|
Introducing a new trim level is not an option in the current campaign build.
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 00:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 01:18 |
|
|
Yeah, you need to do all your trims at model launch...No launching new trims part way through a model run. As for engines, you should be able to use an engine in multiple models without any trouble, apart from maybe the engine not physically fitting in the second model.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 01:54
|
|
|
Stage rally sounds good to me
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
New Dev Update! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtjVLI0wEy8 More polish, some rationalisation in many of the tabs, plus we now have the option for some  paint schemes and wheel camber! (ok, maybe not the wheel camber) Also mentioned is a tentative timeline for the beginning of the beta test for the new version; it'll be around the end of April.I've also done a little work into my upcoming Automation challenge - so far, I've made (and scrapped) a preliminary set of rules for rallycross, and tried out a few different styles of rallycross track. Turns out, stadium tracks (like what you'd see in the Race of Champions) push the game right up to its limitations, and would probably turn out to be not only broken from a simulation perspective, but not very fun either. I am also disappointed to see that there really isn't a good way to simulate any surface other than tarmac right now, so any rally challenge will have to be designed accordingly. I'm kind of leaning away from a proper staged rally right now, as that would mean I would have to make an insane number of very complicated custom tracks just for one challenge. If any of you recall the SA-GT 1975 challenge, where there were hillclimb events mixed in with circuit races, those hillclimb tracks were unbelievably complicated to make, often having between 10 and 20 times the number of sectors (corners and straights) as your average circuit did in the track editor, and that's just modelling a stretch of road 15 to 20 kilometres long. The amount of work to do even ten rallies with five stages each is unfeasible for just one person to do. Additionally, I want to come up with something where there is more interaction for the participants beyond just turning out a revision or two during the challenge. I do have an idea how to do this in a rallycross or time-attack style challenge, and it would introduce a concept that's prevalent in actual motor racing as well, where the participants actively try to game not only each other, but the system too...
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
See, I'm kind of the other way round. I like the apprehension of being locked into a design, and just seeing how the plan plays out. I don't have time to adjust pit strategy and suspension and gears week on week - hell I just clicked "Race" setup because I ran out of time to entry. I know I may be somewhat unique in this since I work weekends too, but a lack of ongoing changes is very appealing to me. Added into it as well is that tracks are different so to change for one week may mean you need to change back the other way the next; it feels like the goal is unfocused somewhat. A season of short stages would also eliminate pit strategy. I suppose what would be perfect for me (and again, I understand, may not work for you running it or others competing) would be a month of races, a month to revise, a month of the same tracks, a month to revise - for however many cycles. Whether those tracks are all selected to emphasise a design feature (offroad, speed, etc) or geared towards people making an all rounder is something that could be decided on too. I think it could be cool to compare first entries and last entries as well. Like we might find the worst car from the final race rounds would still beat the best car from the year beginning, that kind of thing. Revision points could feature to whatever degree, but I think a sense of continuity (body style, engine family for example) would be good. It feels like I'm falling behind in the current challenge because others have more real-life time, not because my design is bad. And that's okay, it's the nature of this '89 game, but I personally wouldn't mind it being different next time round. I think I should make it clear here that I'm still very glad you're running a challenge. As I said, it's the only time I play Automation. What I'm suggesting may well be (and seems to be) the opposite of what you want to run. So yeah I know you put a lot of work into running these, and don't run a ruleset you don't like. But you asked for suggestions, and that's mine!
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 09:24
|
|
|
It just dawned on me that I did not click 'race' as my suspension base for my entry. Oh well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
simplefish posted:See, I'm kind of the other way round. I like the apprehension of being locked into a design, and just seeing how the plan plays out. Some good things to think about here. Something I could do is run a challenge at a pace more like a real racing season, taking months to finish instead of running over a frantic few weeks. On the one hand it gives everyone more of an opportunity to test and revise if they want, and it will also have the effect of not burning me the gently caress out by the end of the challenge (though I have to say at the halfway point of this one I am still enjoying this as much now as when we started - being a lot closer has made it way more fun). On the other hand though, the playbase on the forums is small enough that a challenge lasting that long could easily get lost in the noise, plus it would run through multiple development cycles which becomes a huge pain in the rear end from my end. I'm also trying to find a way to get the rest of the playbase engaged in one of these challenges as well - to give you an example, in the first challenge I ran in 2015, we had 29 players...kind of a far cry from the seven who are in the current challenge. Either way, I'm just spitballing for ideas right now to do something a little different in addition to the big GT challenges, which will not be going away any time soon. extreme_accordion posted:It just dawned on me that I did not click 'race' as my suspension base for my entry. Oh well. Same with my Group A entry... 
