Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 108: New Hardware, New Builds

A few weeks ago, I received a completely new PC, and promptly installed Automation and Sea of Stars on it. The first time I booted up both games, the effect was obvious: both of them ran far faster and more smoothly, what with the new PC being even more powerful than the previous one. Not long afterwards, I heard that there would be a spiritual successor to the much-loved Cult of Personality II, but focused on the European market and running from 1945 to 2005. Unsurprisingly, I was quick to jump into the challenge.

This time, I created a new company - an Asian one, with Japanese and South Korean influences, - with the name of KAI, and I showcased one of its cars in each of the six rounds, as stipulated by the rules. Each one of the vehicles I submitted ended up being quite well-regarded, but special mention goes to the K180 Turbo, a small, light and agile rear-drive coupe powered by a turbocharged inline-four developing between 180 and 230 horsepower depending on market and trim level - all at a relatively low price. 

A modern classic in its own right - that's the K180 Turbo in a nutshell.

I submitted the K180 Turbo in the fourth round, and the host described it as "a modern classic in its own right", and for good reason: it became a cornerstone of the tuner culture, especially in the 2000s when seemingly every enthusiast worth their salt wanted to get their hands on them, just to unlock its full potential. But according to lore, as the tuner culture slowly died out later in the decade, stock examples became increasingly highly prized, and are now appreciating in value.

My penultimate submission for this challenge, the K3 RS-T, was also quite well-received. Yes, it was a lot more expensive, mainly because of it being designed as a Group A homologation special (as the lore stated), but with 20 more horsepower than a non-catalyzed K200 Turbo (an updated variant of the K180 Turbo with a larger engine), a six-speed manual gearbox and an AWD system, it was even faster still across the ground. Unsurprisingly, it became even more highly prized than the K180 or K200 ever were, as reflected in its rising second-hand prices (as stated in the fluff).

The K3 RS-T - more expensive than a K200 Turbo, but well worth it in hindsight.

And as my last submission for the challenge, I decided to come up with the K300 Turbo, a larger rear-drive sports car that replaced the K180 and K200. Specifically, I chose the facelifted 1997 model, not just to meet eligibility requirements, but also for its mechanical improvements. Predictably, it too was well-received, and marked a fitting conclusion to the saga. Interestingly, it was the only one of my submissions to be powered by a six-cylinder engine - specifically, a straight-six. I also created factory tuned versions of both the pre- and post-facelift K300, but it's the standard versions that I remember most fondly, for being genuinely good sports cars in base form.

A post-facelift 1997 K300 Turbo in an attractive metallic green.

Thus ended another one of my many lore-building exercises. But this was only the beginning of my Automation experience on the new machine - there would be a lot more to come in the months ahead.

Life Tiles and Action Cards Revisited: A Vital Component of the Game of Life

Life Tiles and Action Cards Revisited: A Vital Component of the Game of Life

Although I have already discussed Life Tiles in some of my earlier posts here regarding the Game of Life, I have yet to make an in-depth discussion about them (or the Action Cards that replaced them, for that matter). So how exactly were Life Tiles introduced to the Game of Life in the first place? For context, consider that the original version of the game was out of step with contemporary values by 1990, a full three decades after its debut. Therefore, the next version would have to change with the times - by rewarding players for being good citizens.

With this in mind, some spaces were now designated as Life Spaces. Anyone who landed on them would receive a Life Tile, but if the draw pile became empty, they could take a Life Tile from another player, unless that player had retired at Countryside Acres. Thus, the only time that a Life Space could not award a Life Tile at all is when all other players have either retired at Countryside Acres and/or have no Life Tiles in their inventories.

The new version of the Game Of Life had three Life Tiles worth $250,000, four tiles worth $200,000, five tiles worth $150,000, six tiles worth $100,000, and seven tiles worth $50,000, for a total of 25 - these values were printed on the reverse side, with black text on an orange background. However, four Life Tiles would be randomly placed at Millionaire Estates at the start of the game (to be given to the richest player who retired there), leaving the remaining 21 tiles to be placed in the draw pile. In addition, each Life Tile had a description on the reverse side, with those of the more valuable tiles referencing more prestigious achievements.

Originally, Life Tiles were highly prized, especially by players who were falling behind in terms of net worth. As such, it was possible for a less wealthy player to earn a come-from-behind victory by gaining a sufficiently large amount of money from their Life Tiles. To reduce the chance of such unexpected comebacks, all Life Tile values were reduced fivefold in 2002, when the Game of Life was updated. Thus, there were now three $50,000 tiles, four $40,000 tiles, five $30,000 tiles, six $20,000 tiles, and seven $10,000 tiles. 

These values were retained when the Game of Life was redesigned yet again in 2007, although the tiles' descriptions were removed, and on the reverse side the black text on an orange background was replaced by white text outlined in black over a yellow background. In addition, the draw pile consisted of 22 tiles, since there were now only three tiles out of 25 that would be randomly selected for placement at Millionaire Estates at the start of the game, and each of the first three players who retired there would receive one tile.

In the current version of the Game of Life (in print since 2013), Life Tiles are completely absent; instead, Action Cards have taken their place. These can only be obtained by landing on yellow Action Spaces, which are intended to represent important events in a person's life. Each Action Card is worth only 100,000 points at the end of the game, but unlike Life Tiles, these items cannot be lost after being acquired. Moreover, each Action Card contains instructions that vary from losing your job to collecting or paying money, in some cases from and to another player, respectively. Finally, at the end of the game, the value of each player's Action Cards will be added to their net worth. 

However, in The Game of Life 2, which is a stand-alone video game not based on any existing board game variant (a first for the franchise), Action Cards have been replaced by three new items: Happiness, Knowledge and Wealth tokens. These can be earned from Action spaces or through a Fate space. Moreover, choosing the Bucket List option upon retirement will grant the player an opportunity to spin for additional tokens during their turn until all other players have retired. Regardless of type, however, they will contribute to a player's final score upon retirement in the same way that Action Cards and Life Tiles did in previous versions - each token is worth 100,000 points, and the player with the most tokens of a specific type will also receive an additional points bonus.

As I have previously described in this series, it is worth noting that a later version of Generation II gave the Athlete career a unique ability in which returning 4 Life Tiles will yield the $100,000 Salary Card, trading salaries if necessary. Also, the Enhanced Mode of the video game adaptation of Generation III has a unique Share the Wealth Card named "Shared Memories", which allows any player who obtained it to take a Life Tile from any other player. However, this card can only ever be obtained at random, and as stated above, is useless if no Life Tiles are in play. In both of these cases, these rules were not part of the original rule sets of the respective generations of the Game of Life in which they were introduced.

This concludes our discussion of Life Tiles and the items that replaced them. Stay tuned for the next post in this series, in which I discuss a persistent housing problem that has plagued the Game of Life for decades - and has only recently been solved once and for all.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 107: The New Cult of Personality

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 107: The New Cult of Personality

The recent re-launch of the Cult of Personality challenge on the Automation forums got me excited about creating a company with lore for the first time in a long time. Similar to the earlier Generations II tournament, this was focused on the American market, but focused on a narrower time period, from 1960 to 1992. With this in mind, I decided to concentrate my attention on some of the most significant cars from the Madison Motor Car Company, an American manufacturer which I had specifically created for this challenge.

My first submission (for the period between 1960 and 1966) representing Madison was the top-end trim of their intermediate-sized muscle car, the 1966 Trebuchet 427. Its 7-liter pushrod V8 engine delivered a searing 330 net horsepower and 440 foot-pounds of torque, yielding a 0-60 mph time of 6.5 seconds and a quarter-mile time of 14.7 seconds - formidable numbers for the era. For the second round (which spans the years from 1967 to 1973), I submitted an even faster and more powerful trim, dubbed HP (short for Handling Package). In addition to having 20 more horsepower, the HP option (introduced in 1970) added front and rear spoilers, specially tuned suspension, alloy wheels, and front disc brakes, with radial tires, a wider front track and rear disc brakes also being available for the first two years in which it was offered.

A 1970 Madison Trebuchet 427 HP (left, in yellow) next to a pre-facelift 1966 model (right, in blue).

The third round (which covered the years 1974-1979) was set in an era where the entire automotive industry was struggling to adapt to new laws that had been hastily passed in the aftermath of the oil crises of the 1970s. To prove a point, I submitted a completely new model that would serve as a halo car for the next decade - the Ballista. My submission was the top-shelf 350 GT model, powered by a 5.7-liter pushrod V8 delivering 205 horsepower mated to a 5-speed manual gearbox. To harness what seemed like a sizable amount of power back then, I fitted vented disc brakes and A-arm independent suspension at each corner. Although the otherwise clean exterior design had to be encumbered by separate rubber bumpers, I managed to integrate them more cleanly than I expected. Then again, the Ballista was all about performance, and with a 0-60 mph time of 6.7 seconds and a top speed of 156 mph, it was never going to disappoint anyone.

Front (above) and rear (below) three-quarter views of the 1979 Madison Ballista 350 GT.

In the fourth round (set between 1980 and 1986), I chose to submit an updated version of the Ballista - the 350 GTS, powered by a 285-bhp fuel-injected version of the 5.7-liter V8. I also made a cheaper variant, the 305 GT, whose engine was a fuel-injected 5.0-liter V8 developing 225 horsepower. All trims had a mechanical LSD and five-speed manual gearbox as standard. In addition, the facelifted Ballista could be distinguished by pop-up headlights, integrated bumpers, a full-width rear reflector, and (from 1986) a central high-mounted stop light. For the first time ever, customers could order the option of a contrasting pinstripe around the lower bodywork, below which a second, different contrasting exterior color could also be applied. To distinguish it from the 305, the 350 GTS also had a more flamboyant aero kit, complete with a large hood scoop and rear wing - helpful when exploiting its improved performance (0-60 mph in 5.7 seconds and a top speed of 170 mph) compared to lesser Ballistas.

1985 Madison Ballista, shown in 350 GTS (above, black/red/silver) and 305 GTS (below, red/black) trims.

For the fifth and final round (which spans the years 1987 to 1992), I submitted yet another version of the Ballista, the 500 GT. Unlike the earlier trims, this was based on a completely new model, redesigned from the ground up, and powered by an all-new, 5.0-liter all-alloy dual-overhead-cam V8 developing 345 horsepower with the aid of variable intake and exhaust valve timing. As befitting its halo car status, the new Ballista came with a raft of new technologies, such as anti-lock brakes, traction control, and dual front airbags, mostly to improve safety, but also to enhance the driving experience. This car is different from my other submissions in this challenge for another reason - it is the only one of the five to have a fully detailed interior. To be fair, it is somewhat rudimentary compared to some of the examples I have seen elsewhere on the forums, but it's a far more comprehensive job than any of my previous attempts at a detailed interior in Automation.

Above: 1992 Madison Ballista 500 GT - a more capable, civilized and curvaceous offering compared to its angular predecessor, and now boasting a menacing yet pretty feline face.

And what did the host think of my submissions? According to his lore compilation, the original Trebuchet 427 proved to be a formidable force on the stock car and drag racing circuit; this was also true of the later HP version, whose chassis tweaks yielded a surprisingly effective road course racer. Speaking of which, it was a role for which the original Ballista had been explicitly designed to excel in - a tradition carried on by the second-generation car, and indeed all subsequent Ballistas, although all Ballista versions after 1992 (and, by extension, anything from Madison after that date) are too new to fall within the scope of the competition.

And so another compelling challenge on the Automation forums comes to a close. But this is not quite the end of the Madison story, for I have one more version of the Ballista to show here - the 540 GTS, introduced in 1995 and powered by a 5.4-liter engine developing a heady 405 horsepower. As I've previously stated, it's actually too new to be eligible, but is even more capable than the 500 GT from which it was derived, thanks to forged alloy wheels with an extra inch of diameter, adaptive dampers, small front and rear spoilers, larger brake discs, and a six-speed manual gearbox.

Above: 1995 Madison Ballista 540 GTS - too new for Cult of Personality II, but worthy of mention here on account of its improved performance.

As a side note, the second-generation Ballista is the first car in a long time that I have made in Automation with a highly detailed interior (which is something I rarely do, and even then, only if I really want and/or have to), and to be fair, it's somewhat crude and rudimentary compared with some other cars I've seen on the forums, but it's my best attempt yet.

Nova Cannons Compared: Infinite Space vs. Warhammer 40,000

Nova Cannons Compared: Infinite Space vs. Warhammer 40,000

Throughout the Infinite Space trilogy of sci-fi roguelikes, there has never been a weapon more feared than the infamous Nova Cannon. It is a standard fitment on the Yellow Kawangi Dreadnought, and is normally unattainable during normal gameplay, unless the player acquires a Timeless Bauble and uses it to create said cannon. When fitted to a capital ship, it becomes the most useful weapon in the game bar none - a single direct hit can destroy any ship outright unless it has enough armor and shielding. It also has a high muzzle velocity and a very long range that is exceeded only by the Cobalt Torpedo Tube and Multi-Missile Launcher, neither of which are as expensive or powerful.

Its only drawbacks are its lack of homing capabilities, a slow fire rate and immense cost (750 Terran credits), although the first two of these can be mitigated somewhat by combining the cannon with an advanced targeting computer such as the Sardion Optimizer. Also, the game does not treat it as a dedicated anti-capital ship weapon, and can therefore automatically target fighters - this is actually a hindrance for the cannon, given that this was not a role for which the weapon has been designed. As a workaround, you can target capital ships manually to prevent this from happening.

Behold the almighty Nova Cannon - a slow-firing and expensive but extremely powerful anti-capital ship weapon.

If the Nova Cannon seems familiar to you, that's because the popular tabletop game Warhammer 40,000 has a weapon with the exact same name. According to W40K lore, it is one of the most powerful capital ship weapons ever to have been conceived by the Imperium of Man. However, like its Infinite Space counterpart, it is inaccurate and must be aimed carefully to ensure a successful hit. Nevertheless, it can still destroy weaker ships with a single direct hit.

Unlike its namesake from the Infinite Space trilogy, the W40K Nova Cannon comes in three major variants. The Mars Pattern is the simplest; it fires what is basically a very large high-explosive shell. The Ryza Pattern replaces the standard warhead with a an even more powerful (and unstable) plasma warhead of immense size. Finally, the Jovian Pattern utilizes exotic vortex warheads that open a rift into the Warp, capable of splitting even the largest vessels in two; however, such ammunition is even more volatile than that which is found in other Nova Cannon variants, thus making the weapon more susceptible to battle damage. It is worth noting that unlike in earlier games (or W40K, for that matter), it is impossible to completely destroy a Nova Cannon in Sea of Stars, although it can be temporarily disabled, thereby preventing it from firing.

