@IMFLYINHERE
With some modding it probably still will work -- reverse the velocity and make the bullet do no damage. My "flamethrower" and "water sprinkler" are somewhat recent creations that still mostly work -- one deal very small damage and the other deal negative damage (repairs parts)
Update:
From simple guidance in Discord I am able to locate (and extract) engine RPMs. However they are of little use because they are directly tied to wheel speed (and doesn't idle) and thus does not reflect the actual power output.
The game's even worse than I had thought.
woah woah woah this topic is getting quite hot actually. not expecting it.
@SnoWFLakE0s
Fantastic work on documentation. I will read it.
Ha. There is a typo on "list of variables". The GS entry have the "the" typed wrong.
Wait. Brake is a boolean value? What the $#&*
@jamesPLANESii
That's interesting. I was wondering what the variable tabs are for.
It's a bit like in CAD where you can create your own labels and variables and use them in your designs (in case say you need to scale a part)
@WormWithLegs
I understand there are a wheel rpm limit. That's something visible in the "part editor" where you can specify the maxwheelrpm. Obviously there are code associated with it, just as it's obvious car engines have a rpm variable.
__
Yes. We have the "brake" .. wait.
Yes, we have the brake input as a variable (so we have gauges and stuff pre-cockpit update, good job dev) but ew never actually have a part that has a brake with a "brake" input field where you can input the control for braking (e.g. you might want a parking brake you can engage while you are revving up the jets), except airbrakes.
That will actually be very cool. Just like old Cessna you can now brake your plane wheels no matter what else it is doing. Heck we even have these new VR handles and switches.
So far limiting wheel rpm the only way I have found to limit the speed of a ground vehicle (if you want something slow but powerful, like a tank or a truck)
I overheard a conversation about people modding engines to include "power multiplier" and max power (if that's the case) and how it affects engines. I know it affects Jet engines, but I also heard discussions on car engines yet I cannot find them
Also, regarding prop rpm:
What will happen if I have multiple propeller engines? There is no way to select which propeller rpm it is. I would assume it's the last prop engine you put on the plane that counts.
What about multiple car engines for that sake?
why would I care
It's a stupid game that the only reason I downloaded again is to make sure the accurized models will actually perform decent so I can put this design somewhere else and stop wasting time here for any longer
of which it did. end of story.
I was going to drop a like
But consider the toxicity from everywhere and the lackluster response from game devs about updating the game's core, I didn't.
Only the ones that suffered miserably, and some more, are deemed "worthy" by the community and produce truly excellent builds. But by that time, you'd be much better off going either to professional CAD your design (like I am doing) or just play another game.
Yes, the turret is a bit too big. Not very noticeable, but it instantly thrown all of the german aspect ratio out of the window
How did you mess it up like that
@Gestour
Yes, but again. My thinking is that the slowness of the core should be reflected in the game running slow rather than laggy and having parts glitching all over the place
although I guess part of the argument against that theory would be how the programmer would assume that the device is able to do this many frames (or whatsover) per second
However, this does not make sense when some symptoms are "weak joints" or "wobbly hinges" which appear to be more of floating point precision loss rather than the inability to perform calculations. although there may be attempts to speed things up by intentionally dropping precision.
I'm asking the question rather to confirm/find out the reason and potential workarounds.
@TheGreatToad
Yes, but obviously no improvements had taken place.
Well, there are some slight improvements, but mostly just new parts with no changes to core game mechanics to either be more realistic or be more performant. To say we have a new aero engine would be a false statement.
I'm writing this here because 6.3 years ago, the developer thought "hmm this does not seem right. Something is probably wrong here" and he gave suggestions such as "more powerful engines" and "more realistic drag/aero". However, during this 6.3 years, we do not have "more powerful engines" and we do not have "more realistic drag/aero". What we have is a bunch of new crap that doesn't work very well.
However, to say that they didn't do anything would be a understatement. They released SimpleRockets 2, which sounds promising, however it's a separate app and it costs quite a handful
@Formula350
I do not know what you are talking about.
I also think you should try fiddle with terrain quality and physics quality. And, of course, it's not mobile.
Also. SimplePlanes do not run on Unity.
Very good (a.k.a. incredible) amount of ground clearance, although they won't work with the type of load given to them. Four-link is the go-to for monster trucks.
