Spoilers on the back half only
Safety >40
Loudness <50
Emissions < 200
No semislicks
The basic scoring is simple
Gasmea - Hyper - Competativeness
I believe that when all of the cars are in your score and mine will differ because I will have so many competitors in my list
Cosmetic score
After the deadline I will post pictures of all of the cars and their entry number (order in which they were submitted) You plus anyone else will then vote on your top 3 choices, favorite first.
First place will get 5 points added to their score, 3 for second and 1 for third.
Deadline Midnight US mountain GMT-6 I think? Wednesday Morning December 1st.
One week will be given from the time I post the pictures to the close of voting.
PM me your submissions
First block your name Second block the cars name, company Third block your name again, fourth block the engine name (optional).
Now I realise that the year is 2012, not 2015. If I went lore-friendly, GG wouldn’t have a viable car for this segment (or they would but it would be non-competitive).
So should I just aim to max out the score instead…
[quote=“strop”]Now I realise that the year is 2012, not 2015. If I went lore-friendly, GG wouldn’t have a viable car for this segment (or they would but it would be non-competitive).
So should I just aim to max out the score instead…[/quote]
Hmm it seems that I just made my Buffalo trackpac in that time period, might have to do some tuning…
Or I could build a earlier banshee or warpwind… So many options for sub $50k hyper cars…
I have made a great, but terrible choice going with a Rear Engine V6. I hope. Also, having a higher top speed lowers desireablity in hyper. I don’t understand that at all.
Depends on drivability and sportiness. More top speed may mean more prestige, but if it comes at the cost of drivability and sportiness, those things may outweigh it.
And using a rear-engined car does make it very difficult. You’ll have to use very funky setups to make the car drivable for a start.
Echoo0o: I don’t think that would be useful, because there’s already a soft limit in that desirability is offset by budget in market simulations.
Okay, I think I’ve got a decent enough ‘competitiveness’ number (though it required me making a couple of design choices I decidedly did not like). I love how customers who buy hypercars have absolutely no conception of fuel economy. 35L/100km? That’s ok, it has over 1300hp!
Well I guess this would be an apt place to continue the power wars. I see your 1300HP, Strop. I will attempt to raise. [size=85]Don’t ask me to make it corner better though. I’m terrible at suspension tuning.[/size]
lol, I wasn’t actually trying for a lot of power (that’s just how my engines usually turn out). At this point it becomes a four-way tradeoff between sportiness, top speed, drivability and budget, given reliability and economy aren’t really being considered. This is going to be a much slower part of the tuning process, because it’s obviously harder to figure out what improves my score exactly, so I don’t know what my ‘optimal power’ will end up being.
I haven’t even started yet and I was still wondering if I was going to compete. I’ve built some crazy cars that I’ve shoehorned a ridiculous amount of power into. I think I’ll see what I can throw together. I’m pretty sure you’ll have a higher “score” than I will because sportiness and drivability are both considerations in the hyper segment.
Well with that announcement I guess I know which car I’m going with, looks like the warpwind trackpac will be getting far less than the 22.8 mpg and far more the 1000hp the “base” model makes. Now to rebuild it in 2012…