On the subject of ammunition, Nova Cannons in W40K can also be loaded with electromagnetic shells that jam enemy communications upon detonation, gravitic shells that implode to create miniature black holes that suck in anything and everything in the vicinity, or Doppler shells that expose the locations of enemy ships by releasing gravimetric waves. The Infinite Space counterpart, on the other hand, carries only one type of ammunition and is mainly an anti-capital ship weapon - one that is far more useful in that role than anything else the entire series has ever had to offer.

Infinite Space lore shows that any capital ship (i.e. any vessel larger than a fighter) can be fitted with a Nova Cannon as long as it has one non-structural turret capable of mounting a heavy weapon - the only capital ships incompatible with this immense weapon belong to the Calatians, Tchorak or Ravians. The former simply do not field any capital ships with large hardpoints; the latter two use integral weapons (which are built into their ships' superstructures) that cannot be replaced. In Warhammer 40,000, however, only six of the Imperium of Man's ship classes are fitted with Nova Cannons: the Victory and Apocalypse class battleships, Mars and Mercury class battlecruisers, Dominator class cruisers, and the Adeptus Mechanicus' Arks Mechanicus.

Above, left to right: A Terran destroyer, frigate, corvette and scout each armed with a Nova Cannon. Below: A Terran frigate just after destroying one Tan Ru Decimator with its Nova Cannon, and is now attacking the other Decimator with its dual Tachyon Ray Guns.

Just to avoid a potential point of confusion, the Nova Cannon is not the same as the Nova Bomb from X-Com: Interceptor, which is a highly specialized (and enormously expensive) missile capable of destroying a star system with a single direct hit - something that neither of the Nova Cannons can do (the Yellow Kawangi have a different, unnamed device for that purpose, but there is no way for the player to obtain or use it). The Nova Bomb even shares its name (and capability) with a superweapon from the Halo franchise - but a detailed discussion of Nova Bombs is best left for another time and post, if I ever choose to delve any deeper into that matter.

Having compared the Nova Cannons of Infinite Space and Warhammer 40K, there is one question left to answer: which version of the W40K weapon is most similar to its namesake? Judging by the characteristics of the Infinite Space version, it most closely resembles W40K's plasma-based Ryza Pattern Nova Cannon. This is evident in the flavor text, which states that it fires a highly powerful neutronium pod which detonates on impact with an extremely high yield equivalent to a thermonuclear warhead - in fact, earlier games stated that the yield was much larger, similar to thousands of such warheads going off at once. This also provides an explanation of why it is utterly unmatched for damage per shot, as I have stated earlier here - in fact, a direct hit against a small ship with little or no shielding tends to be overkill.

Above, from top: In an epic battle sequence worthy of Warhammer 40,000, a relatively tiny Terran Scout, armed with a Nova Cannon and turned into a dedicated anti-capital ship artillery platform, repeatedly bombards a gigantic and well-protected Yellow Kawangi dreadnought until it is completely destroyed, leaving behind an enormous explosion.

In short, there is little in the Infinite Space trilogy that can match the destructive potential of a Nova Cannon. The only items that are more powerful (as far as I am aware) are the Chromium Gong and Limited Vacuum Collapser, but the former can only be used between one and three times before shattering and becoming unusable, and the latter cannot be used more than once (as well as carrying the additional risk of annihilating its user upon detonation unless he/she is out of range). A Nova Cannon, on the other hand, can be fired as many times in combat as its user wants as long as it remains functional, just like any other ship-mounted weapon. Combine the sheer brute force it can deliver with the stealth factor of a Plasma Coil Cloaker, and you have the cheesiest (but most effective) battle strategy on your hands.

Above, from top: The Nova Cannon is not without its disadvantages, but it can quickly turn the tide of a battle if used correctly.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 106: Muscle Bound for Glory

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 106: Muscle Bound for Glory

The past month saw my reputation as an Automationeer improve drastically, since I managed to score an impressive runner-up placing in CSR 136 before going on to do an excellent job of hosting the round immediately after it. Viewed in the context of CSR 136, this seemed unlikely at first, considering that the brief was to design a sporty, retro-themed car for a moderately wealthy client. However, I ultimately decided to reference the exterior design for my CSR 120 entry, and use that as inspiration for the car I would enter in CSR 136: the 2002 MAD Corsair.

The 2002 MAD Corsair - a retro-modern muscle car with a big engine, lots of power and the handling to match.

To my absolute surprise and amazement, the reborn Corsair snagged a second-place finish by virtue of doing everything right and hardly anything wrong. This may have influenced what happened next: with the winner unwilling to host the next round, I chose to take the reins instead, and introduce a theme of (mostly) four-door modern muscle cars. 

After some consultation with potential entrants, I launched the round and, within a week, had received well over 50 cars. However, 20 of them turned out to be ineligible due to rule violations, and of the others, only 10 made it to the final stage, which included a time trial around a circuit from a standing start.

A few days of deliberation followed, after which I finally settled on a winner: the Turból j4 SAV 6.6 CS. It was the right decision, given that it was the sportiest car (mostly because it was also the fastest car around the track) and had no deficiencies whatsoever in any of the other judging criteria.

The winner of CSR 137: the Turból j4 SAV 6.6 CS.

With the contest done and dusted, I could now turn my attention to preparing for the next round... But that is a story for another time.

Game of Life Myths, Debunked

Game of Life Myths, Debunked

Ever since its introduction in 1960, there have been many myths surrounding Hasbro's Game of Life and its spin-offs. Some are specific to a particular iteration, others apply to the whole series. So without further ado, I will explore some of these in the hopes of finding out whether they are true... Or not.

Myth: "Going to college at the very start is mandatory if you have to win."

Fact: Yes, you have a better chance of getting a high-paying salary (and career in some versions) if you go to college, but it's no guarantee of victory, since bad luck can throw a monkey wrench in your plans even if you start out in college. In fact, it's common for a player with a college degree to lose to one who did not have a degree, especially in Generation II where a college degree was not mandatory for any of the higher-paying salaries. It's less likely in all prior and subsequent versions, though, where most (if not all) of the largest salaries could only be obtained through a college degree.

Myth: "Cash on hand is the only factor that matters."

Fact: While the amount of money you currently have is the key factor in deciding your net worth, it is by no means the only one. Life Tiles (in Generations II and II) and Action Cards (in Generation IV) also provide a handy source of income at the end of the game when they are converted to additional cash, and can often make the difference between winning and losing. In addition, house values (from Generation 2.5 onwards, and a common house rule in the original Generation II) and children's gifts (from Generation III onwards) must also be factored in.

Myth: "It is not worthwhile to have children over the course of a game."

Fact: Not entirely true, especially in Generations II and III, where you would receive a Life Tile whenever you land on a Baby space. In addition, children's gifts (reintroduced from Generation III onwards) make having children even more worthwhile. There is, however, one potentially decisive downside: in Generations II and III, there are some payment spaces whose value depends on how many children you have, and if you have a large family (more than 3 or 4 children), you'll end up facing a big bill if you land on any of them. This is especially true for the space which requires anyone who lands on it to pay a whopping $50,000 per child. It was a different story in Generation I, where the children's gifts were much larger.

Myth: "Cheaper houses are the best ones to buy."

Fact: This was true in the original version of Generation II, where houses could not be sold, but it hasn't been this way since Generation 2.5, where the more expensive houses had the most potential for yielding a profit when sold (and you could now select two House cards whenever you have a chance to buy them). In Generation III, it's a great idea to buy the most expensive Starter Home or House you can afford without incurring excessive debt, to maximize profits when you sell them. This was alleviated in Generation IV, where you would always fail to yield a profit if you spun a red (odd) number when selling a house - at best you would break even - but the most expensive houses still have the largest potential profit margins, making them especially worthwhile. 

