What i still cant understand is how a newly designed part is dropping potential quicker than the part it was based on, thats just silly and makes me think something is still not right with it all...
Thats true, it leaves you with part A having a better potential than part B though when part B is a much newer version of part A. Just seems a bit odd to me as it's not like i have suddenly changed my design team to a bunch of chimpanzees, they should be able to always improve on the design they are revising.
I too have seen the weight increase, another thing that doesnt make any sense unless the extra weight also sees an increase in performance which it doesnt seem to.
#74 by Tom Bagley they should be able to always improve on the design they are revising.
Frank made it so you could have the possibility of making a bad design, even if you are taking it off a previous design. It's like going down the wrong route in the design as you read the results from the previous part wrong. If you always got gains, it would make development too linear. It works the other way as well where you could get a much bigger boost on a part as the designer hit the sweet spot.
Thanks Adam. Im fine with that but there probably needs to be more clarity as to which part is better. I built a part and tested it and the stats were the same as the old part yet it was saying it was the best part in the division. After a week the stats had dropped and my old design was the best in the division again, by this point however i had already started to design a new part on the part that was now worse... see the problem? More clarity needed in this area i think.
I suspect the reason that they switched around in the division ratings is that not all stats decrease in value (e.g. weight) but those stats still make up the overall part rating used for that division ranking (which seems a bit random anyway sometimes!)
The research levels drop fast. To fast for a team with limited resources. That make it impossible to maintain a very bad level until the team has at least a level 3 HQ. Which means that the first half year the manager only can watch the ratings going from very bad to terrible before making any progress on the car. I doubt that new managers will get hoked up that way.
Decreasing one level itself is ok, but should be very slow on low level ratings (below ok) and and faster in high levels.
I have some experience on top level research and HQ3 with 2 dev modules and to many people... with 19 dev slots it is "easy" to bring ALL parts to superb research and keep the level AND develop 7 parts in parallel... hq0 is swimming backward...
