automationgame.com

Just something I've been thinking about.

The torque curves in the engine designer are quite small and difficult to read in detail - I propose a tool where you select your upper and lower RPM limits by clicking on the graph and the area underneath the curve of that rev range is shown - this would be an incredible tool for camshaft/turbo selection and wouldn't be very difficult to code.

Also on camshafts, what about camshaft lift/duration/lobe seperation choices? Hydraulic lifters vs solid, and the inevitable reflection on servicing costs and high rpm reliability?

Under piston oil squirters? Number of main bolts, heat/chemical treating for rods, knife edged crank, flywheel weight selection (the first three with cost/reliability balance, the last two with repercussions on smoothness and acceleration).

Core changeouts on ball bearing turbos as opposed to bush bearing. Seeing as turbos are a consumable part, could that be reflected in the servicing costs where ball bearing cores are significantly more expensive to replace then rebuilding a bush bearing huffer?

Packaging of intercoolers/pipework. Its probably already done or on the cards, but so far I've seen little difference in cooler plumbing having an effect on being able to fit an engine package into a vehicle - being forced to a smaller cooler due to space restrictions?

Twin spark motors? Spark plug selection for type as well as heat rating.

I do realise this is a Tycoon game but lets face it, myself and a lot of people use this to play with the engine side of things given the amount of extremely good work already put into this.

Thoughts?

Thoughts are: dude hasn't watched the Q&A and he should! Here you go: http://youtu.be/P4S6L-kMev0
Topics D & E would be the most relevant for you right here and now.

Hey Killrob!

Thanks for the link, you're right - I hadn't seen the videos - this is a normal method of delivering project feedback? I only just found the facebook page yesterday, I assume you link the videos on there as they come out?

I can understand where you're coming from - plenty of sim games have come adrift by going into too much micromanagement detail and making the end result to the general public or semi-enthusiasts a lesser and tedious animal. We all know that there is no comparable game to this both in the past and in development now, and the work done would suggest that enthusiasts are the target market - while an enthusiast could bang out a working motor in under 2 mins I couldn't imagine a member of the public being able to even after finishing 10 challenges in under 5 mins - would this not be perceived as tedious?

It has been suggested before, varying difficulty modes? An engine 'auto-create' based purely on technology researched, budget and primary stat weightings (sport, tameness) for the easy mode or for those who wish to concentrate on the purely business and marketing aside of the game and then a 'hard mode' which is where we're at now.

I do understand my suggested level of detail is quite significant and probably too far (when's the last time you worked on a twin spark motor that wasn't a rotary?). I'm just curious as to the result. The way I look at it is that this game is made for enthusiasts, by enthusiasts. What are your team's motivations for developing this title? To make bulk coin from the masses or create of relatively small community of enthusiasts that can continue to expand and brainstorm future direction for the game (and possible subsequent sequels) while still making some money from it.

If you do go for the bulk coin from the masses (and that's fine, I'd be the last to judge anyone), I still think a text field showing area under the curve from 2 preset rpms is a banger of an idea.

Thanks for your quick reply Killrob, you fellas do alright for having two lives.

And spot on on the camshaft front - I could imagine it being a mongrel having to move all three sliders to effectively do the same thing as one.

Aside from turbocharging where lobe seperation and overlap move in essentially opposite directions when it comes to turbocharging. A man spending the big moola on turboing a decompressed but otherwise unchanged lumpy N/A motor will end up with a big frowny face. To simplify this process perhaps a 'behind the scenes' across the board LSA and overlap change when turbocharging is selected to streamline the huddled masses angle as well as satisfy (well almost) the engine buffs through more accurate numbers.
Of course this assumes your calcs take LSA and overlap into account. If they don't I'd suppose it's all rather a moot point.

Yes, I'm keeping people more or less up to date via youtube while on facebook we post smaller updates and pictures pretty frequently.



I think it's fair to say that it is rather obvious in which direction you would want to see this project go. Which is fine, this game and community needs knowledgeable people like you. We won't let that happen though, because with it comes poor design decisions that lead to the tedious, overly-complicated gameplay that is not compatible with a ("less anal, but still into cars") general audience.

Automation is a game for people who love cars, engines, complex systems, technology, design, business and finance or any combination thereof. You won't see a higher level of detail in the game than what is currently in it, and we won't dumb down the game either. While that means that the 1-in-a-1000 enthusiast like yourself won't enjoy the game as much as "Automation: The Hyper Super-Duper Engine Simulator Game", it means that it remains playable and, most importantly, fun. We don't try to cater to an ultra-wide audience, that would be stupid because it would destroy the niche we want to fill, but if we cater only to people like you (not meant in a disrespectful way, but as a matter of fact), we would be developers not much longer due to starvation. We'd like to stay game developers a while longer, so that's not really an option. While that is a bit of a stark comment, I think it makes the point pretty clear.

In Automation the turbo vs. cams thing is done such that turbos don't like high cam profiles in general and start losing some of their potential bite, because they don't like overlap. I don't think it's viable to have any more detail than that really, hell, most people playing the game (and they are mostly car guys!) can't even set up a turbo properly with the help of easy mode!

Cheers!

Hehehe Killrob, you got me dead to rights without question.

It's obvious which way I would take. I suppose it's all relative really, I don't see the relationship between LSA and predominantly midrange power/spool time as a difficult or black magic concept but then when I talk to someone who's 'into cars' 10 years my junior at work I can definitely see where you're coming from.

Without a doubt Automation has a high level on detail already in the systems it employs, putting it ahead of an admittedly small pack while still satisfying even people such as myself. I've managed to convert three people now to at least download the demo (all from mechanic/heavy diesel backgrounds and not really computer literate). The work done so far has been exemplary especially considering the shoe strong budget approach Camshaft software has understandably taken. I adore the intricacy in the pre-betas so far and can't wait for further updates and a pre-release copy.

All that said, I still think area under the curve is beyond sexy even for the uninitiated as a tuning tool.

I'll try to stay active so I can try to constructively contribute to the upcoming tycoon segment (exposure to degree level economics beside life experience), and maybe put forward a few more out of the blue and overly anal simulation suggestions.