Myth: "Stocks are overrated."

Fact: In Generation I, buying and owning a stock (which cost $50,000) was a good idea, since you were much more likely to earn money if you did so, what with there being so many high-paying spaces that would only yield cash if you owned a stock. Also, there were two "Play the Market" spaces which functioned similarly to Lucky Day spaces, but required ownership of stocks if you wanted to gamble on them. With a payout much larger than the odds of winning, this made stock ownership even more worthwhile. 

Generation II is a different story, in which the price of Stock Cards remained unchanged, but could now only yield money ($10,000) whenever any player (including its owner) spun the number on its reverse side, and they could be lost upon landing on a Stock Market Crash space. At least there was now a Stock Market Boom space which would allow you to earn a free Stock Card (as long as there was at least one still available) regardless of whether or not you already owned one.

However, Generation III makes Long-Term Investments (essentially Stock Cards by a different name and at a much lower price, at $10,000 compared to $50,000 previously) much more effective. Although each one only yields its owner $5,000 whenever anyone spins its number, the lower price ensures that it can pay for itself in at least two spins, rather than five. Finally, in Generation IV, each career comes with a bonus number; whenever an opponent spins that number, he/she must give the career's owner 20,000 points, and if the owner of that career spins that number, he/she earns 20,000 points from the bank. As such, career bonus numbers are now even more useful than ever.

Myth: "Voluntary career changes are always worth making."

Fact: This depends not only on the circumstances of the current situation, but also on the version you're playing. In Generation II, there were two Night School spaces; if you landed on either of those, paying $20,000 would give you a College Degree unless you already had one. However, if your salary is the highest-paying one available, it's pointless to accept the offer. Also, in Generation III, it was almost necessary to accept the offer to return to school if you had a low-paying career by the time you reached the fourth orange space, but you'd have to pay $50,000 and skip a Pay Day space just to get a chance to trade your current career for a new College Career, and even then, it was always better to take the $20,000 Pay Raise option if you could potentially earn more money from it with your current Career Card. Finally, in Generation IV, where College Careers are even more desirable, returning to school now costs 100,000 points, but is still worth considering if your current career doesn't pay you enough.

Myth: "Losing your job is always undesirable."

Fact: This only applies if your current salary pays out a large amount and you end up replacing it with one that doesn't pay as much, but under such circumstances, the extent to which this is true depends on the difference between the two salaries - the greater the difference, the more painful the career change will be. On the other hand, losing your job may actually help you in the long run if your new salary pays more than your current one.

Myth: "Life Tiles and Action Cards are overrated."

Fact: The exact opposite is true, especially in the first run of Generation II sets where Life Tile values started at $50,000 and went up all the way to $25,000 in $50,000 increments. Even after their values were reduced fivefold, they still remained desirable. This is even truer of Action Cards in Generation IV, since they are all worth 100,000 points each.

Myth: "Having insurance is always a good thing."

Fact: In Generation I, life insurance was a worthwhile purchase due to the presence of several "Life insurance matures" spaces that would yield a handsome payout if a player with life insurance landed on it. However, other types of insurance (specifically, car and fire insurance) could be lost upon landing on certain spaces (such as "careless" or "reckless driver".) As such, life insurance was the best type of insurance to have... Until it was removed in Generation II, where fire insurance was replaced by house insurance. This time, insurance was much less worthwhile, since there are very few spaces on the board that penalize uninsured players, and you are unlikely to land on them anyway. No wonder it got removed in Generation III and was never brought back.

Myth: "The Risky Route is certainly better than the Safe Route."

Fact: This only applies to Generations III and IV (and never to Generations I and II, neither of which offer this option), and even then, only if you take the Risky Route and end up earning more money than you lost. To do this, you need to earn large amounts of money through Spin to Win and/or a Lawsuit (in Generation III) or land on the Collect Spaces but not the Pay Spaces (in Generation IV). As such, if you are not confident about your chances, then you can always select the Safe Path instead and aim to earn some extra Life Tiles (in Generation III) or Action Cards (in Generation IV).

Myth: "The highest salaries are the most desirable."

Fact: While this was generally true in Generation I, and also in Generations III and IV, this wasn't always the case in Generation II, where salary cards were separate from career cards and could be traded between players. In particular, the $100,000 salary card was the most coveted of all, to the point that over the course of a single game, players would fight fiercely over it if one of them managed to acquire it. Under such circumstances, the $90,000 salary (the second-highest-paying one) was actually preferable, since it would most likely be ignored, thereby giving the player who held it a better chance of winning through sheer consistency.

Myth: "Always sue the highest-paid opponent."

Fact: In Generation III, it might be tempting to do so, but if you do it too often, you could end up swapping one major rival for another, and that other player could even end up in the lead as a result. A better strategy would be to sue the opponent with the highest net worth; once he/she has dropped back out of the lead (relative to other opponents), you should start suing the next opponent to take that place.

Myth: "Use your Share the Wealth Cards at the first opportunity."

Fact: In Generations I and III, Share the Wealth Cards could only be used once. As such, they should be reserved for when you need them the most. For example, Collect Cards are best used when an opponent receives large amounts of money from a Collect Space, while Exemption Cards should be reserved for when you get sued or stand to lose lots of cash to an opponent who has just used a Pay or Collect Card on you.

Myth: "Millionaire Estates is always a better place to retire than Countryside Acres."

Fact: Not always true - in Generation II, only the richest Millionaire Estates retiree would receive 4 additional Life Tiles, unless there was a tie between the top two such players, in which case those tiles would be shared evenly between both players. The main drawback to retiring at Millionaire Estates is that Life Tiles belonging to anyone who retires there are still in play, and can be taken by other players if the draw pile runs out. Moreover, even if you do end up receiving the 4 bonus tiles, it won't always be enough to guarantee victory (although it often is). On the other hand, retiring at Countryside Acres would not only give you one Life Tile (if any are still available), but also prevent other players from taking any of yours.

For Generation III, the rules were changed so that the first three players to retire at Millionaire Estates would receive only one Life Tile each. This made Countryside Acres even more favorable than before; however, if you did not have the highest net worth among all players, it would still be a good idea to retire at Millionaire Estates, since players tended to take Life Tiles from the wealthiest opponents.

However, Generation IV removed any benefits (or drawbacks, for that matter) to retiring at either Countryside Acres or Millionaire Estates. I despised this change since it removed a key strategic element that had been around for decades. Unsurprisingly, they were replaced by the Pension and Bucket List options in The Game of Life 2 - but that's a story for another time.

Myth: "The winner is always the player who retires first."

Fact: This is the most common misconception of the Game of Life, especially among younger players. However, it is most definitely not true, and in fact, in Generations I and II, there was no incentive whatsoever to be the first player to retire. On the other hand, in Generation III, each of the first three players to retire at Millionaire Estates would receive a Life Tile. In addition, Generation IV finally introduced a proper incentive for early retirement: the first, second, third and fourth players to retire would receive 400,000, 300,000, 200,000 and 100,000 points respectively. Even then, these retirement gifts are not always enough to guarantee victory on their own.

Myth: "Lucky Day and Spin To Win are more trouble than they're worth."

