Update Speculation thread

Mandatory hate here.

Seriously though, with how popular tha segment is I can't imagine a career mode taking place in today if the game doesn't have one of these. I would prefer a midsized SUV though. Those can be good off-road, have large engines shoved in them, have affordable base models, and can be used for police cars. Just look at the Explorer, G-Wagon, and Grand Cherokee. All of those at some point in their production have had affordable trim levels, off-road capable trim levels, 2/3 of them have been used by police or military, and have had interesting engine choices (Explorer ST, AMG G-Wagon, Jeep Trackhawk). It just seems to me that it would be easier to make an interesting and versetile SUV than a cross over (not that it's impossible to make an interesting cross over, just that it would be easier to make an SUV that versetile)

 

The main reason why the staff never reads that thread is because it's just people spamming pictures of cars they like with uncreative fake brand names. If people started doing that here, the staff would ignore it too.

 

I've taken a day to chill out, and here's my final word on the subject. After this, I'm moving on. Let's all extend an olive branch, and settle this like mature people. My intention is that the following is all presented in a calm, clear, unraised voice:

I believe that you are most certainly entitled to hold your own opinions, regardless of whether or not I or anyone else agrees with them. In fact, I encourage you to have opinions that are different than mine. A diversity of opinions, suggestions, and sub-communities will lead to a well-rounded game that everyone will enjoy.

I want you to know that I think both you and your opinions have value.

I'm not upset at all that your opinion is different than mine. In fact, I welcome that. But I am still upset, and here's why:

This behaviour towards other forum users varies from condescending to outright smearing. These arguments contain baseless speculation on other forum user's motives, and every trick in the book from stereotyping to shaming appears to be used. These appear to be attempts to engage in character assassination against any forum user who disagrees with you, or even hypothetical forum users who might disagree with you (like those so-called 'angry hillbillies').

Behaviour like this would be reprehensible on any internet forum. This sort of Behaviour like this is part of the reason that we're becoming increasingly divided in society both online and offline. Let's not draw up camps for the purpose of fighting each other. I would encourage you, myself, and each and every forum member to take a long, hard, sober look at what they think about the person on the other end of the screen, and remember to separate the person's opinion from the person. I admit that I myself sometimes have trouble doing that, and this may have seeped into our last interaction. I would like to apologize for that.

@zestyfolfdude , I would have preferred to say this to you via private Conversation rather than on a public thread, but for whatever reason, I am currently locked out of starting any conversation involving you. I have made several attempts, and would not be upset if you have put me on 'Ignore Member'. My own conduct hasn't been perfectly spotless either.

As for anyone and everyone else who got dragged into this sorry mess on both sides of the argument, I would encourage you to take a breather. I would like to thank everyone who supported myself, and also everyone who supported Zesty. It's good that we stand up for each other. But with that said, I would like everyone to remember that it's less important to change other people's opinions than it is to show them the proper respect. You can like one type of car more than other, but still interact with people who like the other type of car more than yours in a positive way.[/QUOTE]​

That's all I have to say.

Now, to get back on topic:

I do think that the T-series is due for a minor refresh sometime in the next 18 months or so, but I'll happily leave the order of refreshes to the dev team to base on what they think needs work sooner or later. I think that maybe a choice of three engines or so would be realistic and interesting (There were definitely some class 8 heavy trucks from the early end of the T-series' era with gasoline engines).

As for the redline, I haven't got much info, but I can tell you that the 1987-present Detroit 60 Series Diesel tops out at 2,100 RPM, but that's a 12.7L engine compared to the 10.6L in the T-series.

I've found an ad for an International 9300 (the truck most people associate with the T-series) that is equipped with an 855-cubic inch N-14 Cummins engine, and that is governed to 2,100 RPM. Judging from chatter on trucking forums, it seems that these engines can be revved to that under load, but most drivers seem afraid of causing engine damage at those speeds.

 

Then it would make sense to unpin and lock/delete it. If they're not going to pop in and get a look at what people are saying like they used to, there's no point in keeping it. That pretty much puts the thread on life support. If they're not even going to take vehicle suggestions, just put something up in the header over the Ideas and Suggestions area saying "Sorry, we're not taking in vehicle suggestions. Sorry for the inconvenience" or something like that. If people ignores that and posts a thread about a vehicle suggestion anyway, that's on that OP. It'd be no different from the people who doesn't see the red headers that warns users about threads being old above where we type ours posts.

I seriously see no purpose in that thread if its only there to be treated like a ghost, and I fully advocate its retirement unless the staff starts showing signs of using it, and there's at least one way I can see the thread being utilized.

 

The lines did get blurred for many cars in this time, I suppose the Moonhawk is a little later than the IRL counterpart cars I had in mind. Still, I would like to see some way Soliad gets a second car without going through the effort of actually making a new car for them. I think restyling the Moonhawk and giving it a nicer interior would be a good way to do that. There is so much content potential on the Moonhawk platform, and yet it is one of cars that has been left behind. It still has configs with names like "i6" after all... In a game where it takes so much to make a new car, I thoroughly believe the most should be gotten out of the ones that are in game, and platform sharing between related companies is a great way to do that while building up the in game universe.

 

Since the Moonhawk appears to be a midsize, and since the LeGran appears to be a downsized midsize, I'm still of the opinion that "LeGran" should be a trim level of the Moonhawk, with a vinyl roof and opera windows.

As for a Soliad, I always believed you could add a Canadian car with relatively little effort by rebadging it as a Soliad, switching the gauges to metric, and possibly also removing the Special trim.

 

Looks Like Some More Stuff Nothing Too Exciting.
https://www.beamng.com/threads/how-to-add-more-traffic-cars-with-traffic-app.66612/#post-1087618

 

Just pasting the quote in here

 

That is cool, but what if we could save presets for the kind of traffic we want?

 

I though that BeamNg was:
"A SOFT-BODY PHYSICS VEHICLE SIMULATOR CAPABLE OF DOING JUST ABOUT ANYTHING"

 

I need to see someone do this.

 

i always thought the old one looked better... the new version looks like it's glory days have come and gone, and now it's just a fat shell of it's former self..

 

Isn't the bigger, squarer version the old one?

 

roamer v2 (was in the files one version)

 

There is a mod with bendy busses. Main issue is that bus stops have a maximum length so the bendy one does not fit there and as such you cant do the bus routes with the mod.


@Shotgun Chuck:

Spoiler: OFFTOPIC

Sorry for using pictures but properly quoting this and maintaining context didnt work otherwise.

The difference is that back then nobody gave a damm about the environment and that nobody had much use for crude oil so the "big oil" was incredibly happy about creating one huge consumer.

The electric motor is vastly better suited for the power and load condititions that are created by a car. They always have only been hold back by the lack of competive battery technology. Since that is increasingly becoming a moot point..... guess what will happen? There is a reason why almost anything today runs on electricity.... and that point is it is best overall option outside of niche applications which are about to loose one of their last strongpoints with cars.






1. What make you believe that you own the road? Did you pay for it all by yourself? No, it was paid for by the public.... and all those people just have the same right to use the road as you have. Seing that motorized road usage by far has the highest costs for - again - the public there is very little justification of why it should be privileged the most. Which is still is, mind you.

2. Self driving cars have new security problems. (Hacking, software error). At the same time they however eliminate a lot of human security problems: (Slow reaction speed, lack of precision, lack of sensor information, overestimation. lack of character suitability for responsible driving, driving when in less than 100 % peak condition.)

I am really sorry to break this to you... because I can imagine it hurts deeply.... but at the end of the day... the computer is a better driver than anyone of us.

Just as human factory workers proved to be no match against robots a computers capability to drive is far above what even the most skilled human can muster.

It is not a fair competition. The computer

• maintain full 360 degree coverage all the time.
  
• use sensors far above human ability to scan the road and the traffic.
  
• operates at speeds that make a mockery out of human reaction times. You cant even count the spokes of a wheel moving at moderate speed..... the computer has 3 eternitys worth of time to consider the deepness of the universe in the same time period it takes a car wheel to move a single centimeter at 300 km/h.
  
• With enormous calculation speeds comes enormous reaction speed and as a result a computer can achieve a level of precision steering that no human can even dream of. If it wants to miss an obstacle by 1 cm... it will miss the obstacle by 1,000000000000 centimeters (assuming it is physically possible to change the direction of the car in time)

Assuming proberly equipped sensors and programming... a computer will smoke any human record wherever it pleases.

Again... there is no shame in that. Computer are simple better than us at task that require speed and precision. On the other hand... they are downright terrible at things which a 3 year old baby can do without issues.


3. Environmentalism? Seriously.... you like the world you live in to be a toxic hell incapable of sustaining live in the long term? I am old enough to see the results of the environmental movement.... and those results are overwhelmingly positive. Rivers you can swim in again, green meadows instead of barren wasteland, cleaner air to breathe.... what is not to like?

Breaking News: Rich people dont have to care about the environment.... they can afford to move far enough away and can afford any kind of filtering technology to breathe cleaner air and any kind of medical technology to save their health.

Meanwhile.... average people have few of those luxuries and as such pay the brunt of the price for the poisoning of our world. Of which we, btw... dont have a backup.

4. Safety advocacy? Ahh yes... lets go back to the early age of industrialisation where people died regularly and early because someone was to stingy to care about safety. There is precisly one reason why the number of traffic deaths is dwindling even though traffic has vastly increased. Safety equipment and safety design considerations. So yes.... I want all of it, because I have zero interest in dying because some moron cant drive or because I made a human error. Thank you very much... no deal.





Politics..... a difficult and complex issue. You are correct about the lackluster quality of politicians in most places..... but assuming you live in a democracy you maybe should share the responsibility of electing bettter ones. Or at least trying to.

You dont seem to be a person who cares about the best interests of other peoples much. From your posts one can get a lot of "Me first... me second... me third... me anything".




Maybe you should stop listening to people who want to sell oil and coal and could care less if the planet has a future because they happen to be old and rich enough to not need to care.

Human caused climate change is scientic fact. As is gravity or sunlight. You can bury your head into the sand as much as you want... facts dont go away and ultimativly always win. The question in this specific case is merely how expensive the bill will be by the time people decide to not longer ignore facts.

The thing is... the longer you ignore the problem... the more expensive it becomes. Today... the problem can still be solved with comparable modest changes. In a decade..... much more brutal action will be necessary. I would rather not face brutal actions so to me it seems that the wise course of action is to act now, where we can still soften the brunt of the impact.

The question you should ask yourself is.... if climate change is such a myth... how comes that basically the entire world is considering it an issue? What does make a communistic dictatorship like China consider it? After all, it is a conclusion that was first reached in "The West". If, even in their high distrust they consider it a problem... could it be that just maybe that their scientist have told them that it is true?

That is not to say that China doesnt have issues.... they build a lot of new coal plants but then it is not like that "The West" is a shining example either.


Independent of climate change, more environmental friendlyness is always good. Clean air and water are in everyones interest.


If I am wrong.... all we loose is a bit of life quality of which most can be compensated.

If you are wrong.... we are looking at millions of death and an amount of climate refugees that will make any "migration crisis" of the last 10000 years look like a small bump on the road. Global war will rage for the increasingly small areas that can still sustain human life. Forget walls.... they will be brought down by force of arms because you just dont tell a billion people "no entrance" and expect them to accept it and die outside.





Motorized driving has higher public costs than almost any other form of movement.... why should those costs be carried by those who dont use it?

Motorized driving is in fact heavily subsidized by the tax payer. Those roads and traffic infrastructure did not happen by magic, you know?

You cant expect that something that is so expensive overall is free or even cheap for yourself. World does not work like that.





A bycycle in the way?



You know... the very reason why cities are suffocating in congestion is that cars require an enormous amount of space both moving and stationary.

Again... what it the justification that the road should belong to you... even though you

- need the most space
- cause the most danger to yourself and others
- pollute the environment the most


I am all fine if you drive your car for joy. You just shouldnt expect that the tax payer subsidizes it. We can do better stuff with that money instead.

And yes... I own a car... and yes I drive regularly. That doesnt mean I have to be blind or ignorant about its issues.


"Non drivers". Again... this misplaced belief that the world is there to please you and that the public road is your personal property.

Regarding fear of overlooking non car traffic. I agree that they should not be unlit/unmarked as this is indeed very dangerous for anyone involved.

Still, I wish to quote the german traffic law:

§ 3 Road Traffic Regulation:

"Es darf nur so schnell gefahren werden, dass innerhalb der übersehbaren Strecke gehalten werden kann."

You may only drive so fast that you can come to a complete stop inside your viewrange". If you can only see 30 meters ahead... you have to drive slow enough to come to complete stop at meter 29.

Computers are not superior under any and all conditions. They however tend to be vastly superior for most conditions that happen in driving. Yes, they make - programming - errors. They make errors that no human would ever make.

The thing is... that the amount of such errors is far lower than the amount of human operator errors. The reason for sinking traffic accidents is more computer controll and not less of it. And be it the computer control that makes you not loose control this time and the computer control that makes you evade the obstacle with anti lock brakes under full load.


Insidious? Because it makes life safer and more comfortable? May I assume that you also go down to the next water well instead of using tap water? How insidious.... some may even call it human progress.

The reality is that lot of people dont drive for joy but because they need a ride. Most commuters can probably name every single bump of the road because it just is that boring and repetive. Most commuters would gladly have an AI take over their daily participation in the traffic jam and spend their lifetime with more joyful things than watching the colour of the exhaust fumes of the car ahead.

Fun fact about cycling... you notice things about the environment that you never saw before because you where inside your car and could look arround much.





The thing is, that since finally some serious research and money has went into battery technology that batteries have become magnitudes better in just one decade. If you follow the development graph.... it is quite easy to see that in a maximum of 10 years, range will be a non issue even for economic everyday cars.

Recharge time is by now almost competive to refuelling with in combination with 400+ km of range means that in most cases the driver is the limiting factor and not the energy source.

Modern superchargers recharge arround 20 kilometers of range per minute - tendency rising - so it only takes 20 minutes to go another 400 km. Yes... refulling is still faster but the difference is becoming less and less significant especially with ranges like this where you most likely will need to see a restroom anyway.

Finally.... you can charge your car at home so you may end up saving lifetime in total as you never need to visit a station outside of long range driving ever again.

Did I mention that the usual fuel price hike at the usual vaccation times does not concern you anymore? You pay those price hikes even if you dont drive to your holiday but just daily commute. Not anymore.


Not quite sure why you dislike efficient (by ICE standards) turbo engines. I never quite got the fun in doing less with more.

Density of fuel stations is certainly higher and will remain so for a while longer. Still, the issue is becoming smaller and the advent of modern navigation systems and the internet makes finding a charging station less of an issue as 20 years ago.

And again... you only need a supercharging station for long range driving.... otherwise you can just charge at home which while slower means you have a full battery most of the times as most cars tend to be stationary for countless hours at home.

Regarding natural disaster and power outtages: Are you aware that the fuel pumps on any filling station run on electricity and that almost none of them have backup power? You wont get any fuel out of them either without electricity in most cases.

We dont require a breakthrough in battery technology.... a merely repeat of the last decade of development is entirely sufficient.

Yes, for some remote locations and very special requirements.... EV will need at least another decade to be viable. For anything else however.... for the needs of 95 % of all car owners today.... I would estimate that we will have full parity and possible even superiority in a maximum of 5 years.


