Forum topic: Development concepts

not much fan of assigning parts to a car - a, no overview who gets which part ---- b, when assigning a part to car 2 the page reloads for car 1
sometimes I get an error when I assign the same part to car 1 and 2 and get redirected to the main page...

It will also affect teams trying to save for instance to a HQ5 using "Plan A" instead of "Plan B" or similar, unless there is a limit on when this cost would kick in (eg when bank balance reaches 50 million). If cash cost kicks in directly, it will essentially add an interest rate for Plan A.

True, it will take them longer. But it's still not impossible to reach it. A range is a possibility yes, although I don't think the upper limit will be very high. A team really does not need more than 100 million constantly in the bank (unless they're saving for something) in my opinion.

is it possible to change the "find exploit" on a concept to the same way that "find concept" is handled - enter amount of points, you find it or not. Also a counter that tracks the points you wasted already. Clicking the find exploit button for 5 times in a row very tedious (especially because the page reloads and you have to scroll down again).

I'm going to leave it as is for now, if I want to make the deadline of the introduction of the end of the season. What you're describing is kind of how the concepts are found. Exploits are now a one time spend and that will result in found or not. Not sure what you mean that you have to do it over all the time?

Is the order you discover concepts fixed? Or is that random, so you might find the best concept right away? If it's fixed, I'd suggest making it random so managers don't know if it's worth continuing spending points.

Completely random.

My design team, despite all designers being assigned, has 0-10% rating in every category (design team rating, concept insights, research rating, development rating). Is this not implemented yet?

I noticed it last night as well. That's obviously a bug. I'm going to try to fix it tonight. I will re-instate the actual values and I'll do that once I figure out why it went down. I introduced a new system whereas the modifiers for designers only change gradually, just like the research limit does. And something went wrong there.

not much fan of assigning parts to a car - a, no overview who gets which part ---- b, when assigning a part to car 2 the page reloads for car 1
sometimes I get an error when I assign the same part to car 1 and 2 and get redirected to the main page...

It's hard to create something that looks nice on mobile, while still giving a good overview. I also thought that in that sense (for new users, but also design wise) it made sense that when you go to the cars page that you have the cars listed as tabs, and not just parts.

@ find exploit button:

I suggested to remove the button and let the manager set a certain amount of points he/she wants to spend instead of having a fixed value - so instead of clicking a button 3 times you can just enter the amount of points you are willing to spend in order to find an exploit. Just like finding concepts.

Just a minor suggestion.

When designing a part (after researching a concept) there seems to be an issue with the weight. Tried to design a chassis (lucky concept) and the current/potential weight was the same. For grip and aero it was possible to improve the values, but for weight it was not (due to current and potential being equal). I don't think this is intended.

Additionally, I just tried to design the same concept for S28: risk for iteration was "non-existant", and yet 2 out of 3 iternations failed. So before hitting "low risk", I was down about -2 levels on the improvements.

I suggested to remove the button and let the manager set a certain amount of points he/she wants to spend instead of having a fixed value - so instead of clicking a button 3 times you can just enter the amount of points you are willing to spend in order to find an exploit. Just like finding concepts.

Are you sure you mean searching for an exploit? Because searching for an exploit is a one time button click?

When designing a part (after researching a concept) there seems to be an issue with the weight. Tried to design a chassis (lucky concept) and the current/potential weight was the same. For grip and aero it was possible to improve the values, but for weight it was not (due to current and potential being equal). I don't think this is intended.

I'll check it out. I haven't seen that myself so far.

Additionally, I just tried to design the same concept for S28: risk for iteration was "non-existant", and yet 2 out of 3 iternations failed. So before hitting "low risk", I was down about -2 levels on the improvements.

The risk is something else. The risk means that the level improvement that you see could be actually lower than it shows. After finishing the development and putting the car out on track, you'll see "the updates brought exactly what was expected". Then you know that the update worked. If you iterate too much, then will very very likely be lower than what is shown.
Iterating a project is something else (but related), that is a positive improvement generally, but sometimes an iteration fails and then you can go "backwards". But you should still have time to correct that. If that's clear?

Negotiating with Victor Barthel (contract renegotiation), all clauses show a green tick and Offer Strength is higher than the Minimum strength. Is it a bug or there might some behind the scenes factor which may still affect success?

And what is actually wrong? What would the bug be?

Question - Is the Power Position already taken into account when calculating the Minimum Strength required?

That's very specific. I don't have access to the code now, but I believe yes (it would be logic).

Issue -- If you try to negotiate with a person who rejects the offer and you go to Approach again, on first load the page will break with only "Not possible to start negotiations shown".

Thanks for that, I'll look into it.

Minor layout issue -- The Translate news button is not themed.

Some cleaning up is still left to do yeah.

Question - How can one search for person contract loopholes (can't find it in both the beta and main)?

I'll check it if it got accidentally removed. Or I temporarily disabled it to make it in line with the new system. Need to check.

Suggestion - Can the assigned part to a car be taken to the top of the relevant tab in order to see the currently used part first?

I don't exactly understand what you mean.

Issue - The Information and Weather sections in the Race page are missing.

Yep, known.

Question - Will the new Strategy page be part of this update?

Yes, still left to do.

Question - Spent thousands of designer points to find an exploit but nothing found. Is it expected? Is it that the design team is so bad in finding exploits? Also, what does an exploit gives to the team that finds it? Does it unlock a higher potential right for the current season?

So first of all you're searching for a concept, not an exploit. Concepts still have exploits. But to answer the question: it is expected yes. Every time someone finds a concept, it becomes easier and easier to find the same concept until it becomes public knowledge. So the first one to find can be hard, but it's a bit random so some will be harder to find than others.
It wouldn't be fun if everyone finds all the concepts before week 3 of the game. It will be fun when all of a sudden a new concept seems to appear out of nowhere, after which everyone needs to scramble.

@ exploit button: yes, I am talking about the search exploit button (research page, part-category, discovered concept -> search for new exploit)

it is a one time click: if you find nothing, you have the option to click again. and again. my suggestion was that instead of having multiple one-time clicks to instead have the option to spend x amount of points all at once (just like the "research concept" game mechanic).

@ "risk" during development: yes, makes sense. Adding tooltips will be helpful for new/existing managers, as it might get interpreted as I did.

@ exploit button: yes, I am talking about the search exploit button (research page, part-category, discovered concept -> search for new exploit)

it is a one time click: if you find nothing, you have the option to click again. and again. my suggestion was that instead of having multiple one-time clicks to instead have the option to spend x amount of points all at once (just like the "research concept" game mechanic).

That's not how it's supposed to work. If it's like that for you then it's not working correctly. On which part do you have that scenario?

@ "risk" during development: yes, makes sense. Adding tooltips will be helpful for new/existing managers, as it might get interpreted as I did.

Definitely, still need to provide those (I keep it for the end as things change). I already updated the wiki a bit, but more work is needed.

Chassis - on the "High Rake Concept" which I found myself. That might be the reason.

Is the order you discover concepts fixed? Or is that random, so you might find the best concept right away? If it's fixed, I'd suggest making it random so managers don't know if it's worth continuing spending points.

Why should it be random? Think it would be based of the level of Head Designer etc. design team attributes/talent. Smarter designers will find the best concepts most probably. That's why you pay for them. There should be some randomness on the play, but not totally random. That's just stupid.