down the road... more performance tweaking

[xjer22x]

I have been playing the demo for awhile and love it. Its very addicting and can't wait for boost! Lol

Anyways, what I am suggesting is more tweaking options when it comes to performance. I understand the amount of time and work that goes into programming a game like this. So maybe it could be a DLC down the road after the game comes out. Things like...

*Tweaking valve size
*Cam lift and duration
*Instead of just an AFR slider - picking injector and fuel pump sizes and have an AFR gauge on the dyno to monitor that
*throttle body sizing and porting options
*piston head design as well as compression
*head gasket material for different applications
Other little things like that.

Out of those listed I think it would be the coolest to see the fuel injector/jet sizing and fuel pump selection. Then when dynoing or testing the engine you have to monitor the AFR instead of just selecting what you want it to run at.

[Daffyflyer]

Hey, glad you're enjoying it!

I'll give you a bit of an overview of what we will and won't change and why

First a quote from another thread I posted in that might help you understand our design process

Whenever we add a new variable or option or gameplay mechanic in the engine designer we need to weigh up the negatives, and I'd say these are the three test it needs to pass.

It needs to be all these things.
A: A key technical part of real life engine design, the kind of thing that that is a major focus of real life engineers, not a small engineering chore. Full power and Cruise fuel mixtures: Yes. What temp the thermo fans switch on: No.

B: An interesting design compromise, there have to be disadvantages and advantages to each choice in the gameplay mechanic. If you'd only ever really want to leave it on one setting then its not an interesting mechanic.

C: A worthwhile tradeoff for the effort required to develop it, considering that there are a practically infinite amount of features we could add to Automation, they need to be weighed up against each other

Most of the things you mention pass test A with flying colours, but when it comes to B and C they don't hold up so well, lets address them each in turn.

Valve Size: This is the most interesting and potentially useful one, and probably actually would pass test B, its an interesting design compromise, but I think its unlikely to be worth how much work it is. Currently valve size DOES change, but its considered to always be at the largest possible size that can be fit in the engine for its bore and valve count, I'm not sure allowing smaller valves will help greatly.

Cam Lift and Duration: We orignially had this, but it turned out to be confusing to teach the player about, and there were so few reasons you'd ever want to change them independantly that we rolled it into the one slider that controls both.

Injectors and Fuel Pumps: Fails on test B and C, its not an interesting design compromise, as the only thing that really matters about fuel pumps and injectors is that they can flow enough fuel for the power level you're trying to generate, its not really a decision, you either have big enough injectors or... you don't, and there is no reason you'd want injectors that were larger or smaller than you needed. As such its assumed that the injectors are automatically sized correctly by your engineers.


Throttle Body Sizing: Again, not a hugely exciting design decision, if it was going to be in there I'd also say having a choice of different styles of intake manifold would be part of the choice (short runner ones, long runner ones etc.). One day I'd like to add intake manifold choices but its a hell of a lot of work in terms of art, hence it not being in there currently.

Piston Head Design: Could bring up interesting design choices, but fails test C, doesn't add enough value/awesomeness to the game for the amount of development effort needed.

Head Gasket Material: Just another part where more expensive = stronger. We've already got a lot of those with conrods etc. so adding another part where the compromise is just money vs durability isn't that fun.



Thanks for your suggestions anyhow, and hope that gives you a good idea of why we make the choices we do

[xjer22x]

Thanks for such a detailed response.

I completely see where you are going with the development. I could only imagine the amount of effort that goes into designing and programming a game like this.

as for the main concept of the game that you are going for i now understand the reasons on "why" you make the choices your do. And i have a feeling that the majority of those that start playing this game will be beginners when it comes to actual auto knowledge. So it is a great education piece as well.

Myself i am a performance enthusiast i guess you could say and i enjoy pushing my cars to their limits, and the things i suggested are purely the "little" things that we tend to change to try and squeeze every last performance out of the cars. So MAYBE these things could be incorporated into a added download or feature down the road for those that are little more technical when it comes to tuning and tweaking of the car. Ill explain a little of how i look at it.

Valve Size: This is the most interesting and potentially useful one, and probably actually would pass test B, its an interesting design compromise, but I think its unlikely to be worth how much work it is. Currently valve size DOES change, but its considered to always be at the largest possible size that can be fit in the engine for its bore and valve count, I'm not sure allowing smaller valves will help greatly.

