CTC - Car Tycoon Challenge #1 [RESULTS]

[Killrob]

Yes maffc, that is correct.

@Wizzy: It makes a lot of sense actually. Real income was a lot higher back then too, don't forget about that. The official number is just bogus, the calculation has been revised numerous times over the years to fit the government's needs. In the US of the 50's, a single average household income could afford to feed a family, a house, a mid-class car and save up some money for worse times on top of that. I don't have to explain to you what that looks like today. The 80's are somewhere in between. Your perception of currency/value as a function of time seems to be warped, for which I cannot blame you considering the utter BS the media and economists featured therein bombard us with every day.

[8bs]

And we must not forget that the suggested price indicated in price analysis, is the price that maximises the profits. Most companies wish to maximise profit in certain products, but due to variety economic reasons (markets, consumer behavior, offer vs demand, etc), not always was possible to obtain the maximum profit.

http://stats.areppim.com/calc/calc_usdlrxdeflator.php

http://stats.areppim.com/calc/calc_usdlrxdeflxcpi.php

[PMP1337]

My graph didn't exactly tell much. It doesn't even have curves, only straights.

[GenJeFT]

Yes maffc, that is correct.

@Wizzy: It makes a lot of sense actually. Real income was a lot higher back then too, don't forget about that. The official number is just bogus, the calculation has been revised numerous times over the years to fit the government's needs. In the US of the 50's, a single average household income could afford to feed a family, a house, a mid-class car and save up some money for worse times on top of that. I don't have to explain to you what that looks like today. The 80's are somewhere in between. Your perception of currency/value as a function of time seems to be warped, for which I cannot blame you considering the utter BS the media and economists featured therein bombard us with every day.

You are entirely correct.

Most numbers such as inflation, unemployment, and economy growth that are released by governments its utter BS in a major way. Those numbers are generated by the government and only really exist to verify what a government is doing. If they dont like the results they simply start changing the way its calculated or just release a number that is an outright lie. Earlier this year it was released that the US economy grew by around 1% to 2% in the first quarter, that number was quietly revised down a couple weeks later to a shrinkage of around 2%, a 4% point swing to the negative. If you watch very closely after the quarter numbers are released by the government all you do is wait a couple of weeks and suddenly the growth is cut by upwards of 2% nearly every time. But two weeks after the initial release of the numbers nobody is paying attention so few see it.

Now take inflation. Inflation is suppose to be measured with products or items that can be easily converted to currency (say tables). So if a table costs about 100 bucks this year and 110 bucks next year that's 10% inflation. On the other hand if next year it costs 90 bucks that's 10% deflation. Oversimplified but that's what its suppose to measure. The US government doctors those numbers now by excluding certain things like food and fuel prices because they are "volatile" (basically, they keep going up) and instead base it on things like electronics because they are "not volatile" (keep going down). That produces a REALLY skewed inflation measurement which they claim to be 2% when in reality its 3 to 4 times that.

To get a better idea you can look at the current in Zimbabwe with what happened to their currency. It got so bad Zimbabwe simply stopped releasing official numbers.

All these numbers are released by the government for the purpose of government, if the measurements stop serving government interests how they are calculated is changed, or if its bad enough, they stop releasing them. Something to remember.

[Killrob]

... correct description of the sad reality we live in ...

True that, well said. For anyone interested in this, I can recommend two sites: shadowstats.com and zerohedge.com
Cheers!

[WizzyThaMan]

Yes maffc, that is correct.

@Wizzy: It makes a lot of sense actually. Real income was a lot higher back then too, don't forget about that. The official number is just bogus, the calculation has been revised numerous times over the years to fit the government's needs. In the US of the 50's, a single average household income could afford to feed a family, a house, a mid-class car and save up some money for worse times on top of that. I don't have to explain to you what that looks like today. The 80's are somewhere in between. Your perception of currency/value as a function of time seems to be warped, for which I cannot blame you considering the utter BS the media and economists featured therein bombard us with every day.

I found it a bit, offensive, to call me someone who has been cluttered with governement BS. I am aware of whats going on. But if the persception is that (for the masses) certain prices seem decent, then why kick against the bottle? Isnt the masses going to play the game and feel this is overpriced? I am aware of things like a petrodollar and how the US uses this in their advantage to, well, kind of blackmail the whole world really, so don't even start. Anyway, I still do not agree on the price part. If it is to be correct according to your 'calculations', I think it still should be so that the majority understands instead of those few who DO know how to calculate these numbers.

[fralbjabar]

That was an awesome competition all around, looking forward to the next one!

