@ChrisETH First: if you're gonna enumerate stuff, do it more than just once.

Second: About "Where did 68% come from?", at least that clears it up.

Third: Again, my original comment is not insult to him but his work, why do you keep twisting it as me insulting him personally? Unless you also want me to twist your criticism into you attack me, not my modified F4U-4.

Fourth: I did not say it was tremendous work, don't know where you got that from, after all it was a 67 word brief version of, I don't know, 10 minutes? Although the last is true, if you download the aircraft, you'll see it's already full of fuel, something I always do, because I'm not looking to make realist aircraft, for the most part, just what I picture in my mind.

Fifth: If we're gonna argue about how much changed on both aircraft, then you need to agree that I changed this F4U-4 more.

Again, his removal of 48 parts in a 1.143 parts aircraft isn't enough for a full submission, he probably could've take out much more detailing.

He wanted to make that plane better for higher end phones, what phone did he use? If his phone is powerful enough for a 1.095 parts planes, I'd like to know how much difference those 48 parts really did, did it increase his FPS by 3 frames?

Sixth: It was an "insult" from the beginning, when I saw my comment pinned, I became confused, as normally that's used for more positive or important comments, not a "You barely changed it, why did you upload it?" comment.

Seventh: As a player just starting out, he should have started making his own planes, make a new A-10, not get an aircraft from a more experienced player and re-upload it with little modification.

@Liensis

Question 1: Where did 68% come from?

68% is my guess on how many parts were based in the engine. You may have changed the entire design, making it easy to see what's different. I said 20 parts out of 29 parts were based solely on the engine as a guess. so 20 out of 29 is 68%. I said you insulted him because of the statement that your criticism wasn't meant as a complement. So what was it meant as? A litter box? Of course that type of word usage usually means insulting. He's done more work than you have on his build, which warrants the full submission. Your creation shows a much different change on the outside. His doesn't, by design. When you reduce parts, you try to keep the design the same. The fact you remain ignorant about how nothing was changed proves he did quite a good job. Many parts were removed, but you still continue to argue about this. Sure you did the work mentioned. Again though, writing it down in the way you wrote it makes it seem like it was tremendous work. Balancing the plane is as simple as increasing fuel, and all you did was add a few parts and place engines inside a fuselage. I personally could make the same plane in less time. You put in less effort, and that's non arguable because we're not talking about the original plane's part count. We're talking about how much was changed. And John's changed much more of his plane than you have. Revisiting the insult argument, everything leading up to that, sure it might not have been an insult, but when you suggest it's an insult, that shows it's an insult. I'm not making these things up, you wrote them.

Recap: @Liensis decides to offend a user starting out, by explaining the plane they created is exactly the same plane, and slagging the plane, and suggests their statements are an insult.

@Liensis from 3 months ago has created a plane with less work put into it.

Does this make more sense? John's done more work, which would take longer. Because I've removed and added fuselage pieces, and they take a long time. This design, done in 10 minutes. Your effort is half of what John put in. He got rid of extra unnecessary parts. You try to speak in percentages, explaining you've had a bigger impact. But the percentages are the truth, however, aren't displaying that John's removed more parts than you've added.

@ChrisETH I also almost forgot.

You keep saying I insulted him, you don't what that means right?

If actually had insulted him, I would've called him pejorative words, skipping over his work, which was what I criticized:

"Your work is bad" =/= "you are bad"

@ChrisETH You still can't see his "modifications" weren't enough warrant a full submission, right? Again, how much better is that decrease of 4.2% in a 1k build, that still can't be properly used in most phones.

I used percentages because it shows the proportion of modification better, I did more in this Simple F4U-4 than he did in that Gorgeous A-10.

I guess you are right, he kept "the same experience for users", laggy for most Phones, normal for most Gaming PCs, nothing changed enough.

Also, being the responsible for this Jet conversion of a Propeller Aircraft, I'd say making it flyable takes more effort than removing details from a 1k parts build, because frankly, at least 20% of the detailing made by actual great builders, I can guarantee are just redundant, I seen aircraft here in this site that are smoother than any photo of the real aircraft I've seen.

Also, where did you get that 68% from? The original was 55parts, mine is 84parts, that's an increase of 29parts, that might be an increase of over 50%, but nowhere near close to 60%.

Here's what I did, remove the prop, gave it a more round nose, add 6 machineguns (with their connecting wings hidden inside the nose).

Then I made the "Pulse jet" looking fuselages and put 1 J15 Engines inside each one, and sat then on top of 1 Long Hardpoint for each, then I had to balance out the poor thing, because it wouldn't fly or get out of the ground otherwise.

