Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 256: An Agile Albatross

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 256: An Agile Albatross

Migrating to Al-Rilma for the latest stable build of Automation created a few problems, to say the least. In particular, many of my Ellisbury-era builds were either unviable or needed major revision. The 1962 AMS Albatross was a clear example of the latter, being largely based on my earlier KMA KS20 aesthetically, but with a fiberglass body and a smaller engine to cater to the requirements of a Discourse challenge. Its 1989 namesake, meanwhile, is now called the EMR ECT4, and has also been revised accordingly.

As for the 1962 Albatross, its lighter weight helps it more easily leverage what little power its smaller engine develops - and vastly improves the driving experience. Being quicker off the mark and through the corners was an inevitability, but in the context of the challenge in which it was submitted, where it was one of a few cars with at least 100 horsepower, it was enough to justify its $18,000 AMU price (the highest allowed) with ease. Key to its performance is the fitment of tubular headers and dual DCOE carburetors, yielding a 110-horsepower output harnessed using radial tires (again, to meet challenge requirements) and a 4-speed manual gearbox (to save weight, and also because a fifth gear would've been overkill given the era in which the car was launched).

Above, from top: Reimagining the AMS Albatross as a 1960s sports car with a fiberglass body made perfect sense, since it more closely aligned with its avian name.

On the other hand, the EMR ECT4 was more faithful to its progenitor, retaining the steel/aluminum body it once had, along with a turbocharged iron-block/alloy-head 16-valve straight-four driving all four wheels via a helical center differential.

Above, from top: The first car that bore the Albatross nameplate is now called the EMR ECT4, with extensive mechanical revisions to make it suitable for Al-Rilma.

In short, both of these cars may have come from different eras and aimed at two distinct market segments, but they are united in their quest to put smiles on drivers' faces at reasonable prices.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 255: Roof Replacement

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 255: Roof Replacement

Sometimes, the default roofline morphing range for a specific body set in Automation may not be enough for your aesthetic needs. Fortunately, the Steam Workshop offers a free 3D fixture mod set (Shadow's Roof Fixture Pack 3) that allows you to insert the turret (which includes the roof, pillars, and windows) from a specific real-world car into your build. The mod actually contains dozens of fixture sets based on Asian, American, Australian, and European machinery; some of these sets also have multiple variants each. Just select the set and variant that suits you best, then insert the window glass material into the window slots while using the default chrome or plastic materials for the window trim, along with either color-coding the roof and pillar slots or applying a contrasting color to them, and moving and resizing the fixture accordingly, and you're good to go.

Taking the '92 Evade (2.53m wheelbase) as an example, there are several options from this massive mod fixture pack that could be viable. In true mad scientist fashion, I examined all manner of possibilities after hiding the roof, pillars, and windows of the base body set, and after several hours, found multiple options, with the following three being the most promising, as shown below:

Above, from top: Three examples of combining custom roof fixtures (showing one variant each from SHD's Euro 00s Sports, Asian 00s Coupe, and American 90s Muscle 3D roof fixture mod sets) with the '92 Evade body set (2.53m wheelbase in notchback configuration, with a wraparound rear window that is not shown here), reshaped and repositioned accordingly to suit the base body set's morphing zone settings. I hid the roof, windows, and pillars by using a fully transparent material for the former two, and some transparent patch fixtures to mask the latter.

All three of the above options (especially the variants shown here) are recommended if you want an expansive yet low-slung glasshouse, but with a different shape from the stock roof.

To be fair, the stock roof/pillars on the fastback variant on this body set (the one without a wraparound rear window, instead having actual B- and C-pillars along with rear quarter windows) can be made quite sleek (though still more upright in side profile compared to the custom options I've shown) if the morphing settings for the A Pillar, B Pillar, B Pillar Adjustment, Lower C Pillar, Roof Detail, Roof Height, Upper A Pillar (vertical and horizontal), and Upper B Pillar zones are all set to zero, as follows:

Above, from top: The sleekest, lowest stock roof settings for the fastback variant of the 2.53m wheelbase '92 Evade body set can give it the cab-rearward proportions of a front-engined grand tourer, but look more upright in side profile compared to the custom 3D fixture roof options shown here, although they will most likely work fine if you would rather have an actual fastback instead of a notchback.

There are other roof fixture/body set configurations that are known to work well in some circumstances, but the three options I've shown here are generally seen as good starting points if you want an accentuated notchback profile. Just make sure the roof fixture chosen overlaps as cleanly with the stock bodywork as you can make it through resizing and repositioning the fixture, without too many unsightly gaps (or ones that are too large).

In short, if a body set's stock roof can't provide you with the right roofline, a custom-made 3D-fixture one can serve as a suitable replacement, provided that it is correctly sized and in the right place.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 254: A New Take on an Old Flagship

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 254: A New Take on an Old Flagship

With the deprecation of the body set that underpinned my earlier 1987/1992 KMA KX12 in the Al-Rilma update (which added the '87 Bossa Nova body sets in its place), I decided to reimagine it from the ground up - as an even more upmarket flagship supercar. However, I realized that it would make even more sense as a hypercar considering how much more expensive it would potentially end up being. Taking my earlier 1984 Wolfram Warlord as a basis, I adjusted the morphing zone settings and reworked the aesthetics (for both the interior and exterior), while also adding 50 horsepower and a six-speed gearbox, along with a full carbon-fiber chassis/body and inboard pushrod-actuated suspension to improve overall performance, with the interior being a fully hand-made item (complete with a high-quality CD/cassette stereo audio system) to further justify its top-tier market positioning.

Above, from top: Reimagining the KMA KX12 and KF12 as a fully hand-built flagship hypercar made more sense with the Al-Rilma update - using the '86 Rosso was the only option given that the '87 Bossa Nova's closest equivalent in size had an engine bay that was too small for the engine I chose to use.

At $100k AMU before options, such excellence doesn't come cheap, but you get what you pay for, which in this case is a lot. Then again, this was never meant for large-scale production anyway.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 253: Of Warriors and Warlords

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 253: Of Warriors and Warlords

Reimagining the Wolfram Warrior and Warlord in 1984 for the sixth iteration of the Automation (or should that be Aragan?) Legacy Challenge wasn't the work of an afternoon - but I made it look like it did by repurposing some of my preexisting designs. By taking my earlier WM Warrior and revamping it to align with the Wolfram brand philosophy, I ensured that I could create two trims of it: the GT (with 275 horsepower and a premium interior) and the GTS (with 300 horsepower and a sports interior, plus forged wheels and wider tires, in addition to a hood-mounted scoop fixture, a taller rear wing, and dual exhaust tips on each side in place of single items). Positioned further above the two was the Warlord, whose mid-mounted 48-valve V12 displaced six liters and cranked out 550 horsepower - good for 218 mph (almost 40 more than the Warrior GTS) thanks to a ground-effect undertray. Having a luxury interior helped justify its upmarket positioning even further, which was justified considering its whopping $80,000 AMU base price (nearly three times as much as a base model Warrior).

Above, from top: While the 1984 Wolfram Warrior GT (red) and its track-focused GTS sibling (yellow) were great sports cars in their own right, thanks to a high-displacement V8, neither of them had the true supercar status and presence of the larger, mid-mounted V12-powered Warlord (black).

All in all, this sports car and supercar blitz, despite being a necessary evil to compensate for the fact that their earlier iterations were based on deprecated or less desirable bodies, was an enjoyable experience for me, as it tied into the company's later history more easily.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 252: An Alternative Automation Build Generator?

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 252: An Alternative Automation Build Generator?

After years of playing with the Automation Build Generator spinner wheel set, I decided to create an alternative configuration, one that relies more heavily on in-game classification than the first one I'd made. To that end, I created the Alternative Automation Build Generator, whose layout is as follows:

Above: An overview of the Alternative Automation Build Generator spinner wheel set.