Fact: The exact opposite is true - in Generation I, the payout (15:1) was much higher than the odds of winning (5:1). It's more complicated in Generation III, though. Normally, the odds of winning and the payout are both 10:1. However, a Spin to Win Card can improve the odds of winning to 5:1 or 2:5 depending on the type of card used. Finally, in Generation IV, the chance of winning is again 10:1 by default, but the player who landed on a Spin to Win space has better odds at 5:1 due to having an extra token to use. Moreover, no points can be lost in Spin to Win, nor does the winner of Spin to Win gain any amount of points other than 200,000 under any circumstances. Of course, none of this applies to Generation II, which doesn't have these mini-games at all.

Myth: "If you have to buy a Stock Card or Long-Term Investment, do it as soon as you can afford to do so."

Fact: Unlike the other myths being discussed here, this one is always true, because the sooner you buy stock (or invest, if you're playing Generation III), the more opportunities you will have to make money from it. Generation IV avoided this problem by giving every career a Bonus Number from the get-go; this trend was carried over into the Game of Life 2.

Myth: "The Doctor is the best career to have when playing under the Enhanced format."

Fact: Nothing could ever be farther from the truth - in Generation II, there were several other careers that were more lucrative, and in Generation III, the Athlete could reach a theoretical maximum salary of $240,000 in an Enhanced Game, whereas the Doctor's theoretical maximum salary was just $195,000.

Myth: "Winning the Game of Life is based purely on blind luck."

Fact: Although the Game of Life is mainly a game of chance, there is also plenty of skill involved, to the point that you'll need to understand the finer details of the game, regardless of which version you're playing. I have previously covered these aspects in an earlier post, so there is no need to discuss them here.

These are some of the best-known myths and misconceptions about Hasbro's Game of Life. Now that I've debunked them, I hope you end up being a better player - and also a wiser one.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 105: Electric Problems

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 105: Electric Problems

With the electric car gaining in popularity with every passing year, I would like to take some time to ponder on why Automation does not support this form of propulsion. There are a few reasons for this. The first one is that back in the earliest days of the Kee era, electric cars were nowhere near as common as they are today, and so the developers decided not to implement EV powertrains, nor have they done so in the UE4 era. The second reason is complexity: implementing electric drivetrains would require a lot more coding than what the game already has, and even after the next game engine update is released, such complications are undesirable. 

It is for these reasons that all EVs shown thus far in the Automationverse, whether created for company lore or for competitions, or both, are nothing of the sort underneath the skin. Instead, a placeholder internal combustion engine is chosen, after which the chassis and trim elements are selected accordingly, as they would be for any other car. This glaring lack of support also partially explains why I chose not to make (or rather simulate) any purely electric vehicles when creating the lore for the Hampton Motor Group during the Generations II challenge, the other reason being that the game does not continue beyond 2020 - a patch to extend the timeline further, to the years 2021-30 would be most welcome, but that's a subject for another time and post.

Game of Life Careers, Ranked

Game of Life Careers, Ranked

Until now, I have never attempted to rank the various careers in most versions of the Game of Life, simply because usually, each career has a set salary (either fixed or variable) tied to it. However, this wasn't the case in Generation II, where the careers could be paired up with one of multiple salaries (or one of any of those in the original version), and even had spaces on the board that were associated with them. If you had the corresponding Career Card for that type of space, any player who landed on it would have to pay you instead of the bank, and you would not have to pay anything whenever you landed on any spaces that matched your career card.

With this in mind, here is my definitive ranking of all nine careers in Generation II of the Game of Life:

1. Accountant: With 4 associated career spaces and the ability to prevent its user from paying taxes, this is certainly the best career to have. It is even more useful if your salary is lower than those of your opponents. Its only drawbacks are that it requires a college degree or Night School to obtain, and one of them can only be reached on the right-hand branch of the second fork on the board. For this reason, some players deliberately avoid it just to seek out a tougher challenge.
2. Athlete: Almost as useful as the Accountant, this career has five associated spaces that pay out a fixed total of $185,000. However, while it does not "protect" its user from taxes, it has a major advantage over the Accountant in that it does not require a college degree, effectively making it potentially available sooner. Another reason for its runner-up finish in my rankings is that none of its career spaces are on a particular branch of either fork on the board.
3. Artist: This has a total of four associated career spaces paying out a total of $205,000. However, one of these (the one that requires you to pay $35,000) can only be reached from the left-hand branch of the second fork on the board. Even with this shortcoming, this is still considered to be one of the best careers to have in Generation II of the Game of Life.
4. Travel Agent/Computer Consultant: Like the Athlete, the Travel Agent (Computer Consultant in the 40th Anniversary version onward) has five associated career spaces. However, they only pay a total of $160,000, slightly less than those of the Athlete. Even so, this is one of the better choices you can find in this game. Unfortunately, an overpowered revision in Generation 2.5 (which allowed it to collect a whopping $50,000 every time the spinner got stuck or fell off its track) led to it being nerfed to the point of near total uselessness for Generation III.
5. Superstar/Entertainer: As with the Doctor below, this career has three associated career spaces, but they only pay out $155,000 in total. One of these is found only on the left branch of the second fork, but it doesn't pay out much ($15,000 to be precise); if it paid out more, this career could have been ranked even lower (or higher depending on your view). As it stands, however, it sits right in the middle of the list.
6. Doctor: Although it has only three associated career spaces paying out $135,000 in total (with one of them on the right-hand branch from the first fork), this is still not the worst choice among the nine available. It does, however, require a college degree, which is why I had to put it in sixth. Apparently Hasbro took notice of this and buffed it for Generation 2.5 so that it was only compatible with all but one of the five highest-paying Salary Cards (see below).
7. Teacher: Why did I choose to rank this career so low? Because it is unique in that the potential earnings from its career spaces (of which there are three) are dependent solely on the number of children your opponents have. As such, this career becomes almost totally useless if none of your opponents have children, if it were not for the fact that you won't have to pay for your own children's tuition fees either. At least in Generation 2.5 it no longer requires a college degree - this change was implemented to avoid an unresolvable career shortage if no standard careers were available, and would retroactively become a common house rule in the original version.
8. Salesperson: In all honesty, this is not a good choice at all. Not as bad as its incarnation in Generation III, where it was nerfed to the point where it became the very worst career you could have, period, but still ranked very low, because its four career spaces pay out a total of - wait for it - just $70,000 (of which $25,000 comes from a space on the left-hand branch of the second fork on the board). Its only redeeming feature is that it does not require a college degree, but then again, neither do most of the other careers.
9. Police Officer: This is, by far, the worst career in Generation II, regardless of salary - it has only one associated career space, which pays out just $15,000, and even then, it's only found on the right-hand branch of the second fork. It does, however, have one thing going for it: the unique ability to collect $5,000 from any opponent who spins a 10. The amount earned from this ability would be doubled in Generation 2.5, but the addition of special abilities to all other non-college careers made it seem even less significant by comparison.

On the subject of special abilities, when more of these were introduced in Generation 2.5, this shook up my career rankings significantly. Here are the changes:

• The Athlete is now the #1 career to have now that the Accountant can no longer use green or yellow Salary Cards - the former's ability to discard 4 Life Tiles to upgrade to a yellow Salary Card (of which there is only one, valued at $100,000) puts it even further in the lead.
• The Entertainer can't use green or yellow Salary Cards by default either, but it can upgrade to the $100k Salary Card immediately after two identical numbers greater than 7 are spun, putting it in a close third, ahead of the Artist.
• The Computer Consultant is, at worst, a close second behind the Athlete since it collects $50,000 every time the spinner gets stuck between numbers or falls off the track entirely. Unsurprisingly, this made some people consider it overpowered, and I even considered disregarding this ability entirely and replacing it with a house rule in which it received $10,000 every time two identical numbers less than 4 were spun.
• The Accountant has dropped to fourth overall; as a College Career, it cannot have a special ability, and now requires $125,000 of debt instead of $50,000.
• The Artist is now ranked fifth overall since several careers have leapfrogged it in overall usefulness as described above. Even the fact that it can collect $10,000 from any opponent who spins a 1 does not help its cause much, if at all.
• The Doctor remains at sixth overall, but despite also being a College Career (which now requires taking on $125,000 of debt), it is now closer to the Accountant since it can only accept green or yellow Salary Cards.
• The remaining careers' positions also remain unchanged despite the effects of their special abilities. At least the Teacher's ability to use the special ability of another unused Career Card makes it a more viable option now.