See this one
@Ethological @Rapidfire747w
I think it's designed this way so as to confuse enemies. Reversed layout nevertheless give great advantages over pitch agity.
@kaaraabiner
Eh. Maybe.
@Ergi
The american (or the way I learned) is "cannon".
The german way that I come to know is "kanone"
It's more like a howitzer, or "Haubitze", but I had yet to find a proper designation. Also some guns in german arsenal is called "mörsar". Probably meant "mortar".
The 15cm slg is called "schweres Infanterie Geschütz 33", with "geschütz" meaning "gun", and "schweres" meaning "heavy".
So piecing everything together, this might be called "schweres waffentrager auf E 100".
But the way german call SPGs -- they call them Geschützwagon instead.
So maybe I will call it "Schwerer Geshützwagon E 100". This end up being simply adding"schwerer" to the vehicle in world of tanks.
But if you look at it, the infamous "schwerer gustav" have a caliber of 80cm, and that is a supersonic gun firing armor-piercing shells. This instead simply lobs high-explosive shells.
@Vastalen
The physics of the game just isn't accurate enough to handle things like that.
I think you will be better off with spheres (or hemispheres) with large friction values (and some mechanism to maintain contact between the two).
And, well, you know how the game treat all fuselage (no matter the edges) as cubes.
He could have totally used 2 extra parts to make it explode via activation groups. and 10 parts for a pig-like object instead of the cockpit. Also the wheels should be put on the outside to increase stability
But it's good. It's pretty good.
You can do a university-level project just by building one of this out. Then you can write and publish a worthwhile article by bragging about it.
Remote-control bird anyone? N-20 motors are quite versatile. Battery may be heavy but at least we have plastic.
I'd prefer making a real-life electric model of a 10-wheel mobile-crane, rather than making such a skeleton build in simpleplanes.
It's utterly pointless, but in the mean time, damn. This is .. good.
He even tossed in central (lockable) diff. Credits to this guy.
Minor mistake:
The lower cylinder (should) house the return spring, and the upper cylinder is the damper. It should be connected to the breech block via the small vertical fuselage block, and the arm (horizontal small fuselage block) should extend outward.
@Sm10684
Pretty awesome.
That said, I believe stocky cars like this kind should use less than 1K parts. Like, 500 or something should get it done .....
Yeah, I don't know why but they did curve the engine exhaust upward. If they think it's going to hit the ground they can just cut it.
Pretty awesome. I like these "square" cars. Nowadays more round ones look like ... they are good cars, but they don't look as "car-like" by contrast. Maybe.
@NightmareCorporation
Imaging seeing someone driving this around in multiplayer ...
I mean it handles okay, so a ground trip from Yeager to Bandit won't be too hard...
Well, depend on how many people (you) are (being) chased (chase) wt
@RailfanEthan
lol. Petition to change description to "Press 1 to set on fire"
Since it will occasionally explode (it's rockets, duh)
An alternative to using smoke particles (from rockets) is to mod a gun
@UltraLight
This is very decent.
And, I mean, only 200 parts. This is good.
And, perhaps, a reminder that we really shouldn't be building highly detailed cars ...
100 parts? sick
@IMFLYINHERE
With some modding it probably still will work -- reverse the velocity and make the bullet do no damage. My "flamethrower" and "water sprinkler" are somewhat recent creations that still mostly work -- one deal very small damage and the other deal negative damage (repairs parts)
To scale, but massively fast. and heavy.
Althought the weight issue cannot really be solved without massive research on actual weight of parts..
Massive static model. 3D printing much?
I wish DRS would be a thing. Cars with aero can go absolutely insane with those.
Update:
+1From simple guidance in Discord I am able to locate (and extract) engine RPMs. However they are of little use because they are directly tied to wheel speed (and doesn't idle) and thus does not reflect the actual power output.
The game's even worse than I had thought.
It's starting to take shape!
woah woah woah this topic is getting quite hot actually. not expecting it.
@SnoWFLakE0s
Fantastic work on documentation. I will read it.
Ha. There is a typo on "list of variables". The GS entry have the "the" typed wrong.
Wait. Brake is a boolean value? What the $#&*
@jamesPLANESii
That's interesting. I was wondering what the variable tabs are for.
