right now I think the ideal spot is about 65%-80% somewhere in there, depending on your car output
I actually really dislike the current system so I’ll be glad when its updated.
I think there should be a limit to how cheap a car design can be sold.
That limit should probably be based on all the factors included in creating it.
So item costs, total spent on R & D to produce the design, production line layout, and hourly costs such as employee wages and power consumption.
Looking at these factors, how would you balance it?
I would take the amount spent on R & D and use it as a sign of how “innovative” or “practical” the car is. If I spent $1M in items and employee wages to create a new part for a car, this item is sold at a higher price until I have covered the amount of money I spent on the R & D. Basically, all newer designs will get price boosts because of this R & D factor. However, competitors can out-price you if they completed the research sooner and are no longer looking to cover their R & D costs. The cars are equally desirable to the customer, but one is at a lower price so customers would always buy that car. Except the cars availability has to be taken into account. That is how many cars are being produced? If you produce the car at higher price, but also at a higher volume you can normalize the profit for the number of sales you are getting in comparison to your competitor and can compete against a company that has done the research previously. Then once you pay off the R & D you will have effectively dominated the market for this particular design.
Of course other than R & D if you make a cheaper production line layout, or manufacture parts in-house it can be more profitable.
In this way we can simulate a kind of difficulty level where you have to reach a consumer range where you are either selling a few cars at a high price, or selling many cars at a reasonable price to increase your market share.