Discord finally rolled out the thing they've been planning for a while now where image embeds only work for a limited time (a day or so, if I recall correctly). It sounds like just an anti-user update at first but it means they no longer have to be hosting hundreds of thousands of images for free on other sites, so it's a big improvement for their servers and backend stuff.
SimplePlanes 👏 was 👏 not 👏 abandoned 👏 it 👏 reached 👏 the 👏 end 👏 of 👏 life 👏 that 👏 all 👏 games 👏 come 👏 to 👏 and 👏 Jundroo 👏 decided 👏 it 👏 was 👏 time 👏 to 👏 move 👏 to 👏 the 👏 future 👏 instead 👏 of 👏 a 👏 nine 👏 year 👏 old 👏 game 👏 that 👏 was 👏 increasingly 👏 difficult 👏 to 👏 work 👏 on 👏 due 👏 to 👏 its 👏 age.
How 👏 many 👏 times 👏 do 👏 I 👏 have 👏 to 👏 keep 👏 telling 👏 people 👏 this.
You can't rename yourself to a name that's been previously used, even if the old account has been deleted. (Fun fact that's also why I have the 01 at the end of my name; I made an account, changed my mind and deleted it, then changed my mind again)
@Trainzo When you select a part, you can bring up the precision transform menu by clicking the Rotate Part option (arrow on the right-hand side of the screen) and then selecting the icon that looks like a wrench in a circle. On the menu panel that opens, scroll down past Options and Rotation Amount, and you should see Nudge Amount.
There should be a movement increment (or something similar named, I forgot what it's labeled as) towards the bottom of the position/rotation adjustment panel. You might need to scroll down.
The default value should be .078125
Depends on the application. The Twin Otter is a better all-around aircraft and can just generally do more (more passengers/cargo, longer range, greater safety with two engines), but subjectively the DHC-3 is a better bush plane (less maintenance, still comparable passenger/cargo capacity, possibly better STOL performance).
In other words, from a certain point of view the DHC-6 is essentially a DHC-3 but larger and more capable, while the DHC-3 is quite literally the DHC-2 (in both design and role) but bigger and better.
The C-47 in question has 47 parts and no interior. The only notable difference between it and a civilian DC-3 at that scale is the cargo door (and technically the engine performance, but better to get that so that it flies like it should rather than making the numbers in the editor match up precisely). In short, I do not understand the problem.
@ShinyGemsBro Well, definitely the vast majority of (pre-war) J-3 Cubs were yellow with some variation of the black stripe, but the engine cowling on the Bush Plane is definitely based on the later Super Cub (many of which were also yellow, though they are commonly seen in a variety of other colors as well unlike the J-3).
@ShinyGemsBro well achskyually the Bush Plane is closer to a PA-18 Super Cub than a classic J-3
Also,
The Kicking Fish is loosely based on an F-16
The Little Bugger is a Chenowth sand rail
The Sea Plane is a Lake LA-4
And the closest I've found for the Twin Prop is a DA42-style fuselage with PA-23 Apache wings, engines, and tail
@PPLLAANNEE oh sick thanks!
edit: the MIDI is kinda scuffed but it'll still be a huge help; I can still use it as a reference instead of having to do each note by ear now!
I'd also been wondering if something like this was possible but I never had the skill to even attempt it. THIS IS AMAZING!
I wonder if I can get it to play Valkyrie Airlines... will have to try that later.
@StockPlanesRemastered Hollow fuselages still have the collider of a regular fuselage (i.e. there's no "interior" and the ends are still solid), so if you need something - like a cargo plane - where another object can actually move through the tube while also not wanting to disableAircraftCollisions on the whole thing, this could be quite useful.
@WinsWings Yeah I'm with 32 and Graingy on this, having to pay for certain builds would just instantly make me ditch both games. The whole point of the websites is that anyone can share what they make for anyone else to play with, and locking user-created content behind a paywall is just an abhorrent business practice. I've got enough of a problem with official content being paywall-restricted. DLC for extra parts and whatnot I'd probably support, but outright having to pay to download user creations is a big no-no. This doesn't need to turn into War Thunder with all sorts of premium paywalled builds, when this is supposed to be a fun sandbox game where you can build anything you want.
I do agree with you that some "preset" parts would be neat though, like more landing gears, better wings, tank tracks, and whatnot.
@AshdenpawTG22 "Ghosting"? You mean, ramping down updates as they shift focus to a new project?
Remember, Jundroo is literally seven people. They can't really work on two projects on the scale of Juno/SP simultaneously effectively, and Juno - as the newer and significantly more advanced and in-depth project - obviously would receive priority.
It is unrealistic to assume that development on both could continue simultaneously, or that updates for SimplePlanes would just keep coming indefinitely.
I still haven't made up my mind on the free edition of Juno though. On the one hand it's great to get more attention to the game and probably will in fact help with profits ("cash grab" in the videogame sense is not an appropriate term for this though; that would be more like if they had hyped up Juno as a KSP-beater - which they didn't - and then abandoned it two weeks after launch once a bunch of people had bought it), but on the other hand their presentation of it is somewhat misleading in terms of what you'd actually be getting for free.
Huh, okay. Well, in order to give my thoughts I'm going to know precisely what you mean by "lack of effort put in by Jundroo," because wrapping up development on a nine-year-old game to finally fully move to their next major project is decidedly not lack of effort.
My inability to understand the meaning of this post is further impeded by your inability to communicate in a decipherable manner, as well as an abhorrent lack of both punctuation and any kind of formatting structure.
Short version:
When you bought the game you did so with the full knowledge that development would eventually come to an end, as with pretty much every other game that doesn't follow the content-as-a-service model, and now that that time has come you're claiming you've been betrayed?
Have y'all not had games reach end-of-life before? They aren't trying to subconsciously convert everyone to Juno so they can axe SP, they're just finished developing SP and have moved on to their next project (and are showing it off here because... people that play both, I guess?).
it feels like a massive stab in the back for Jundroo to pay little to no attention to Simpleplanes to make it a better PC and mobile game
The game has been out for over nine years (December 2014 was the first launch, on mobile only; the Steam version came a year later), which is a fairly long time for a video game these days and a rather absurdly long time for an indie game, much less a studio's first truly successful game (sorry SimplePhysics and SR1, but it's kinda true), much less one that was originally just a mobile game. There is no backstabbing or desecration (whatever that would mean in this context); it's been public knowledge for a long time now that SP is built on spaghetti code and became more and more difficult to update over the years (a fate Juno will hopefully avoid now that they know what not to do).
The game isn't being worked on anymore because it's almost a decade old and the developers decided it was time to work on something bigger and (arguably) better. That's just how it is.
Also, please don't tag me on things I have not requested to be tagged on.
@PlaneFlightX Yep, that was it. Thanks so much! It's been a while since I've worked with FT lol.
And now comes the fun part, fine-tuning it so it actually does what I want it to do how I want it to do it
Looking forward to the QoL things and whatever the career expansions turn out to be! (Also, were those some circular solar panel arrays? Neat!)
Can't say I agree with the decision to go free with extra purchases to remove ads and unlock the full game, though. Saying "most of the content in the game is free" is rather misleading when you consider that the things that are now not free are:
The full system
Tinker panel
Procedural wheels/props/rockets/jets (which, if my understanding is correct, means that the free version won't have any customization of these parts at all, given how the "procedural" tag had been applied to all of that when the features were first added)
Vizzy
Several launch locations
The entirety of the career mode
Ability to have more than two active crafts
If you ask me, that list comprises the majority of the content that keeps the game interesting for more than a few hours (particularly the procedural parts), and saying that "most of the content in the game is free" while locking all of the above behind a paywall is decidedly not the kind of full honesty that I'd come to admire Jundroo for.
Eh, maybe I'm griping too much. I already bought the game last year on Steam after all (and have indeed been enjoying it quite a lot), so this doesn't affect me.
Well, I use Firefox as well and this hasn't happened to me (so far, at least), so I'd suggest running a virus scan on your end.
Also, what adblock do you use?
@ThatKindaWeeb I haven't found any unfortunately (in fact I wasn't sure it was jettisonable until I saw a mention of the belly tank jettison handle in a model cockpit). I presume it'd be basically like any other drop tank, though stable flight is probably even more important than otherwise.
You can scale down the visual size of the wing part (and any other parts, for that matter) using Overload. Basically, they make the wing whatever size they need for it to work, then scale it down with Overload so it can be hidden.
