Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 100: An Automationeer's Year in Review - The Gaping Maw of Unfillable Boots
While 2020 will be remembered as either a rough year or a gap year for (almost) everything else, Automation has proven to be the sole exception thus far, especially with regards to forum events and challenges, generally setting very high standards that future contests may struggle to even approach, let alone match or exceed. Here are some of my favorites from the past year, in no particular order.
CSR Rounds 120 through to 129
What do these ten CSR rounds all have in common? It's simple - all of them had an engaging backstory, premise and rule set, and as such they had very large entry lists, with CSR 124 having the largest one of all at a whopping 64 entrants. On the other hand, CSR 120 had the best backstory of any CSR by far. Given that I had matched my previous best result of second in that round, it remains a personal highlight of my life as an Automationeer. Regardless of my results in these rounds (except in CSR 123, in which I didn't enter due to lack of time), at some point in the future, we may consider this period to be a golden age not just for CSR, but all Automation forum competitions in general.
Above: My entries for CSR 120 and 121 - the MAD Corsair GTE (left) and GEC GS2 Turbo (right) - two of my most successful CSR entries in the UE4 era of Automation to date.
My one and only gripe during this time was that the judging phase usually took much longer than the submission phase, which was exactly one week long. However, considering that the hosts' standard of writing was vastly superior compared to previous rounds (as it had to be), this extended delay between submissions closing and final results being announced is most definitely justifiable - and as a consequence, CSR as a whole is all the better for it.
Unfortunately, in one of these rounds (#126), this approach backfired: after a very long delay, its host could not finish the last stage of reviews in time, and instead was forced to release the final results immediately. Nevertheless, this truncated conclusion, unsatisfactory as it seemed at first sight, still produced a worthy winner, as any CSR round should - and as it turned out, CSR 127 would ultimately maintain the high standards of its immediate predecessors, right down to reverting to the tradition of releasing a full set of reviews before the final results.
The last of these 10 rounds also proved to be the best in my opinion. It was originally intended to be a retro-futuristic round, but widespread complaints forced it to be abandoned and relaunched by a different host. With the new version's more liberal rule set accompanied by the most intriguing backstory of any CSR in these ten, it was no surprise that it attracted a diverse array of entries from well over 40 users. I was one of them - and jumped at the chance to enter with a cutting-edge supercar concept (as far as cutting-edge for 1988 was concerned, since that was when the round was set in) - the LCE LP12 AWD Concept.
The LCE LP12 AWD Concept as submitted in CSR 129.
Given the big budget cap for this round, I threw the kitchen sink at it - all-wheel drive, high-displacement normally-aspirated V12, air suspension with adaptive dampers, luxury interior and sound system, etc. And as a futuristically curvaceous cab-forward design, it was the visual antithesis to many of the other entries, which tended to be angular, wedge-shaped designs.
My initial apprehension for fear of min-maxing quickly gave way to relief after finding out that my car would be shortlisted, followed by elation when it was finally confirmed that it would be in the top five. Sadly it could only manage fifth - all four of the other finalists proved to offer similar or better value for money - but it still beat out a multitude of strong rivals en route to the finals.
As a final footnote, the LCE LP12 AWD Concept bears some visual similarities to the Hampton Hydra, which I made for the lore of the company I established for the Generations II tournament (further details of which are shown below). However, given the more primitive state of chassis development in 1988 (compared to 1993, when the Hydra was launched), the LP12 was given a standard steel chassis and aluminum alloy panels with conventional double wishbone suspension (plus air springs and adjustable dampers, in keeping with its role as an advanced concept car) at each corner, in contrast to the Hydra's all-carbon construction, rear-drive configuration and pushrod-actuated suspension.
The Hampton Hydra, an early 1990s hypercar I created to bolster the lore of my Generations II company, the Hampton Motor Group. Notice how it bears some vague visual similarities to the LCE LP12 Concept - especially the shape of the rear spoiler, as well as the low-mounted side intakes, rectangular lower bumper vents, and subtle upper air scoops.
British Rivals: Comeback - A Super Touring Simulated Tournament
While most motor racing series have been placed on hold for months, and in some cases into next year or even beyond, someone saw fit to host a simulated tournament in the Automationverse as if nothing had happened. What set this apart from previous tournaments is that it was preceded by two rounds of submissions for the mid-sized cars that entrants would have to make: one for a concept trim to judge public reaction, and another for a mass-produced version to serve as the basis for the race car - effectively making it a combination of, and a spiritual successor to, the earlier Bavarian Racing Challenge and the Themed Car Challenge. Speaking of which, the rule set for the race car was very similar to that used for actual Super Touring categories between 1991 and 2000. In fact, the tournament proper was a condensed simulation of the 1994 British Touring Car Championship season, but held on only six tracks with two races each. The Super Touring theme of the final stage also ties in nicely to the next challenge I'll be recapping here.