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
With SASC-89 entering its final stage, it is now time to start thinking about what we would like to see in future Automation challenges. I have created a Google Forms survey on that topic; you can find it here: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeltasfC1_5dIrEdg2RU5it9fva6tzg-6JRGqIQIeLzQN07HA/viewform Everyone, even if you've never played in one of my challenges before - hell, even if all you want to do is read about how it unfolds - is welcome to fill in the survey and make their opinions known!
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
New Little Dev Update! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGzBUTU7LMc
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 15:32
|
|
|
And just like that, another Dev Update! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-NLaO1dHlg Steady progress is being made, plus those V10 and V16 engines sound pretty good indeed. On the topic of the next challenge, I've made a tweak to the rules that will tighten up the racing considerably, and also make some of the larger, heavier bodies a fair bit more competitive. Having tested the changes out on the cars submitted for SASC-89, without any other tweaks to any of the cars, the fastest and slowest cars in each class lap one second per lap closer around the Automation test track than with the plain SASC-89 rules, and with some actual tuning it could drop considerably more too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2017 05:14
|
|
|
MrChips posted:And just like that, another Dev Update! I'm so desperate for an update.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
Top Hats Monthly posted:I'm so desperate for an update. I think we all are, but rest assured they are working on things steadily, and hopefully sometime in the next month or so we will see the beta of the new version. Speaking of which, here's a new dev update! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULWTO2MDsNo
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2017 03:27
|
|
|
New little dev update https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTVhGICgvBs Preliminary release date for first UE4-based open beta is the 26th.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2017 06:10
|
|
|
New LDU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpRfLOWHwqg Still aiming for Friday for UE4 version, but it will coexist with the old version until they get the campaign in. Also, LUA calcs will be single threaded for a bit because data corruption.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2017 03:47
|
|
|
And just like that, the open beta of the Unreal update has launched! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIAPTYu_l8U If you;'re in too much of a rush to watch the video (and you should, if only because at the time of this post it's going to be an hour or so still), you access the open beta by opting into it from your Steam library, by going into the properties menu and opting in. Note that you need to use the launcher to access the open beta; you cann ot access it without the launcher. Have fun!
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2017 07:31
|
|
|
A lot of bugs in the UE4 version, but it's still kinda pretty: http://i.imgur.com/IH3nSgm.gifv LATE EDIT: If any of you are trying out the beta version, I strongly urge you to send all your crash reports via the tool, and report any bugs and otherwise odd behaviour in the UE4 Open Beta Discussion / Bugs thread over at the Automation forums. MrChips fucked around with this message at 16:14 on May 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2017 03:11
|
|
|
this just popped up in the AI chat thread: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMAR9mBFN4c I didn't realise that Automation is a Kiwi development. Makes me so proud. :cryingkiwi:
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 03:07
|
|
|
Yep, they are New Zealanders (or in the case of Killrob, a German transplanted to New Zealand). Anyhow, the team is busy rolling out bugfixes and performance improvements; the UE4 version has come a long way so far, but there is still a long ways to go still. Unfortunately, I've been reading their forums lately and it seems as though most of the modding tools will not be present in the first iteration of this new version, so it looks like the next challenge will likely run in the old version of Automation (at least provisionally).
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 04:00
|
|
|
I just gifted the game to my best mate, also a goon. Hopefully he gets amped up about the next challenge
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2017 06:24
|
|
|
New little dev update, emphasis on little: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qel15jaIlno The third release candidate came out a day or so ago, with more bugfixes, but there is still a ways to go before we see a public release. The good news is that when the custom test track function comes back, it will be compatible with all the old tracks from the existing version. This is (for me at least) a good thing, because it would be a monumental hassle to rebuild all the custom tracks I made over the last couple of years for these challenges.  Also, it sounds like for the upcoming dev cycle, both versions will be available, as the lite campaign will not make the current UE4 version (because they are doing an entirely new version of the lite campaign for the UE4 version, probably a little closer to the eventual full campaign).
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2017 17:38
|
|
|
I know I'm a bit late on this, but Automation is 10% off in the Summer Sale on Steam. It's not a huge discount, but that's about as good as it ever gets for this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
New Dev Update! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1L6XkMLcew
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2017 06:00
|
|
|
MrChips - ETA on a new comp or are you waiting to see what happens in the new engine?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
The next challenge will be fairly soon, like in about a month or so. The UE4 version looks like it won't have any tools to make the challenge work for this upcoming dev cycle, so it will be on the old, Kee Engine version of Automation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 05:18
|
|
|
slothrop posted:this just popped up in the AI chat thread: They were Aussie but moved to Kiwistan for better taxes or something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 05:22
|
|
|
wargames posted:They were Aussie but moved to Kiwistan for better taxes or something. Or internet that works?  Personally the NBN hasn't been too bad for me but holy hell has it been bad for others
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2017 08:59
|
|
|
Oh hey this slipped me by, but there's been a little dev update! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bca53k0PQI
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2017 02:57
|
|
|
Another dev update; this time talking about tutorials and scenarios that will be present in the game's next update. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0L_LF7DpqH0 E: The next update will bring a mountain of "new" car bodies and variants as well - right now, we're at 40 or so in the UE4 version, and apparently there are enough validated and ready to go that it will push the body/variant count over 120. Expect the update after the scenarios are finished, which shouldn't be too long from what I gather. MrChips fucked around with this message at 06:09 on Aug 3, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2017 05:02
|
|
|
Dumb newbie question: How do I switch to the Unreal Engine version?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
On the launcher, use the button on the far right. Might need to be in the open beta on steam for it, though
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
Little dev update, caught it late again it seems. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPsbMPTTMII More discussion of the challenge mode and scenarios, as well as a request for help with translations. If any of you are willing to help out, there is more information in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLwjQPLCKz4 And one last thing to note: SASC-90 will begin in two weeks or thereabouts; the thread will be posted in Let's Play on September 1st!
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
I wonder what we can do to get more peeps involved in the next SASC. Personally, I'd propose a customer car system using last year's cars with the only modifications allowed being to the engine tune, gear box ratios and suspension settings. Perhaps limit the amount of teams that can use a specific car to 1 or 2.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
MrChips posted:
Woohoo! I've already been out to Mt Panorama for testing! strictly doing the speed limit  I was trying to replicate my engine designs in the new engine and found there are a few changes, specifically the economy measurement which is displayed as a percentage now instead of grams/kWh or whatever it was before Certainly looks pretty though
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 03:25
|
|
|
Triple A posted:I wonder what we can do to get more peeps involved in the next SASC. Personally, I'd propose a customer car system using last year's cars with the only modifications allowed being to the engine tune, gear box ratios and suspension settings. Perhaps limit the amount of teams that can use a specific car to 1 or 2. That's kind of what I was thinking of doing actually, except I was going to put in the added restriction that only new players could use customer cars. I am also going to do a better job of getting the word out about the challenge too; something I've kind of neglected to do. slothrop posted:Woohoo! I've already been out to Mt Panorama for testing! strictly doing the speed limit The UE4 version certainly does look good, but...there are no modding tools in it yet (and there won't be until all the content from the old version makes it into the new version, which will be a few months still) so we are stuck with the old version for this upcoming challenge.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 07:42
|
|
|
