I almost don’t have anything new here. I was looking for some specific topic in the suggestions, and in the process I’ve stumbled upon some things that either didn’t get any dev answer (be it yes, no, or maybe) or in one case got an answer long time ago with nothing like that happening later. Let’s go!
Editable spacing for editable text:
Right-click menu:
Torsion beam + L-FWD:
Recolourable badges:
Twin exhaust outlets for inlines - I feel like this one could have been answered elsewhere, but I couldn’t find it, so it could be missed indeed:
Body grouping - this one got answered by Killrob in 2020 as a “yes”, but… it went silent since, with the feature still not in the game (NOTE: the suggestion is in the linked post, in a thread with a different suggestion answered as impossible):
This I’ve seen pop up in several threads, with no definite answer (the closest was sth like “noted, good one” IIRC) and this is what I came looking for - paint UI improvement. My main issue with it is that with more than just a few paints the global section gets unwieldy, unless paints are named in some highly organised code. Could we get some form of grouping them, like folders, tagging, filters, search bar or whatever? Right now all the info about the paint has to be contained within its name and thumbnail, and with how wonky the thumbnails sometimes work (getting darker or brighter), it’s mostly relying on the name. But the name is just one line of max. 12-15 characters, and it would be nice to just name the paint instead of coding whether it’s metallic, pearl, matte, funky leather material, copper-like finish or maybe really cheap looking plastic (as it all gets dumped equally into the global section), which can of course be checked by applying it, but… that’s somewhat tedious when you’re just browsing your global materials collection in search of a nice, metallic exterior paint. And then on top of that is the topic of different eras (50s basic paint won’t look like 10s mono paint of similar shade!) and different sandbox companies, for which more involved players might want to create separate paint lineups.
So, in summary, what I’d really like to see in terms of paint/material organisation:
some indication of the base material the custom one is based on, as it’s not always paint nowadays - be it an icon (paint, plastic, metal, upholstery, glass, special), automatic tag or a filter in the UI
introduction of either a tag system similar to the one in the car designer menu or some roughly equivalent filtering solution
introduction of the ability to custom categorise the paints, either by the mentioned tags or folders/groups
modifying the name field of the paints to support multi-line names, like in the fixture case:
I’ll pass this along, but it’ll be a bit of a challenge to fit a control for this in the space that’s available.
…was actually a bug that it was in there in the first place, and has since been removed.
If we can find verifiable, real-life examples of cars that have this, we will take it into consideration. No guarantees that it will make the game though.
Unfortunately we would have to re-write the entire badge system to make this work, as they don’t behave like other fixtures do; if we can find the time, we’ll give it a stab, but looking at the plan for the rest of the Supercharger Update, our plates are pretty full as it is.
As a BMW owner myself, I’d be in support of this But, that’s not what drives what gets into the game and what doesn’t. It’s something we might consider, but no guarantees.
We are re-working the search function in the body selection screen as we speak; it might not be a fancy new tagging system, but it will be a marked improvement from the current situation.
This is also something we are considering tweaking or modifying as well, in the future. We’d have to put quite a bit of thought into it though. Also, unrelated changes to the UI in other areas to improve usability will probably some necessitate changes to the paint UI and other places as well.
Examples of cars using torsion beam + L-FWD: Almost anything FWD Audi at least 70s-90s. VW Passat of the generations using Audi platforms. Regular cars sold in huge numbers.
I remember being able to combine a McPherson strut front suspension with a ladder frame chassis in early Kee builds, but this option has long since been removed. Why is this, and can (or should) it be brought back? Especially since it would be a great way to save costs on a ladder-framed design, but still want to fit an independent front suspension instead of a solid front axle of any kind.
In McPherson Strut design the strut top mount has to be load bearing. This is not possible with ladder chassis because as the bodywork is mostly decorative and not structural, the bodywork where the top would go cannot support the load which the strut puts down (or more accurately, up). In real life there has never been a car with ladder frame and McPherson Strut suspension.
The closest to this would be the original Lotus Elan with rear Chapman Strut suspension. But that is not a ladder chassis but a backbone chassis. It would be closer to spaceframe in operation.
Technically I guess it is possible to design a ladder chassis to incorporate McPherson Strut, but you would have to make additional support for the strut top which means it’s taking up way too much space. (Basically a big and very beefy prong up above the strut itself). Not only that but the frame itself would be a lot more complex to make and engineer (ladder frame is just a bunch of long steel beams after all, it doesn’t require much complex pressing) which kinda defeats the purpose.
But, that’s not what drives what gets into the game and what doesn’t. It’s something we might consider, but no guarantees.