All the work was based on this picture: https://i.redd.it/51cmg20982851.jpg

In hindsight, I should've colored it black, looks better that way too.

Continued*

"@JohnHorton I hope you understand I wasn't complimenting you."

So yeah, can it m8. Because I can be very petty when people deserve it.

@Liensis

"What he did, was keep the same plane, but take away parts, to make it better on those who can't run that original with more parts. If it looks the same, it's a success, because it needs to be the same experience, but with less parts."

I think that should explain. He even says that in the description he wants to get rid of some parts to make it less laggy. 4.2% is much better. Especially because it depends on which parts they get rid of. On top of that, yes you had less parts to add too, and @JohnHorton had more parts to get rid of, but he still got rid of more parts than you added. And on top of that, at least 8 or more of those parts are missiles for gods sake. So don't run around either. John didn't add a truckload of engines, because they wanted the same experience for users. This is why numbers is better than percentages. Percentages don't represent what's added or subtracted. John meticulously got rid of the shark design on the nose, you slapped some engines with a few fuselage parts on it, and you just got the fuselage parts to add to the 29 parts. Either way, that's that m8. He got rid of designs making the mobile experience worse, because those small meticulous designs require many parts, which is why you couldn't recognize any difference with a glance. But does your percentage reflect that? No.

"I'm of the opinion, modifications to prior vehicles should either add something new, or give a good improvement to the past vehicle."

He did. He subtracted the design to make it easier to run; which removed more parts than you added. And I think his post requires more effort. I could slap some engines on the same plane, and be done fast. Removing designs without ruining the original, that's much harder. Why am i defending his "4.2%" decrease? Because it required more effort than what this thing is. I'm defending it because you just went and tried to insult someone, when you could've skipped, and that's mean. If you wanna be petty, go ahead, because I can be much more petty m8. Think about it. Those fuselage parts per engine seems to be about 4 fuselage parts per engine, adding to 16 parts. Give or take a few. There are 4 actual engines. Add those engines, we're at 20. That's an easy 68% of parts added. In such few parts. The other 9? Might be assorted. Again, the point stands, that you went and insulted someone, and then proved to be hypocritical. And if you try to say you never meant hard will:

@ChrisETH I'm gonna be very petty here:

From 1143 to 1095 parts, it's a 4.2% decrease in parts.

From 55 to 84 parts, that's an increase of 52.7% parts.

This means his submission is much more closer to the original than mine, and:

How much of a diference will 4.2% less parts make in a >1k part vehicle? How many phones will that help?

I'm of the opinion, modifications to prior vehicles should either add something new, or give a good improvement to the past vehicle.

It's a success at filling this site with more spam aircraft clones, it's not much different from those people that re-submit 2 or 3 year old good creations on their just made account, without any modification.

So, I'll not apologize for saying the truth, his submission should not have been done, but I can't control people, only tell them afterwards that they made a mistake.

As for the wrong number, yes, I'll say you right, I couldn't bother going back to both aircraft again and just went off of my memories, as I thought it was a decrease from around 1115 to 1095 parts.

@JohnHorton OOOOOOFFFFFFFF

@ChrisETH I removed his comment for breaking the rules! It's called KARMA

@JohnHorton yep

@ChrisETH I think he kind of broke the website rules didn't he?

@Liensis so in truth, you've misunderstood, its supposed to look the same, for the same experience.

cringy mic drop

@Liensis you crack me up. the improved plane has 1095 parts, and the original has 1143. If you're going to spout a number, be sure first m8. On top of that, that means your plane is more parts closer to the original m8. So you're wrong. What he did, was keep the same plane, but take away parts, to make it better on those who can't run that original with more parts. If it looks the same, it's a success, because it needs to be the same experience, but with less parts. You just misunderstood, spouted off a quick white lie, and you're caught. m8 just apologize and delete ur comments if u want to. I mean you literally insulted @JohnHorton for no reason

@ChrisETH No, he said "he removed unnecessary details", whatever they were.

I modified this aircraft to be different enough, giving it 4 engines and giving it 29 more parts.

As for the 2nd comment I made, I felt confused as to why he pinned my criticism.

For the A-10 he tried to modify, he would've needed to do a lot more than taking away 20 or so parts away.

"Sorry to say this, but your modification to this aircraft is laughable."
- You.

"@JohnHorton I hope you understand I wasn't complimenting you."

Well thats a bit hypocritical, isn't it?

I'm not saying you can't modify designs, but you made the same amount of changes as @JohnHorton, so ummmm, you really were hypocritical were you?