn’t create a spreadsheet with every calculation that he posted, obsessively tweaking and redesigning. My entire fleet of five cars took an hour to design.)
As I said, if you guys REALLY REALLY want, I’ll start posting the calculation spreadsheet in the OP of new challenges going forward. But I’m against it because of what it will then do to the challenge. And remember:
Consistent math, determined before the opening of the competition. Pre-balanced with a minimum of 3 designs. No favoritism.
[quote=“NormanVauxhall”]I have mixed feeling about this victory.
I’m not happy that I used the not-Defender body, I was in conflict with myself and still I am. I feel a bit… cheater.
I’ve confessed my personal conflict in live chat to Conan and Leonardo9613. My first choice was the not-Golf SW body, but it had some graphic bug that annoyed me a lot.
I was on the edge of the rules for that… but I’m happy that the car had good result.
Thanks again to VicVictory about this great challenge. Keep up the good work! This is a great formula.
I really hope that the next you challenge you are planning are about cars that I don’t like very much… because I can’t participate to the next 2 
[/quote]
I don’t see the use of the not-Defender as cheating. IRL upright 4wd bodies are more practical and their offroad ability gives them utility that a car body cannot hope to match. The early 80’s is also the right time for the 4WD boom to start!
Without the 4WD revolution (and their bad safety record) the soft-roader concept wouldn’t have happened and the MPV would never have been born. IMO you’re over-thinking the result Norman as the body you used was available to us all, but a competition full of 4wd’s would have been boring so I for one am glad I built a (losing!) sedan with monocoque that reflected my view on family transport. Norman, your family transporter is the best, but I’d still buy something like mine as I like driving the car, not just getting from A to B!
Please VicVictory don’t change your system; it’s fine as it is. Besides, I’ve seen Zab’s calculation (adapt or die front page) and it frightens me!
[quote=“HighOctaneLove”]
Please VicVictory don’t change your system; it’s fine as it is. Besides, I’ve seen Zab’s calculation (adapt or die front page) and it frightens me![/quote]
What are you afraid of a little math?!?!?
I have been putting some serious thought into generalizing the weightings as Vic has, it puts a little mystery into it for me.
Edit: The equation forces the designer to look at the car as a whole, not just a few key stats.
Yes actually 
my skills with math lie in the accounting field, not formulas! 
[quote=“HighOctaneLove”]
Yes actually my skills with math lie in the accounting field, not formulas! [/quote]
Well, that means when Tycoon mode comes around, your bean counters had better be the best around. 
[quote=“VicVictory”]
Yes actually my skills with math lie in the accounting field, not formulas!
Well, that means when Tycoon mode comes around, your bean counters had better be the best around. [/quote]
Why do you think Bogliq is located in Moldova?*
- Hint: It’s a tax haven!
Very cool competition! Now that I have the steam version figured out (I think) I will be entering competitions again!