Notice how I avoided ranking the careers in any other version of the Game of Life - until now, that is. The reason for this is simple: In all other versions, salaries are always tied to careers. This makes ranking the careers in those versions much more clear-cut, especially in Generation III where the Doctor was the best career (of any kind) to have, period, followed closely by the Lawyer, while the Athlete and Entertainer rounded out the top four. Further down the field are the Veterinarian, Accountant, Computer Designer and Police Officer, with the Teacher, Hair Stylist, Mechanic and Salesperson at the very bottom. However, the Enhanced Mode of the video adaptation of Generation III switches things up by reintroducing special abilities, and their effects on the rankings are shown below.

• The Athlete has a 2x multiplier for any and all Pay Raises it earns, allowing it to potentially earn even more money than any other career, including the Doctor and Lawyer. Also, as a standard Career, it does not require debt to select at the start of the game; therefore, anyone who starts with it will not be rendered immediately ineligible for the Debt-Free achievement. In short, it has now become the most useful career in Enhanced Mode, period.
• Among College Careers, the Lawyer is now the most useful one, since anyone who uses it can collect $10,000 from the winner of a Trial mini-game between two opponents, and will also receive a bonus whenever they play that mini-game.
• The Doctor is now only the third-best career overall, but is still a solid choice, and even more so now that it can collect medical fees from other opponents, without having to pay for them as well, as was the case in Generation II.
• The Entertainer can play the Pay Raise mini-game whenever two identical numbers greater than 7 are spun on consecutive turns, increasing its earnings potential even further, and in some cases, matching the Lawyer and Doctor. As such, it is much more competitive now compared to the standard rule set.
• As was the case in Generation II, Accountants no longer need to pay taxes, but this time, they can't get tax refunds either, although they can collect $5,000 from the bank whenever other players pay taxes.
• Veterinarians can now collect a Life Tile upon reaching a Pay Raise space, as long as there are Life Tiles still available.
• Computer Designers can select two numbers during Spin to Win instead of one. Given that players have only one number to choose from during Spin to Win under the Enhanced rule set, this can be quite useful.
• Teachers no longer have to pay to return to school, which comes in handy if they want to trade in their current career for another one.
• The Police Officer's special ability (which allows them to collect $5,000 from any opponent who spins a 10) is unchanged.
• Hair Stylists now get to spin for baby gifts whenever an opponent lands on a baby space, with the value of the gift determined in the same way as wedding gifts. Even so, this career is still one of the worst options available due to its low salary.
• Mechanics can now collect $10,000 from any opponent involved in an overtaking maneuver, i.e. when a player passes another on the board. However, given the Mechanic's low salary, this may not help them very much in the long run.
• The Salesperson can now collect 10% of the price of any house bought by an opponent - a handy boost considering that this career is the least lucrative one in Generation III.

In short, the changes to Generation III for Enhanced Mode have made for a less predictable game - and potentially a more enjoyable one. But regardless of what version of the Game of Life you are playing, the most important thing to remember is that the highest-paid players tend to win most of the time - but not always.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 104: Engine Configurations Revisited

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 104: Engine Configurations Revisited

As of LCV 4.1.17, Automation currently allows players to select from one of 12 engine configurations. Some of these are inline configurations, where the cylinders are placed in a straight line; others are V configurations, where the cylinders are arranged in two banks forming a V-shape when viewed from the longitudinal axis. There are also flat configurations, in which the cylinders are positioned such that they face outwards and move in opposite directions to those on the opposite bank. Here is a brief refresher on each of them.

• Inline 3: The cheapest, smallest, lightest and roughest of all the configurations, it cannot make much power, but is ideal for small and cheap economy cars. This is also the only option for which turbocharging was never implemented during the Kee engine era.
• Inline 4: A bit larger, smoother, heavier and more expensive than an inline 3, but more powerful. Its low cost makes it a worthwhile option for many mass-market cars.
• Inline 5: Longer than an inline-4 but shorter than an inline-6, and falling halfway between the two in all aspects, this configuration was added in the transition to UE4. It is available from 1970 onwards.
• Inline 6: The longest inline engine configuration, and the most prestigious one of its kind. It is better suited to turbocharging than any other, since the single turbo receives exhaust gases from six cylinders (although twin-turbo setups for this layout have not been implemented yet).
• V6: A compact layout that is not as smooth as an inline-6, and is more expensive to develop, but takes up less longitudinal space, making it ideal for smaller engine bays. It can have either a 60- or 90-degree bank angle, with the latter being wider and less smooth but having a lower center of gravity, and is more easily developed if you have familiarity with a 90-degree V8 (see below).
• V8: A large, expensive and prestigious layout smoother than a V6 (but not to the same extent as an inline-6). It, too, can have a 60- or 90-degree bank angle, and if you choose the latter, you have the option of fitting a flat-plane crankshaft, which sacrifices smoothness for high-end power.
• V10: Sandwiched between the V8 and V12 in all aspects, this configuration is unlocked from 1985 onwards, and can only have a 90-degree bank angle. It is commonly used for applications where a V12 is too large and a V8 is not prestigious enough. As with the inline-5, this configuration was not present in the Kee era, but was introduced in the UE4 version.
• V12: Even smoother and more prestigious than a V10, but also larger, more expensive, and heavier, this is a configuration most often found in high-priced luxury cars and supercars, and can only have a 60-degree bank angle. It is also the most expensive configuration you can use unless you have an early access key for the V16 engine (see below).
• V16: The largest, heaviest, smoothest and most prestigious configuration available, and even then, only if you have the early access key to unlock it. Due to its extreme size, there are few bodies that are physically capable of accommodating it.
• Flat-4: A horizontally opposed engine with 4 cylinders. It has a lower center of gravity than an inline-4, but is the worst choice for turbocharging because each turbocharger only receives exhaust gases from two cylinders.
• Flat-6: Similar to a flat-four, but with three cylinders per bank instead of two, and is therefore more suitable for turbocharging (though not as much as an inline-6). It is more expensive than a flat-4, but smoother.

There are other engine configurations in real life, of course, but since the above 12 layouts are the only ones present in Automation as of LCV 4.1.17, I have only chosen to cover those in this summary.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 103: A New Guide to Chassis and Suspension Types

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 103: A New Guide to Chassis, Engine Placement, and Suspension Types

Having already explained the various body and chassis materials used in Automation, I shall now elaborate on the chassis, engine placement and suspension types available in the game. Considering that the fan-made guide on the Automation forums was abandoned long ago, I felt that I would like to pick up right from where it left off. To start off with, here is a list of chassis types as of the most recent build (LCV 4.1.17).

