02-04-2014, 11:47 AM
(02-02-2014, 11:37 PM)Eric.B Wrote: S) Such an idea seems reasonable, but in reality how much different is it than just designing a new block? Adding an extra layer of buttons to click through seems like a bit much... The reason the trim/model year system is how it is, is because of the additional need to design the physical vehicle.
I think a better way to go about it would be to add a "clone existing component" button to the already suggested "Slider Summery" window. This reduces the work and gui for both you and me!
I think for upgrades it might work best if you were locked to the phsyical engine size. So length, width, layout, would be locked, everything else would get a limited slider that is locked by, say, 20-30% (in either direction) of your original design.
You could also directly modify (with minimal redesign cost) the tolerances of your engine, so you can decide that with an engine you really like that ends up going into an economy car, but originally designed for a luxury brand, you can reduce quality to help drive the price down, almost without limit. Likewise, you can increase quality for those mass-produced Everyman's Cars you're making to put into a luxury touring car or coup.
That said, in either case, you can only make changes so far in either direction before it's simply impossible to do so, or you're just better off making an entirely new engine to the specifications and waiting the extra time. I imagine that, with some exceptions, upgrades should primarily exist as a stop-gap of sorts, however, until you can properly make a purpose-built engine for whatever role you need it for.
I'd also rather see that upgrades end up taking 1-2 months instead of being so instant - perhaps that means you can lower the price slightly, but I like the idea of needing to pay such crazy prices...you can either throw money at the problem to fix an issue, or you can bide your time. Either work, in a sense, but you end up spending significant amounts of one or the other in order to come out better for it, which is how I think it should be. Money for upgrades, time for new designs, within reason for each but never so much of one as to exclude the necessity of paying anything with the other, as it currently is with the upgrade scheme.