It's a bit like in CAD where you can create your own labels and variables and use them in your designs (in case say you need to scale a part)
@WormWithLegs
I understand there are a wheel rpm limit. That's something visible in the "part editor" where you can specify the maxwheelrpm. Obviously there are code associated with it, just as it's obvious car engines have a rpm variable.
__
Yes. We have the "brake" .. wait.
Yes, we have the brake input as a variable (so we have gauges and stuff pre-cockpit update, good job dev) but ew never actually have a part that has a brake with a "brake" input field where you can input the control for braking (e.g. you might want a parking brake you can engage while you are revving up the jets), except airbrakes.
That will actually be very cool. Just like old Cessna you can now brake your plane wheels no matter what else it is doing. Heck we even have these new VR handles and switches.
So far limiting wheel rpm the only way I have found to limit the speed of a ground vehicle (if you want something slow but powerful, like a tank or a truck)
+3I overheard a conversation about people modding engines to include "power multiplier" and max power (if that's the case) and how it affects engines. I know it affects Jet engines, but I also heard discussions on car engines yet I cannot find them
Also, regarding prop rpm:
+2What will happen if I have multiple propeller engines? There is no way to select which propeller rpm it is. I would assume it's the last prop engine you put on the plane that counts.
What about multiple car engines for that sake?
the old gun have a burst. the cannons dont
valiant effort.
My version
Not too different.
why would I care
It's a stupid game that the only reason I downloaded again is to make sure the accurized models will actually perform decent so I can put this design somewhere else and stop wasting time here for any longer
of which it did. end of story.
I was going to drop a like
But consider the toxicity from everywhere and the lackluster response from game devs about updating the game's core, I didn't.
Only the ones that suffered miserably, and some more, are deemed "worthy" by the community and produce truly excellent builds. But by that time, you'd be much better off going either to professional CAD your design (like I am doing) or just play another game.
Yes, the turret is a bit too big. Not very noticeable, but it instantly thrown all of the german aspect ratio out of the window
How did you mess it up like that
@Gestour
Yes, but again. My thinking is that the slowness of the core should be reflected in the game running slow rather than laggy and having parts glitching all over the place
although I guess part of the argument against that theory would be how the programmer would assume that the device is able to do this many frames (or whatsover) per second
However, this does not make sense when some symptoms are "weak joints" or "wobbly hinges" which appear to be more of floating point precision loss rather than the inability to perform calculations. although there may be attempts to speed things up by intentionally dropping precision.
I'm asking the question rather to confirm/find out the reason and potential workarounds.
... Oh. We have multiplayer. This help explain.
@TheGreatToad
Yes, but obviously no improvements had taken place.
Well, there are some slight improvements, but mostly just new parts with no changes to core game mechanics to either be more realistic or be more performant. To say we have a new aero engine would be a false statement.
I'm writing this here because 6.3 years ago, the developer thought "hmm this does not seem right. Something is probably wrong here" and he gave suggestions such as "more powerful engines" and "more realistic drag/aero". However, during this 6.3 years, we do not have "more powerful engines" and we do not have "more realistic drag/aero". What we have is a bunch of new crap that doesn't work very well.
However, to say that they didn't do anything would be a understatement. They released SimpleRockets 2, which sounds promising, however it's a separate app and it costs quite a handful
+6For a moment I thought the lower ones are some kind of weird emoji characters
🤩
@Formula350
I do not know what you are talking about.
I also think you should try fiddle with terrain quality and physics quality. And, of course, it's not mobile.
Also. SimplePlanes do not run on Unity.
Hey, it is actually quite impressive ...
Very good (a.k.a. incredible) amount of ground clearance, although they won't work with the type of load given to them. Four-link is the go-to for monster trucks.
See this one
@bityu
+1It's not necessary the look that matters. Although, few of the few care about handling, too.
Quite a lineup.
The handling on pavement (a.k.a. runway) is quite incredible. But it can't even move offroad.
Quite heavy, too.
@realSavageMan
lol
@Ethological @Rapidfire747w
I think it's designed this way so as to confuse enemies. Reversed layout nevertheless give great advantages over pitch agity.
@kaaraabiner
Eh. Maybe.
@Ergi
The american (or the way I learned) is "cannon".