List of Chassis Types in Automation

• Ladder: This consists of a rectangular frame shaped like a ladder, to which the bodywork is attached. It is the cheapest option by far; however, it provides less safety and rigidity than any other type, and is also the heaviest option available. Moreover, it cannot be made of anything other than steel. Nevertheless, its oversized nature makes it durable and well-suited to off-road applications.
• Monocoque: Utilizing a superstructure shaped like the car it is built on, and to which the panels are attached, this is the most commonly used chassis for modern cars. Although it requires a larger factory and is more complex, expensive and difficult to develop than an equivalent ladder frame, it is lighter, stiffer and safer than any other chassis type, and is compatible with any material. In fact, this is the only kind of chassis that can be made out of carbon fiber, albeit at immense cost.
• Space frame: Consisting of a network of tubes that vaguely resembles the car's shape, it is lighter and stiffer than a ladder frame, though not to the same extent as a monocoque. It also requires a smaller factory, although it is more expensive to build and develop, and must be made of either regular or galvanized steel. As such, it is commonly found on low-volume sports cars, especially in the earlier years.
• Semi-space frame: A novel kind of chassis which combines a unitary passenger compartment with front and rear space frames. It is easier to build than a pure monocoque, though not as light or rigid. It can only be made from aluminum and is not available until 2001, effectively limiting its use to high-end modern cars.
• Light truck monocoque: Combining a unitary passenger compartment with a ladder frame for the cargo area, this is a compromise between the durability of a ladder frame and the superior safety and lightness of a true monocoque. This makes it well-suited to light-duty trucks.

Next is a list of engine placement options.

• Front transverse: This places the engine ahead of the passenger compartment and perpendicular to the longitudinal axis. It is a space-efficient configuration that is compatible with front- or all-wheel-drive (unless using a torsion beam rear suspension - see below) and is therefore suited to many mass-market cars, especially smaller, low-budget ones. However, it is less ideal for accommodating longer engines, especially straight-sixes.
• Front longitudinal: Unlike the front-transverse placement above, this places the engine ahead of the passenger compartment and parallel to the longitudinal axis. It is compatible with rear-, all-, and in some cases, front-wheel-drive, as well as 4x4. However, it is less space-efficient than a transverse set-up, and is therefore better suited to larger cars, especially executive, sports and luxury cars.
• Mid transverse: The first of two mid-engined configurations, this places the engine between the passenger compartment and ahead of the rear wheels, and parallel to the axles. It is ideal for small and light sports cars which do not need a large engine bay, but is not compatible with AWD in Automation.
• Mid longitudinal: The second of two mid-engined configurations, this differs from the mid transverse set-up in that the engine is placed perpendicular to the axles. It is a common arrangement for high-performance sports cars, supercars and hypercars, especially since it is compatible with AWD. Both mid-engined configurations place more weight over the rear axle than any front-engined configuration, and should be set up accordingly.
• Rear longitudinal: A rear-engined set-up places the engine over the rear axle. While it is a viable arrangement in the earlier years for smaller cars, it places even more weight over the rear wheels than any other configuration, aiding traction but also compromising drivability due to the effects of weight transfer.

Last but not least, here is the list of suspension types available in the game. Unless otherwise stated, all of these options are available only for rear suspension.

• Solid axle (leaf-sprung): This relies on a pair of bow-shaped metal springs attached to each end of the car at one end of the spring, and to a solid bar or a differential. It is cheap, simple and capable of supporting heavy loads, as well as being very robust off-road, and can be fitted to front and/or rear axles. However, its weight and dependent nature compromise the car's ride and handling.
• Solid axle (coil-sprung): As above, but with coils for springs, and uses a set of links between the axle and chassis, thereby providing better comfort and handling compared to a leaf-sprung solid axle. It, too, can be fitted to front and/or rear axles.
• Torsion beam: Unlike other suspension types, a torsion beam is semi-independent and can only be fitted to the rear axle of a front-wheel-drive car. It consists of a set of rear-facing trailing arms supporting the rear wheels, and are linked together laterally by a hollow metal beam. It provides decent levels of comfort and handling when tuned correctly, and takes up little space, as well as being cheaper to build compared to a fully independent rear end. However, it cannot be combined with a driven rear axle, and as such is not recommended for larger, more upmarket cars.
• Semi-trailing arm: This is the simplest type of independent rear suspension. Comprised of two rear-facing Y-shaped trailing arms attached to the rear axle via a vertical spring/damper combination, it is heavier and less capable of supporting heavy loads than a torsion beam setup, but provides slightly better comfort and handling, although it is not as good in this regard than a more advanced setup. Therefore, it is well-suited to low-budget applications for which handling is a priority, especially in the early years.
• MacPherson strut: Uniquely among suspension types, a MacPherson Strut can only be used on a front axle (except on some mid-engined bodies where it can be used for rear suspension) as long as the bonnet (hood) line is high enough to accommodate it, and cannot be fitted to a ladder frame chassis. It has one lower control arm, attached via a pivot under the wheel hub at the outer end, and bushings near the bottom of the chassis at the inner end. It takes part of its name from the strut attached to a reinforced wheel arch section, which is called a strut tower. It takes up less space and costs less to manufacture than a double-wishbone front suspension (see below) but does not provide as much ride comfort or handling precision, and as such is a good choice for most mass-market vehicles, especially low-budget ones.
• Double wishbone: One of the few suspension types that can be fitted to front and/or rear axles. It consists of a pair of A-shaped pivoting arms called wishbones, linking the top and bottom of the wheel hub to pivot points on the chassis. With its ability to provide superior wheel alignment compared to less sophisticated designs, it is most commonly used in high-performance, racing, and luxury car applications, where its greater cost and complexity are considered acceptable trade-offs for its dynamic advantages.
• Multi-link: This is a highly advanced design that utilizes several (usually at least five) pivoting arms called links to ensure precise rear wheel movement. This provides even better ride and handling potential than a double wishbone set-up, but at the expense of even higher cost and complexity, making it ideal for premium cars where its dynamic benefits are considered desirable. In addition, it only becomes available from 1990 onwards.
• Pushrod: This is the most advanced, complex and expensive suspension type available in Automation. It is similar to the double wishbone design in principle, but mounts the spring/damper unit horizontally instead of vertically, and connects it to the lower wishbone using a pushrod and rocker arm assembly. This mounts the spring and damper inboard, reducing unsprung mass and improving aerodynamics and weight distribution, with unmatched potential for fine-tuning. Being based on a double wishbone design, it can be fitted to the front suspension of mid-engined cars. However, its extreme complexity generally precludes its use in all but the most expensive supercars and race cars, and as with the multi-link setup above, it is not unlocked until 1990.

This concludes the second part of my guide to the chassis options in Automation.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 102: Chassis and Body Material Options

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 102: Chassis Options Explained

With the guide to chassis options on the Automation forums now outdated due to numerous game engine changes, I have seen fit to create my own guide to reflect the latest version of the game. I'll start off with a brief explanation of the various body and chassis material options available as of the current version.