My entry for this three-stage tournament was the MAD Gazelle, a mid-sized four-door saloon powered by a four- or six-cylinder engine depending on trim level. While it was an average performer during the first stage, it fared much better in the second stage, although my lack of knowledge about configuring cars for racing held it back throughout the final stage. Even so, I could still hold my head up high, considering that I finished ahead of so many other users in the final reckoning.
Above, from top: The various trims of the MAD Gazelle as submitted in rounds 1, 2 and 3, respectively, of the British Rivals: Comeback tournament.
All in all, the build-up to the racing tournament made the whole challenge an excellent way to get Automationeers interested in developing race cars again (if they weren't already) - especially since I was tempted solely on the premise of the first stage, which would have been compelling enough on its own. However, the third and final stage was what really sealed the deal for me.
Automationverse Donington Historic Festival
Based on the real-life Donington Historic Festival, this was essentially the Automationverse's equivalent, with entrants being allowed to submit one entry each in up to four of the following categories, which are summarized below as follows:
- Competition Sports Cars (Endurance 50s): Sports cars made from 1950 to 1959, with a maximum engine size of 3000 cc, and running on cross-ply tires no wider than 175 mm.
- Endurance 60s: Sports cars made from 1960 to 1969, with a maximum engine size of 7000 cc.
- Group 4: Touring cars and sports cars made from 1970 to 1981, powered by a normally aspirated engine with a maximum displacement of 6000 cc.
- Group 5: Silhouette race cars made from 1976 to 1982, with engine displacement between 2000 and 6000 cc.
- Group C: Endurance racing prototypes from 1985 to 1983, with a maximum displacement of 8000 cc before 1992, and 3500 cc thereafter; natural aspiration is mandatory from 1992 onwards.
- Group A: Touring cars from 1982 to 1993, built on a body capable of having two rows of seats, powered by front-mounted engines with a maximum displacement of 5000 cc.
- Super Touring: Touring cars from 1993 to 1999, based on front-engined four-door sedans, and powered by normally-aspirated engines with up to 6 cylinders and no more than 2000 cc of displacement.
- Group GT1: Sports cars from 1993 to 1999, with no limits on engine placement, configuration or displacement. Variable-ratio power steering is prohibited in this category.
All categories require the use of suspension incorporating steel (standard or progressive) springs, twin- or mono-tube dampers, and passive anti-roll bars. In addition, all-wheel drive is prohibited in Group C, Super Touring and Group GT1, and active aerodynamics are prohibited in all categories, as are all off-road parts (off-road tires and sway bars, skid plates, manual or automatic lockers).
All cars were judged primarily on how period-accurate their design was, and how logical they were for the classes to which they belonged, with minor bonuses given to the most competitive cars within their classes. Although the relative lack of lore in any of my companies' history prevented me from entering, this was still a very fun challenge for anyone to follow; its sheer number and variety of entries, both between and within categories, would have made it a true (virtual) feast for the senses had it existed in real life. Sadly this particular meet is on hold due to the host's ongoing mental health issues, but it was well worth attempting to launch such an event in these troubled times.
The Inaugural Automation Virtual Car Meet
While not strictly a challenge, the fact that this was effectively a design showcase made it an important event for many Automationeers, and as such I will be including it here. This was an event in which each user could exhibit up to three cars in total, where each car would be accompanied by a brief description and backstory. For the sake of brevity, I will focus solely on my contribution here.
I chose to send in the mandated maximum of three cars: a yellow 1992 DMS Cuneo Spider, a lightweight roadster with relatively modest power and no driving aids; a silver 1985 Hampton Valiant Sprint, a high-performance sports sedan with understated styling, and a red 1970 MAD Corsair GTS, a big and bulky muscle car powered by a torquey big-block V8 engine.
Above and below, from left to right: DMS Cuneo Spider, Hampton Valiant Sprint, and MAD Corsair GTS.
All three of my submissions were completely stock, with fully original parts and no modifications whatsoever. The light and agile Cuneo was the antithesis of the other two cars, which were bigger and heavier, although it could not match either of them for straight-line pace thanks to its smaller, less powerful engine. All three of these cars, however, left positive impressions on anyone who saw them.
In short, the first-ever Automation Virtual Car Meet was an unqualified success. In particular, I enjoyed showing the unique features of each car and taking a look at the other entrants' submissions. It would be a shame if this event turns out to be a one-off - I would expect more meets like this one in the coming months and years. And while I'm at it, I would suggest that some of these events be themed - for example, one meet would be about modern cars, another would have an off-road theme, and so on.
Generations II: The Full Line Challenge
This is a more than worthy successor to its predecessor, and much deeper as well. With all cars from the original Generations challenge obsoleted by the latest major Automation update due to incompatibility, the entire contest was rebooted using full lineups from multiple mainstream manufacturers across several categories and eras. The changing rule sets once again reflected the evolution of passenger car regulations and trends over time. Entrants were also required to accompany their submissions for each round with associated lore, adding further to the depth and backstory.