New dev update! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9AipxrdJXU The next UE4 version should be out in about a week and a half to two weeks; unfortunately there are no modding tools just yet, so the upcoming SASC-90 challenge will still be in the old version. Speaking of SASC-90, a quick discussion of some of the changes in it. SASC Offseason News - CRT-90 Debuts At Le Mans Shakedown LE MANS - CRT rolled out the all-new CRT-90 prototype chassis this afternoon at a special shakedown session at Circuit de la Sarthe, with both of last year's Prototype competitors providing engines for the new cars. Right out of the box the CRT-90, with its sleeker lines and improved aero package compared to the CRT-89 from this past season, set lap times in the low to mid 3:30 range, significantly faster than the CRT-89s managed in the race last June. In fact, the CRT-90 was so fast down the Mulsanne straight that it has attracted some attention from the organising body; on the first lap out, both the CMW and NEMW-powered cars both matched last year's top speed of 360 km/h (224 mph), and by the end of the session both cars had set trap speeds far in excess of 400 km/h, with the NEMW hitting the timing gates at 429.8 km/h (267.1 mph). "This dramatic increase in top speed is the result of the SASCO's decision to modify the guidelines for engine cooling in the 1990 yearbook," NEMW's team principal reported, "This change has cut the aerodynamic drag of the new cars by half, and with further refinements we could potentially see them go faster still." CRT will be testing a revised "B" version of the CRT-89 chassis later in the week, intended to help reduce costs and bolster the number of Prototype entries for the 1990 season. Additionally, there are ongoing discussions to have a second customer chassis in the Prototype class. (*this is where you guys come in, see below!) Tomorrow, the SASCO will be testing a selection of the sports cars from the 1989 season as a demonstration of some of the other aspects of the new rules. *SASC-90 Prototype Chassis Design Contest In order to spice things up a bit in the Prototype class, I am looking for another chassis design to run in this class. What your task is, then, is to take the 1980s LMP body, shown here:  And design a worthy-looking entry for the SASC-90 Prototype class. This is only a design challenge; I do not want complete cars for this! In other words, using this body in the 1990 Model Year, make it the shape you think will appeal to me the most, add whatever fixtures you like (only mods in Pyrlix's High Quality Essentials Collection on Steam, FOUND HERE, then submit the body, without engines or suspension tuning to AISheepGame@gmail.com before September 1st! How do you submit your entry? Using the export button like this:  Some things to keep in mind:
I will do the chassis tuning (such as tires, brakes and the like) in order to ensure the end result is more or less equal to my existing prototype designs. Good luck!
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2017 01:57
|
|
|
It'll be great if/when we can make our own racing decals for these.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 08:45
|
|
|
Danny Glands posted:It'll be great if/when we can make our own racing decals for these. I do hope the unreal version of Automation will allow for texture mods in the future just for this purpose.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2017 09:40
|
|
|
Triple A posted:I do hope the unreal version of Automation will allow for texture mods in the future just for this purpose. Let the penis liveried cars rain down upon us...
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
So, the second big change to the rules in SASC-90 is in regard to the tires. Here is a quick explanation of what's going to happen, and why; In SASC-89, you will recall that each class had a maximum tire section width, in an attempt to control lap times between classes. This worked after a fashion, but it also had the effect of severely limiting which bodies were competitive, as some of the bodies had really no hope of meeting the minimum weight restrictions. Since I not only want to see lots of diversity in terms of entries, I also want to see them be competitive too, and what I have planned will help. For SASC-90, there is no hard maximum tire section in the Group classes; instead, a car of a given weight will be allowed X amount of tire section, to be divided front and rear. Here is an example: SASC-89 Car Weight: 954 kilograms Class: Group A Maximum Tire Section: 225 millimetres SASC-90 Car Weight: 954 kilograms Class: Group A Maximum Combined Tire Section: 470 millimetres Now, if you divide the combined tire section front and rear, you would have a tire section of 235 millimetres front and rear. But, this also allows an amount of stagger as well; a difference of up to 30 millimetres will be allowed from the "square" setup. This means you could run up to a 265 mm tire in the rear, as long as you run a 205 mm tire up front. This will make heavier cars far more competitive, and also it will help to reduce the advantage that a mid- or rear-engined car has as well, since traction was often the limiting factor for most of the front-engine, rear-drive cars in SASC-89. In a test I ran at the end of the last season with all the SASC-89 entries, just changing the tires to this new ruleset cut the gap from the fastest to the slowest cars almost in half, with no other optimisation. The other neat thing this change will allow is that there will no longer be a minimum weight in the Group classes, as the tire restriction will have the same effect (not that I expect to see anything less than about 850 kilograms anyway...if you can get under that, well done!)
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 02:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 01:18 |
|
|
In other news: New Little Dev Update, new UE4 beta goes live in a few hours https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i7X0Uqimmo Also, V16s for those of us that bought the Turbo/Supercharged versions pre-Steam (and obtaining them in the future if you didn't) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BS4PQMAxp0 Kilonum fucked around with this message at 05:00 on Sep 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2017 04:56
|
|