List of Body and Chassis Materials (current as of UE4 build LCV 4.1.16)

These are the various materials used to create the basic structure and bodywork of your vehicle. They are as follows:

• Steel (chassis and body material): Standard steel is the simplest and cheapest type of steel, and is generally viable for the body and chassis for most mass-produced cars until the late 1980s or early 1990s. However, its environmental resistance is poor, and as such it is recommended mainly for low-budget vehicles.
• Treated steel (body material only): Available from 1994 onwards, this is a kind of steel that has received basic protection against corrosion. It is slightly more expensive and difficult to develop than regular steel, but is still viable for newer cars that have been built on tight budgets.
• Galvanized steel (chassis material only): This type of steel has a zinc outer coating that protects it from corrosion. However, unlike treated steel, the galvanization process used to create it cannot be applied to bodywork. Even so, the fact that it is only slightly more expensive than standard steel makes it popular for low-budget builds, even for more modern vehicles.
• Corrosion-resistant steel (chassis material only in LCV 4.1.11, previously also available for body panels): Employing more advanced rust protection techniques than treated steel, this is a more expensive option, but one that is lighter than lesser steels. As such, it should be primarily reserved for mid- to high-priced premium cars, especially those made in the 1980s or 1990s, at least until more advanced materials become available.
• AHS steel (chassis material only): Advanced high-strength steel is more thoroughly engineered than lesser steels, making it stiffer, lighter and stronger. However, it is even more expensive than corrosion-resistant steel, and is only available from 1996 onwards. Therefore, it should be primarily used for the chassis of modern high-end premium cars.
• Light AHS steel (chassis material only): This is similar to AHS steel, but is even lighter, and costs even more due to having been subjected to very thorough testing during development. It becomes available from 2001 onwards.
• Partial aluminum (body material only): A mix of mostly steel bodywork with aluminum used for panels that are more easily manufactured - usually the doors, hood and trunk lid. Available from 1985 onwards, it becomes more common in later years.
• Fiberglass (body material only): This is a lightweight material commonly used for low-volume sports cars. It is not as safe or prestigious as any kind of metal, however, and is laborious to manufacture. Early Kee-based versions of Automation also had polymer plastic as a body material option; this was removed in later builds for being too statistically similar to fiberglass.
• Aluminum (chassis and body material): As a body material, it is available from the beginning; however, as a chassis material, it is not unlocked until 2000, and even then, only in the form of a bonded monocoque or a semi-space frame. Lighter and more resistant to corrosion than any kind of steel, it is also more expensive and difficult to manufacture, especially in the earlier years, and is therefore best used for high-end sports and luxury cars.
• Partial carbon fiber (body material only): Similar to aluminum bodywork but replaces some body panels with carbon fiber equivalents.
• Carbon fiber (chassis and body material): The most expensive and prestigious material of all, it is also the safest and lightest. As a body material, it is available from 1993 onwards, whereas it is unlocked for monocoque chassis a full five years earlier (in 1988). Due to its extremely high price, it is generally reserved for low-volume modern supercars and hypercars.

This concludes our summary of body and chassis materials. In the next post, we will take a look at the various chassis types available, along with engine placement options.

Infinite Space Myths Revisited: Flotillas of Five and Lone Wolves

Infinite Space Myths Revisited: Flotillas of Five and Lone Wolves

Most of the time in Infinite Space III: Sea of Stars, five recruitable allied ships (three capital ships, initially scouts or similarly sized vessels, plus two fighters) will spawn on the randomly generated map when you start the game, thereby allowing you to have six ships in your fleet (including your starting ship) at a time. However, very rarely, there will only be four such ships spawned at the start of the game, leaving you with a maximum of five ships in total. This situation can only occur under the following set of circumstances:

• No special allies (Damocles or Kestrel - both of these ships are only available as part of their respective quests) are present on the map.
• One of the two fighters must be a Muktian fighter; the other one must be a Zorg fighter. These ships can only spawn on a map containing their factions' respective home worlds (Bandur for Muktians, Loryx for Zorg).
• One of the two capital ships must be Terran (Moon Marauder); the second capital ship must be Garthan (Bloodfang). This will leave no room for a sixth vessel (in the form of a fourth capital ship) in the fleet.

If all three of the above conditions are met, you will only be able to field a maximum of five ships in your fleet instead of six. This ties in with the next myth: is it possible to fully complete a game without ever having added any capital ships to your fleet, leaving you with only your starting Terran capital ship (not including fighter escorts)? Surprisingly, the answer is yes. However, there is only one way for this to occur: by destroying all of the systems where the capital ships (or their crew, in the case of the Calatians) are found using a Limited Vacuum Collapser. (Given that the Calatians become your allies the moment you rescue their stranded crew, this won't work if said crew is present on the map and is found before the LVC has detonated.)

In any case, this only works if the LVC can be detonated in a place such that all of those systems are engulfed in the blast. It is easier in the above scenario, though, since you only have to destroy two systems harboring capital ships instead of three. Moreover, if one of the ships destroyed is vital to a particular quest, the game may become impossible to complete fully. Finally, even if it is still possible to actually complete the game, doing so will be more difficult: whereas Terran frigates and destroyers have six equipment slots each (plus three and four weapon slots respectively, Terran scouts and corvettes have four and five such slots respectively, with the latter also having two weapon slots compared to the scout's single weapon slot. Thankfully, all Terran capital ships (except for scouts and survey ships) can be retrofitted with a rear-facing turret for a small fee.

That's one more reason to think twice about detonating a Limited Vacuum Collapser: In addition to having to avoid destroying your own fleet in the process, you could risk annihilating potential allies before you've even met them, leaving you with fewer wingmen in your fleet than intended (or even worse, none at all). Fortunately, this is a rare occurrence, and under certain circumstances can even be exploited if your fleet already has enough firepower and protection to survive hostile encounters, rendering the extra allies unnecessary.

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 101: The Final Generation?

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 101: The Final Generation?

With the recent announcement that the Generations II tournament is drawing to a close, I would like to share some important details along with my plans for the future lore of the Hampton Motor Group. First and foremost, the 12th and final round of Generations II is unique for two reasons: It is the only one to be set in 2010 or later (2013, to be exact), and is the only one with no passenger car categories. Instead, there are three full-sized truck/SUV categories: compact and mid-sized crossovers, plus full-size pickup trucks. 

Above: Hampton's 2013 truck/SUV lineup, from left to right: Herculean, Brigand and Fairlie.

To integrate this round into Hampton company lore, I decided to make the next-gen Fairlie a transverse-engined crossover based on the Fennec platform, while a larger crossover, the Brigand, would sit above it in the lineup. In addition, the all-new Herculean would become the brand's first full-sized truck. On top of all this, the Nevis would be refreshed, although given that it would not fit into any of the categories for the final round, I decided not to submit it. Speaking of which, the Braemar nameplate would no longer be used for this generation - all examples would simply be called the Nevis, regardless of body style or engine/transmission combination.

As for the passenger cars that were once the bedrock of the range, I decided not to ignore that part of their lineup either - the Ferret would be replaced by the Heron, but the Fennec, Valiant and Vanguard nameplates would continue, albeit on new platforms and with new bodies (although the Venator name would no longer be used - all Vanguards were once again referred to as such, regardless of body style). The Transliner, however, would most likely be axed after 25 years due to lack of demand late in its lifespan; in its place, the Brigand received a seven-seat option.

Hampton's presence in the performance car sector will continue, but it will be represented by only one dedicated sports car - the Halberd. This would replace the Harrier in the range, and be available with either a V8 or V12 engine. Speaking of which, such engines would be relegated mainly to high-performance trims of longitudinally-engined cars; other models and trims would receive turbocharged straight-fours and straight-sixes instead.

Beyond this, I plan to continue to expand the company's lore to include 2020 onwards. Any successors to these new-for-2013 models may be out of the question for now due to game engine limitations, but it might still be worth exploring what happens to the company around that time.

Ultimately my dedication paid off - all three of these new models were well-received at launch. The upshot was that Hampton Motor Group was the most successful import brand of the entire tournament, and in fact would be the second-most successful brand overall. Needless to say, I felt chuffed after spending nearly a whole year creating, developing and polishing the Hampton Motor Group and its backstory. And so one of my most satisfying long-term commitments as an Automationeer finally came to an end.