This one was the most enjoyable of them all, primarily because of how long it took - most challenges took a few weeks to complete, but this one lasted several months, and gave me a chance to establish several decades' worth of lore for my Automation company, the Hampton Motor Group of Warwickshire. I did not enter this contest to win it overall, but I was able to perform well in several categories thoughtful the competition, thanks to some thoughtful engineering decisions. In fact, I managed to claim a few category wins over the course of the series, against my rather conservative expectations.
Unlike the previous Generations tournament, however, this one actually started in 1956 instead of 1946, and instead of ending in 1999, continued well into the 21st century. As such, I chose to give the Hampton company some introductory lore, spanning the first eight years of their existence, from their establishment in 1948 to their entry to the highly lucrative American market in 1956. Also, while most rounds required three submissions, some of them had four - in each case, one per category from each user.
On the subject of users, there were initially fifteen(!) of them who initially entered, including myself, but there was such a long delay between the second and third rounds that some of them unfortunately lost motivation and withdrew later on, although a few new users eventually took their place. However, many of the existing entrants still chose to commit to the entirety of the contest, and I was one of them, since I did not want to lose interest in the challenge one bit and miss out on a golden opportunity to develop my company's lore all the way from its post-war beginnings to the modern era.
One thing I learned from this contest is that it rewards a realistic approach to car design and development - even more so than any other challenge. More importantly, however, it also served as a refresher on a few very important lessons: comfort, reliability and affordability are key priorities for most mass-market cars, with utility vehicles (such as trucks and vans) in particular requiring to be not only durable, but capable of carrying heavy loads for their size. Performance cars, meanwhile, not only have to go fast, but also stop and turn well. Above all, it made me realize that, in general, the most competitive (and hence popular) cars in a particular segment are the ones most suitable for the requirements of the market sector in which it competes, and that retaining a car and/or engine for too long can be detrimental to a company's success, due to either or both of them showing their age against rivals' newer offerings as time goes on - hence, they ought to be replaced with new, fresh designs every so often.
Modern Hypercar Design Showdown
This one stands out not just for its premise, but also for how humorous many of the verdicts accompanying the entries turned out to be. Sure, there were some stinkers, but this was outweighed by the sheer number and quality of the other entries, which turned out to be aesthetic masterpieces. Although I didn't enter this one either for lack of skill, it was still very fun to follow, which is exactly as I had hoped it to be. Sadly the most recent game engine updates created some irreconcilable compatibility issues, so this challenge will most likely have to be restarted with just the finalists from the first stage taking part. Nevertheless, whatever entries - and there were plenty of them - were submitted before the initial deadline provided valuable lessons in how (or how not) to design the exterior of a modern hypercar, even if what lay under the skin barely mattered at all in the end.
The Grunge Run
Reminiscent of the Great Automation Runs of years past, this cross-country outlaw road race was a higher-stakes affair than its spiritual predecessors. As before, each entrant's team (including my own) was accompanied by a deep backstory. In keeping with the roleplaying nature of this challenge, each crew member (of which a team could have up to four, depending on their vehicle's seating capacity) could have two traits (of a possible eight) assigned to them, while their vehicle could be outfitted with two items that could help (or hinder) them throughout the race (although some items were incompatible with others and/or could not be used by certain vehicle classes for balancing reasons). In addition to this, various events (such as police encounters and road hazards) would be simulated by the roll of a 20-sided dice, in which the higher the number rolled, the more successful the encounter or event would be.
Unlike in the Great Automation Runs, the Grunge Run followed an elimination format. There were eight checkpoints, and the last five teams to reach a particular checkpoint (other than the last one) would be eliminated. As for the teams that weren't eliminated after crossing an intermediate checkpoint, they would continue on the race as usual. However, only the winning team would receive the grand prize: a whopping $2.5 million. In addition to this, any unfilled slots left over at the end of the submission period would be allocated to random non-player characters.
After carefully weighing up the countless crew and vehicle combinations, I settled on a fast four-door car driven by a four-man crew, and fitted with a police scanner (for eavesdropping on local police radio transmissions) and a tool box (to make it easier to conduct repairs in the field). I did briefly consider entering a supercar and a two-man crew, but chose not to after realizing that it would have been slower and less effective overall than what I ultimately ended up using, primarily due to the lack of capacity for more than two crew members.
The Warlords' car as entered in the Grunge Run.
Given that this was also a roleplaying challenge on the official Automation Discord Server, I felt like I had no choice but to create my own Discord account just to enter. It was daunting at first, and it took me a while, but I finally caught up to everything that had happened since the race began. Eventually, I discovered that my team had made it around halfway to their final destination at the very least, much to my relief. To take advantage of this new RP opportunity, I chose to engage in the roleplaying session on the Grunge Run Discord server, and interact with the other entrants there. Revisiting the events of the Grunge Run up to the point where I joined Discord was quite entertaining - and even humorous at times.
After an intense first half, I eagerly anticipated the second half of the race - unfortunately, that part of the competition is still in limbo at the time of writing. It would be a shame if this contest was ended prematurely - it would be an immense waste of time and effort. Even so, regardless of what happens to the Grunge Run in the end, I enjoyed being part of it.
