FAQ  •  Login

Chassis Quality

<<

BlastersPewPew

Posts: 628

Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 7:01 am

Cars: Mazda 3

Post Fri Apr 24, 2015 3:47 am

Chassis Quality

Why does the price (Total Cost) go UP when you lower the quality of the chassis? The tool-tip states it should decrease but I am not seeing that.

EDIT: for example, the car I am working on costs $9179.10 and 117.96 P.U. at 0 quality, at +5 it is $9992.52 & 133.13 P.U., at -5 it is $9942.95 & 116.35 P.U.
<<

UltimateBMWfan

User avatar

Turbocharged
Turbocharged

Posts: 360

Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 5:34 pm

Location: Germany

Cars: 2008 BMW M3 Coupe

Post Fri Apr 24, 2015 4:34 am

Re: Chassis Quality

I'm not sure, but one possibility could be the increased material usage to craft the same parts. Less quality could entail less efficient use of raw materials, causing you to have to buy more.
Car companies:
BMC AG |

Image
<<

BlastersPewPew

Posts: 628

Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 7:01 am

Cars: Mazda 3

Post Fri Apr 24, 2015 4:44 am

Re: Chassis Quality

Well that would explain the over 200lbs of weight gain, more steel to make the same strength frame etc.
<<

utopian201

User avatar

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 382

Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 11:12 pm

Post Fri Apr 24, 2015 4:53 am

Re: Chassis Quality

I thought the whole point of lowering quality was to cut costs?
Aurora Motor Company: Nothing Comes Close | Youtube ads: Aurora Manticore - "Dyno"
Auto magazine plus directories - list your car in the appropriate directory to be considered for a magazine cover/article.
<<

BlastersPewPew

Posts: 628

Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 7:01 am

Cars: Mazda 3

Post Fri Apr 24, 2015 5:10 am

Re: Chassis Quality

Hence my question, it is confusing especially when the tool-tip states otherwise.
<<

Leonardo9613

User avatar

4-Star Beta Tester
4-Star Beta Tester

Posts: 1270

Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 6:59 am

Location: Curitiba, Brazil

Cars: '15 Ford Ka 1.0 SE

Post Fri Apr 24, 2015 7:01 am

Re: Chassis Quality

Think about the development costs and the production units. It is way easier to design and manufacture a solid piece of steel than it is to make a complicated design, that is just as good, but without as much material. Also, cheaper, more widely available types of steel could be used.

Edit: Just noticed that the autocorrect corrected something it shouldn't have.
Last edited by Leonardo9613 on Thu May 07, 2015 5:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
<<

BlastersPewPew

Posts: 628

Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2014 7:01 am

Cars: Mazda 3

Post Fri Apr 24, 2015 7:08 am

Re: Chassis Quality

The problem with that is the production units dont decrease enough to make it worth it, they only went down by about 1.5 units, I was expecting a similar drop like the +5 got in a boost.
<<

PMP1337

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 250

Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2014 9:56 am

Location: Lisbon

Cars: Fiat Brava

Post Thu May 07, 2015 5:20 am

Re: Chassis Quality

BlastersPewPew wrote:The problem with that is the production units dont decrease enough to make it worth it, they only went down by about 1.5 units, I was expecting a similar drop like the +5 got in a boost.

Someone will come here and say: "The quality slider represents tech year, so using tech year from five years ago isn't the same as traveling to the future as it happens when you up the slider."

I've told this many times. Quality sliders should be about quality. Tech year free points don't make sense. Either you have the tecnology or don't. Ok, you want to give free quality boost to companies that have expertise on certain tech, sure, but don't claim "tech year". Claim something like pratical research bonus or something.
Quality sliders should represent the better tolerances, the higher quality control.
Lowering the sliders to have less production units should be a viable option. Because brands do that.
Image
<<

conan

User avatar

Naturally Aspirated

Posts: 862

Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 1:13 am

Post Thu May 07, 2015 5:44 am

Re: Chassis Quality

PMP1337 wrote:
BlastersPewPew wrote:The problem with that is the production units dont decrease enough to make it worth it, they only went down by about 1.5 units, I was expecting a similar drop like the +5 got in a boost.

Someone will come here and say: "The quality slider represents tech year, so using tech year from five years ago isn't the same as traveling to the future as it happens when you up the slider."

I've told this many times. Quality sliders should be about quality. Tech year free points don't make sense. Either you have the tecnology or don't. Ok, you want to give free quality boost to companies that have expertise on certain tech, sure, but don't claim "tech year". Claim something like pratical research bonus or something.
Quality sliders should represent the better tolerances, the higher quality control.
Lowering the sliders to have less production units should be a viable option. Because brands do that.



Have you try to understand the quality slider yet? Because I see that you haven't. We all see that you haven't.
uranium tungsten oxygen octo-thulium

Return to Developer Questions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests