You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jan 19, 2019. It is now read-only.
Admittedly, this would mostly come into play for cars and trucks.
But I'm wondering if this would be doable as it would allow more flexibility for those vehicles without having to bloat the configuration file with clones.
Especially because in real life, choosing the right axle ratio is a major consideration.
All the major axle manufacturers (such as Dana and Meritor, for example) provide dozens of axle ratios for their models.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
If I wanted to truly build a truck configuration with all the possible options as real life does, the configuration file would need up to 50 different entries. The vast majority of those would be clones for the sake of accommodating the axle ratios.
Having a separate selection for axle ratios would cut down that number down to a MUCH smaller fraction.
As a bonus, it would make it easier to adapt trucks to different map sizes, such as the 8km x 8km maps Corn Belt and Dakota.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Admittedly, this would mostly come into play for cars and trucks.
But I'm wondering if this would be doable as it would allow more flexibility for those vehicles without having to bloat the configuration file with clones.
Especially because in real life, choosing the right axle ratio is a major consideration.
All the major axle manufacturers (such as Dana and Meritor, for example) provide dozens of axle ratios for their models.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: