This is what the person that I was responding to wrote, and it's objectively wrong:

>Hybrids are the worst of both worlds when it comes to maintenance. They have their benefits and are key to fighting climate change, but mechanically you inherit all the problems from both sides.

Also, much more complex is a value judgement. Complex in what way? High voltage electronics isn't exactly "not complex", and the coolant loops in BEVs are more complex than those in regular cars, because the tolerances are tighter.

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that you mean mechanical complexity, but even then, that's not a given for ICEs. Gas turbines can have as little as one moving part, and there are piston engines that can get away with as few as four (the piston-conrod-crankshaft assembly and a compressor wheel).

At the end of the day, a good design has the minimum amount of complexity necessary to perform a given task, and no more. Given that BEVs are fundamentally unable to replace ICEVs in several niches (e.g. those relying on on-street parking, off-roading), maybe a little more complexity is warranted? As is, they aren't a 1:1 replacement for a standard car, and that's okay, but they're being marketed as such which is a recipe for failure.