I thought I had a brilliant idea to go for the cheap off-road segment, figured everyone here would go after the sports car and hot hatchback segment and leave that end of the market alone. Unfortunately for me it seems killrob had the same idea...

Ah well, still made a decent profit due to sales volume and being priced a couple grand below him (at the expense of profit/unit though). I think I may have put too much engine in it (3.5l 6, terrible economy but what a torque curve!), didn't gain anything with my target demographics and killed me on operating costs. Lessons to learn for next time!

Here's what I entered (click for big):

[Der Bayer]

I am aware that the optimum price estimations are sometimes a bit high. This has got various reasons:

1) The price estimation is only an estimation and not 100% correct. It does not take factory sizes of other players into account. If it would, the calculations would take around 10 days if I .

2) Annual costs are read in from the .txt-file. These do increase with higher price (due to increased repair cost), but the calculation works with a constant value. Therefor the estimation will always give you a higher optimum price tag. It will change for next time.

3) The overall price level is set by the competition. If there is no good and cheap competition (especially for the wealthier customers), you can sell them anything at any price.
I will look into it whether fixed price look-up tables work better, although I am not a friend of fixed values.

4) This is only a forum game made by an unexperienced guy in terms of game development (me). For the first round I am happy with how everything worked out. For next round I will adjust some of the magic coefficients and the results will hopefully be a bit better than next time.


And by the way: There will be never be fixed limits like for example "Semi Slicks only" as long as I'm in charge of this challenge. This makes it way too complicated for a forum game. If you want something like that, play car scenarios. I want my challenge to be like: If I use Semi Slicks, I will automatically sell more cars in the trackday category. And that's totally the way it works.

[Kubboz]

There is another reason, perhaps. The real world has actually got some cheap and good competition, the used car market. The CTC does not. (and frankly, I don't think it's within the scope of Martin to simulate that)

[Killrob]

I found it a bit, offensive, to call me someone who has been cluttered with governement BS. I am aware of whats going on. But if the persception is that (for the masses) certain prices seem decent, then why kick against the bottle? Isnt the masses going to play the game and feel this is overpriced? I am aware of things like a petrodollar and how the US uses this in their advantage to, well, kind of blackmail the whole world really, so don't even start. Anyway, I still do not agree on the price part. If it is to be correct according to your 'calculations', I think it still should be so that the majority understands instead of those few who DO know how to calculate these numbers.

1) The game is fixed at a 2010-ish price level at the moment before any tycoon parts are in. That will change in the tycoon part.
2) The challenge adjusting these values so that they correspond to realistic levels is a) unrealistic and b) creates an unnecessary layer of abstraction.
3) I doubt people have a good understanding of what things cost almost 30 years ago.

[Der Bayer]

There is another reason, perhaps. The real world has actually got some cheap and good competition, the used car market. The CTC does not. (and frankly, I don't think it's within the scope of Martin to simulate that)

Very good point! But I think the biggest issue is lacking competition in the more expensive segments. The buyers would prefer better cars with higher stats and cannot find them, thus they would buy the best they can get for almost any price.

[Dragawn]

What if we advance the next challenge by 5 years each time, and the cars from the previous challenge are still in the market with like half the price, less volume, and some reduction on the stats? Higher environmental resist -> higher retained stats. How would that be as second hand car market simulation?

[Der Bayer]

Let's see how my planned improvements work out. If it's only about adjustig prices, I can make that wihout a used car market. I have to leave something for Automation 1.0, too.

[WizzyThaMan]

Bayer, Im looking forward to your changes. They look promising and will probably give a better result! Nevertheless you did a good first times. I was just trying to give you feedback, so I hope I didn't in any way offend you. I really admiore the work you do. Looking out for the next CTC!

[shawa666]

I found it a bit, offensive, to call me someone who has been cluttered with governement BS. I am aware of whats going on. But if the persception is that (for the masses) certain prices seem decent, then why kick against the bottle? Isnt the masses going to play the game and feel this is overpriced? I am aware of things like a petrodollar and how the US uses this in their advantage to, well, kind of blackmail the whole world really, so don't even start. Anyway, I still do not agree on the price part. If it is to be correct according to your 'calculations', I think it still should be so that the majority understands instead of those few who DO know how to calculate these numbers.

1) The game is fixed at a 2010-ish price level at the moment before any tycoon parts are in. That will change in the tycoon part.
2) The challenge adjusting these values so that they correspond to realistic levels is a) unrealistic and b) creates an unnecessary layer of abstraction.
3) I doubt people have a good understanding of what things cost almost 30 years ago.

I'm old enough to remember what a car did cost 25 years ago.