As with the original Automation Build Generator (and its Advanced variant), you click the Spin All button once, then wait until all six wheels have stopped, before commencing construction of your build (if the resulting combination is valid). The mechanics of the set are as follows:

• The top row contains three wheels, one each for the body type (sedan, hatchback, wagon, SUV, truck, MPV/van, coupe, and convertible), wheelbase (< 2.0m, 2.0-2.19m, 2.2-2.39m, 2.4-2.59m, 2.6-2.79m, 2.8-3.0m, and >3.0m), and layout (front-engined FWD, front-engined RWD, front-engined AWD/4x4), rear-engined RWD, rear-engined AWD, mid-engined RWD, and mid-engined AWD). 

• Three more wheels are found in the bottom row, one each for the interior type (Basic, Standard, Premium, Sport, Luxury, Hand-made, and Race), audio system (Basic/None, Standard, Premium, and Luxury), and respin options (two spaces each representing the other five wheels, plus two more with None on them; if this spinner lands on either of those spaces, no respin is required, whereas all other options lead to a respin of the corresponding wheel). 

• In addition, the Wheelbase, Layout, Interior, and Audio wheels each have a space marked Any, which allows for free choice among all other options on that specific wheel if landed on. Finally, if there is no valid combination of body type, wheelbase, and drivetrain layout in-game as suggested by the result, the current result is invalid and thus must be discarded.

It may be possible to combine this with either version of my earlier Automation Build Generator for a more complex and detailed build, but this new wheel set can also be used on its own if you don't need (or want) to introduce additional variables such as market, segment, trim year, and exterior color into the final result. So have fun and give it a whirl - you're guaranteed to enjoy it as much as the original one in either of its formats!

Hotshot Tales, Part 20: Showing No Mercy

Hotshot Tales, Part 20: Showing No Mercy

How would a "mercy rule" for Hotshot Racing (specifically, Barrel Barrage and Drive or Explode) affect gameplay? I've been pondering this question for a few years now, so here's how it could be implemented compared to the standard rules for both modes, in which the game will let the last remaining human player continue to drive until they run out of time, complete all laps, or are eliminated. While it gives that player a chance to survive as long as they can, I'll admit that even attempting to do so can be a challenge, especially on the more technical and/or narrower tracks. My proposed "mercy rule" removes that problem completely in two ways, as described below.

The first part of this rule deals with lapped traffic during a Barrel Barrage. In longer races, it is possible for a skilled human player to be the only finisher on the lead lap, if not the only one, period. However, any players who aren't on the lead lap (human or not) can still continue racing if they have time left to do so. Unfortunately, this can potentially result in them being hit, or even eliminated, by barrels placed by anyone who is on the lead lap. To avoid this problem, any players who are lapped should be given a small amount of time (probably 3, 5, or 10 seconds) to get on the lead lap, and will be automatically eliminated unless they do so within that time. This rule won't be implemented in Drive or Explode, in which it is impossible to finish a race a lap down on the leader due to its different rules.

The second part of this rule applies to both Barrel Barrage and Drive or Explode, and is much more direct in its approach. With the Mercy Rule on in those modes, if only one human player remains, and there are no bots (CPU-controlled players) left, the game automatically ends, granting an immediate victory to the sole survivor, without allowing them to drive all the way to the full race distance, and preventing them from having to avoid barrels or dropping below the minimum sector speed in Barrel Barrage and Drive or Explode, respectively. However, although it increases your chance of survival in such situations, it also prevents you from being able to humiliate the opposition even further by completing every lap as the last player standing.