The german way that I come to know is "kanone"
It's more like a howitzer, or "Haubitze", but I had yet to find a proper designation. Also some guns in german arsenal is called "mörsar". Probably meant "mortar".
The 15cm slg is called "schweres Infanterie Geschütz 33", with "geschütz" meaning "gun", and "schweres" meaning "heavy".
So piecing everything together, this might be called "schweres waffentrager auf E 100".
But the way german call SPGs -- they call them Geschützwagon instead.
So maybe I will call it "Schwerer Geshützwagon E 100". This end up being simply adding"schwerer" to the vehicle in world of tanks.
But if you look at it, the infamous "schwerer gustav" have a caliber of 80cm, and that is a supersonic gun firing armor-piercing shells. This instead simply lobs high-explosive shells.
why don't you just strap the rotators to the propeller directly?
@Vastalen
+2The physics of the game just isn't accurate enough to handle things like that.
I think you will be better off with spheres (or hemispheres) with large friction values (and some mechanism to maintain contact between the two).
And, well, you know how the game treat all fuselage (no matter the edges) as cubes.
@TheNightmareCompany
How did you make sure that the blades do not fight each other?
@TheNightmareCompany
I mean that you could make the user able to explode the "tnt" via press of button (or activation group)
sounds interesting.
Fixed plane.
link
I feel like it is missing something, but I can't name what that is missing.
"I hate to see a bird go down like that."
What's wrong with helicopters?
He could have totally used 2 extra parts to make it explode via activation groups. and 10 parts for a pig-like object instead of the cockpit. Also the wheels should be put on the outside to increase stability
But it's good. It's pretty good.
I had a upload using regular pistons to power the wheels, but it gets janky.
You can use the wheels on my vehicle, if you like.
The input for the rotators can also simply be a set of ternary operator like the following:
(Trim < 0) ? (-0.5) : ( (Trim >0) ? 0.5 : 0 )
+1I used 0.5 here because if you max out Trim it will be rather janky.
It's a two-stroke.
Oh, the title says that.
Such a waste. You can make it into a 4-stroke by adding another set of camrod and valves.
You can do a university-level project just by building one of this out. Then you can write and publish a worthwhile article by bragging about it.
+1Remote-control bird anyone? N-20 motors are quite versatile. Battery may be heavy but at least we have plastic.
I'd prefer making a real-life electric model of a 10-wheel mobile-crane, rather than making such a skeleton build in simpleplanes.
It's utterly pointless, but in the mean time, damn. This is .. good.
He even tossed in central (lockable) diff. Credits to this guy.
If we remove all the reference whatsoever, this is a pretty handsome guy in the flying suit.
+1Minor mistake:
The lower cylinder (should) house the return spring, and the upper cylinder is the damper. It should be connected to the breech block via the small vertical fuselage block, and the arm (horizontal small fuselage block) should extend outward.
@UgandaKnuckles
+1I am.
@Chancey21
I asked myself the same question, but since it mention "flight" and "handling" I assume it meant a plane
@Sm10684
Pretty awesome.
That said, I believe stocky cars like this kind should use less than 1K parts. Like, 500 or something should get it done .....
Yeah, I don't know why but they did curve the engine exhaust upward. If they think it's going to hit the ground they can just cut it.
Pretty awesome. I like these "square" cars. Nowadays more round ones look like ... they are good cars, but they don't look as "car-like" by contrast. Maybe.
Wait. The picture is Hockenheimring. no?
@NightmareCorporation
Imaging seeing someone driving this around in multiplayer ...
I mean it handles okay, so a ground trip from Yeager to Bandit won't be too hard...
+2Well, depend on how many people (you) are (being) chased (chase) wt
It's easy to see why it's the best "vehicle" ever to be on SP net
Wondering why they painted it black in the first place ...
I like the flags
@RailfanEthan
lol. Petition to change description to "Press 1 to set on fire"
Since it will occasionally explode (it's rockets, duh)
An alternative to using smoke particles (from rockets) is to mod a gun
lol
@UltraLight
+1This is very decent.
And, I mean, only 200 parts. This is good.
And, perhaps, a reminder that we really shouldn't be building highly detailed cars ...
@DEN12345
+1I refuse to mod things, so the smallest (and simplest) wheel possible is a rotator attached this way
For haloween, this is perfect