Yes... EV are very expensive right now. Like with any new technology (new as in having reasonable batteries) it comes at a cost. In time entry into the mass market will make the cost competive. The market uptake might be further increased by EV being cheaper to run than ICE vehicles..... some taxi services already use Teslas because the time lost charging is cheaper than the maintainance of ICEs.




When you coldly look at the facts, renewable energies are still vastly better for the environment overall than any other source of power. I am always fascinated how much care for wildlife people suddeny have when it is endangered by renewables and not by smoking chimneys.

Yes... they are not perfect. In fact... nothing is and almost anything human do can have an effect on the ecosphere.

There are few deads that can be more painfull than slow poisoning. See burning fossils.

Infrasound damages the human heart? So low speed air and ground vibrations damage the human heart? I seriously think we should ban any non earphone music immediatly. Oh... and concerts... people must be dying left and right.... oh wait.

Even if you assume that there are vibrations and that they are harmfull, I would question the relevance in a world that is full of vibrations. Did I mention that traffic causes a crap ton of vibrations? Building? Heay machinery (like steam turbines and generator assemblies in classic power plants?)


Even assuming that that infrasound damage is real - which I seriously doubt - it would probably struggle a lot to equal the damage done by air pollution. The heart btw pumps blood by contraction. One might call it some kind of slow vibration.


The only real issue with renewables is a certain lack of predictability. Yes, we need some serious energy storage but then even with the costs of that renewables are still cheaper than burning fossil crap.

In the longterm.... renewable energy is basically free while finding more and more coal and oil becomes both more expensive and more damaging to the environment. Long gone are the times where a bit of digging resulted in rich deposits..... those are mostly exhausted by now and never come back.

It is especially annoying with oil because there is so much you can do with oil instead of burning it like some stone age man.

Solar cells by the way outlast all predictions of their lifetime so far. My middle school has a roof full of PV which was old when I went to middle school. It is still running today.... more than 2 decades later.

This is even more impressive when you consider that when my middle school build that PV the technology was still in its fledgling stage.





What a sad story. Now lets look at fossil fuels subsidies:

https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fa...-closer-look-at-tax-breaks-and-societal-costs

That is a crap ton of money. I suggest we terminate it immediatly and instead spend it on something more reasonable.



ICE numbers in mainstream will reduce no matter what as markets like China have already put and end date to ICEs.

But yes, the process will accelerate, especially as most people who drive electrically never want to go back.

Ironically, the sport market may be the first victim. EV have far superior driving performance on anything resembling equal amount of horsepower and they are much more refined. At the same time, price tag isnt exactly a major concern for the average buyers of those cars.

With the sport market success comes the mainstream success. Everyone wants a cool car... not some clunky low performing loud stinker.

If you define boring by making little noise while offering much better performance, I am sorry that is not a definion that I share.

You dont have to like it of course but when you are honest this is a lot about feelings and has little do do with facts. Electric drivetrains allow more design freedom making it possible to benefit the driver even more.

If you joy of live depends on making loud noises with inefficient toxic fuel burning engines I would advise you to find a different hobby as this one probably has a maximum of 2 decades left, possible much less.

I also would honestly - and I dont mean that insulting in any way - advise you to find some other things in life that create joy in you as your current joy source feels very limited to me.

BTW... I did enjoy writing this wall of text above.

EDIT: While a pre war car would not be my personal favourite for the next car that should be added to the game I am not against it either. The more content, the merrier.

 

I don’t think the staff ever really does use it, but in my opinion, it’s still beneficial for this forum. It might not contribute much, but at least it keeps new threads for car suggestions being created more frequently than they already are.

 

Opening a garage door here and there wouldn't be too bad

 

sorry to be off topic , but i wonder if the devs will consider battery simulation in the future
because i think it would be quite interesting for beater configs to have a failing battery,
and ignition timing and all that nonsense.

 

You're not off topic at all cause this is an update speculation thread.
Also I agree