If the "mercy rule" were to be implemented for both modes, it would have to be balanced by having the game award additional cash to the player for every lap completed (or at least reached) in those modes regardless of whether or not this rule was toggled on. Turning it on would thus deprive the player of those extra earnings if it were invoked during such a race, making it a matter of balancing risk with reward by giving the player a chance to play it safe and use it, or ignore it and attempt to increase their winnings. In short, it would be useful for less experienced players, but less so for more highly skilled ones, who would rather be brave and leave it off. Regardless, the idea should be something the developers should consider for the sequel - if such a thing were to be made.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 251: A Duo Reimagined

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 251: A Duo Reimagined

Having created the 2013 AAA Crusader, I began asking myself a question that had been on my mind for weeks: Would this have made even more sense as a 2000s build? To that end, I decided to use it as the basis for the 2005 Wolfram Wolfclaw - and I intended it to be the successor to the WSC-95 concept I'd made in Ellisbury a few years earlier.

Above, from top: Although aesthetically derived from the 2013 AAA Crusader, minor exterior changes helped set the 2005 Wolfram Wolfclaw apart from its inspiration, and a 32-valve dual-overhead-cam-per-bank V8 displacing 5.0 liters replaces the overhead-valve 16-valve 6.0-liter unit the Crusader had, thus guaranteeing WES 9 compatibility. The basic mechanical layout (front-engined, rear-drive, with a 6-speed manual transmission/helical limited-slip differential combo as standard) remains unchanged, however.

Broadly similar in performance to the Crusader, the Wolfclaw is slightly lighter, but more expensive due to a greater use of positive quality points, although given its more premium positioning, this extra quality is justified - especially given the increased redline (7500 rpm instead of 6500). In addition, the two-seat interior was retained - a 2+2 would've been too heavy, cramped, and therefore self-contradictory. Moreover, to more closely align with 2000s aesthetic trends, the roof and pillars are now color-coded instead of being finished in a contrasting color. The result is an even more cohesive and competitive offering for its time. However, it wasn't the only car I recently reimagined as part of my two-pronged plan.

Shortly before I finalized the 2005 Wolfclaw, I dusted off an old manufacturer name from my Kee engine days and created the Macale Manta, a mid-engined, V8-powered supercar with 500 horsepower, peaking near its 9000-rpm redline. This, however, wasn't the original specification - as originally built for a forum challenge, it delivered a more conservative 480 horsepower, and lacked the electronic limited-slip differential and adaptive dampers found in the final version on cost grounds, instead using a simpler helical unit with monotube dampers. Also, the color scheme was changed from a red exterior with a red-on-black interior to a deeper blue exterior with a blue-on-cream interior. Finally, its techpool was increased to a uniform +7 in all areas (except for +8 on the gearbox and suspension), which the Wolfclaw matched.

Above, from top: Duplicating the 2005 Macale Manta I'd previously made for a forum challenge to unlock its full potential was a no-brainer - but I had to increase its techpool allocation to what the Wolfclaw would use just to make that possible, especially since it gave me additional headroom left in the budget for more advanced components compared to the original design.

While the Wolfclaw is a better everyday companion due to its superior reliability, drivability, comfort, and safety ratings, the Manta's more exotic mid-engined look, combined with its slightly higher prestige score and greater sportiness rating (helped by taking 3.5 seconds to reach 60 mph from a standstill compared to the Wolfclaw's 4.1, among other things), make it more of a supercar than a grand tourer by comparison, and in an era and segment where competition was as fierce as it had ever been in real life, this is what would've mattered most to customers.

Above, from top: They may not have been direct rivals, but the Macale Manta and Wolfram Wolfclaw were among the most competitive options in the premium sports car/supercar segment in 2005 according to my lore.

In short, envisioning the 2000s Wolfram Wolfclaw as a brawnier, more refined counterpart to the contemporary Macale Manta (which itself underwent significant revisions after a cheaper, rules-compliant version of it had been submitted for a forum challenge) made a lot of sense for me - and allowed me to make direct comparisons between the two, to more easily justify their place in a highly competitive market. There is also growth potential in both model lines that could lead to additional trim levels - track-focused variants, convertibles, and even actual race cars come to mind - but for now, the base model for each of these cars will suffice.