Larger is usually better but you can usually tweak TQ numbers by having smaller exhaust valves vs intake. But once again this is super detailed for the common user.

Cam Lift and Duration: We orignially had this, but it turned out to be confusing to teach the player about, and there were so few reasons you'd ever want to change them independantly that we rolled it into the one slider that controls both.

yes this is confusing still to those that are enthusiast like myself. But would be a great learning piece for those that are trying to see how higher or lower lift can affect an engine performance like duration as well. But can be overwhelming for most

Injectors and Fuel Pumps: Fails on test B and C, its not an interesting design compromise, as the only thing that really matters about fuel pumps and injectors is that they can flow enough fuel for the power level you're trying to generate, its not really a decision, you either have big enough injectors or... you don't, and there is no reason you'd want injectors that were larger or smaller than you needed. As such its assumed that the injectors are automatically sized correctly by your engineers.

I can see how this would be hard to incorporate but realistically for any of us that are adding power to our cars, this is the most important aspect almost. i currently have almost doubled my HP of my 2010 camaro by twin turboing it. I have upgraded the injectors but are running on stock fuel pump. My fuel pressure drops at high RPM on the dyno so i know that i need upgrade my fuel pump. whenever i have my car on a dyno, the gauge that i am glued to is the AFR gauge to make sure i didnt run lean. Plus if you have too big of injectors then you have to go smaller. just creates a more interactive way to find the right combo for power.

Throttle Body Sizing: Again, not a hugely exciting design decision, if it was going to be in there I'd also say having a choice of different styles of intake manifold would be part of the choice (short runner ones, long runner ones etc.). One day I'd like to add intake manifold choices but its a hell of a lot of work in terms of art, hence it not being in there currently.

yes this is one of those little picky things that we do to try and squeeze every last HP out of our cars. I do like the idea of being able to add more options of intake manifolds though. And i took a couple years of 3D modeling and i know how hard and complicated making these models can be so i have mad respect for you you all.

Piston Head Design: Could bring up interesting design choices, but fails test C, doesn't add enough value/awesomeness to the game for the amount of development effort needed.

This as well is for those that are looking to be able to tweak HP and TQ curves. A flat top responds different then a dished piston. Might only be a small impact but once again it gets everything out of the car.

Head Gasket Material: Just another part where more expensive = stronger. We've already got a lot of those with conrods etc. so adding another part where the compromise is just money vs durability isn't that fun.

so as you can see from the trend of my explanation, I think it would be good for maybe a "EXPERIENCED" user release down the road after the game is finished. But i agree what i am thinking is probably too much for the everyday user in terms of your audience.

[Daffyflyer]

One thing with the fuel pump etc. is yes it's important, but its not a decision really, its just "it needs to be big enough" and manually choosing it to be big enough isn't a design challenge it's just useless busy work

[PhillipM]

Same with the throttle body really, for carbs, venturi size matters, for EFi, doesn't make anywhere near as much difference. Most people slap the biggest throttle body they can on and think it's improved horsepower when all it's actually done is change the rate of effective throttle opening.
Makes me laugh when you see people 'upgrading' the 70mm throttle body on their 2l 4-pot for a $500 aftermarket 'billet' one that's 80mm and assume it must be better....totally disregarding the fact that WRC cars have been pulling enough air for 400bhp through a 34mm hole for the last decade....

[RobtheFiend]

Turbos make the throttle nearly unimportant, I have seen a dragrace twin-turbo engine with 2400 hp with only 2 3" trottles.
On a normal aspirated engine the upgrade from 70mm to 80mm might give an increase in power. Most likely the response increases.

By the way, WRC cars have been limited to aprox. 300 hp for many years, not 400.

[Juno8]

This is a fact that I just remembered from a site I read a lot on about the Audi Quattro S1 and about the power so you see the Group S had well over 500bhp to at least 600bhp at most before it was banned

"Although the official figures were never released, many people believe that the most powerful rally car in history is the Audi Quattro S1, which had over 500bhp."

[Daffyflyer]

Yeah, I doubt the throttle body itself is a restriction in most EFI cars, unless you've got a really horribly tiny throttle..

[PhillipM]

As someone that's done some work on modern WRC cars, let me tell you this, the original intention may have been for a 300bhp limit, but if you think any of them have been anywhere near that limit for years, you've been misinformed

[Bloozed]

I think people need to remember this game isn't only about building engines,
It's about building up a car company.
The engines are only a small part of that.

[Daffyflyer]

^That too.