@Mousewithamachinegun123 bruh it's still not even remotely done
I haven't built anything in SP in like six months and of the two things I could have for a platinum special, one is barely even a fuselage and the other has landing gear that I haven't been able to get to work the way they're supposed to in like a year (it's a quite complex mechanical design that I need to get right, but I haven't been able to)
Update like 24 hours later: I FINALLY FOUND A WORKAROUND FOR THE PROBLEM WITH THE LANDING GEAR WOOOOOOOOOO
We're back in business. Still need wings, tail, interior, external details, and flight controls, but I'm planning to work on those in the coming weeks.
A lot of times I just end up flying around in circles because I can't out-maneuver the other plane. The AI won't let off and it just keeps flying around in circles.
The AI tends to prefer two-circle/Lufbery/rate fights (which, given its fairly simple aggressive programming that more-or-less amounts to "keep the nose pointed at the enemy," makes sense), so if you and the AI have similar capabilities you will probably get locked into a rate fight if you allow yourself to be.
The tricky part of a rate fight against a comparable aircraft is that it is very difficult to leave or reverse your turn without opening yourself up to attack. The AI's programming accounts for this, and it can be very difficult to disengage and try for a different attack if you don't have enough energy to stay away from the enemy's nose while reversing your turn.
The best way to avoid this is to not get into a rate fight to begin with, but you can also try to turn the situation to your advantage by moving into the vertical axis, which will cost you energy but decrease your turn radius and help you get around the circle faster.
@ColonelRelford If only the airlines and the FAA still saw it this way... Now it's all about how many boxes they can check off to hit the DEI numbers, not about the competency and experience of their flight crews.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: The physical laws of aviation do not care about the race, gender identity, skin tone, or any other social "qualifiers" the flight crew may have. Aviation is the one field where skill and experience should be prioritized over all else, and it pains me that somehow this has been cast aside in order for airlines to fill more DEI checkboxes for better press.
See here
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/RrB1A3/Cursed-Bush-Plane
Discord finally rolled out the thing they've been planning for a while now where image embeds only work for a limited time (a day or so, if I recall correctly). It sounds like just an anti-user update at first but it means they no longer have to be hosting hundreds of thousands of images for free on other sites, so it's a big improvement for their servers and backend stuff.
+3Objectively the best replica on the site of a very unique and beautiful plane. Well done!
+1SimplePlanes 👏 was 👏 not 👏 abandoned 👏 it 👏 reached 👏 the 👏 end 👏 of 👏 life 👏 that 👏 all 👏 games 👏 come 👏 to 👏 and 👏 Jundroo 👏 decided 👏 it 👏 was 👏 time 👏 to 👏 move 👏 to 👏 the 👏 future 👏 instead 👏 of 👏 a 👏 nine 👏 year 👏 old 👏 game 👏 that 👏 was 👏 increasingly 👏 difficult 👏 to 👏 work 👏 on 👏 due 👏 to 👏 its 👏 age.
+10How 👏 many 👏 times 👏 do 👏 I 👏 have 👏 to 👏 keep 👏 telling 👏 people 👏 this.
Try
+3clamp01(VTOL)and then invert the input if necessary.You can't rename yourself to a name that's been previously used, even if the old account has been deleted. (Fun fact that's also why I have the 01 at the end of my name; I made an account, changed my mind and deleted it, then changed my mind again)
+2@Trainzo Of course, glad to be able to help!
@Trainzo When you select a part, you can bring up the precision transform menu by clicking the Rotate Part option (arrow on the right-hand side of the screen) and then selecting the icon that looks like a wrench in a circle. On the menu panel that opens, scroll down past Options and Rotation Amount, and you should see Nudge Amount.
@Trainzo Here you go. It's the Nudge Amount property.
There should be a movement increment (or something similar named, I forgot what it's labeled as) towards the bottom of the position/rotation adjustment panel. You might need to scroll down.
+1The default value should be .078125
@CrazyCatZe I think it fits it quite well.
Depends on the application. The Twin Otter is a better all-around aircraft and can just generally do more (more passengers/cargo, longer range, greater safety with two engines), but subjectively the DHC-3 is a better bush plane (less maintenance, still comparable passenger/cargo capacity, possibly better STOL performance).
In other words, from a certain point of view the DHC-6 is essentially a DHC-3 but larger and more capable, while the DHC-3 is quite literally the DHC-2 (in both design and role) but bigger and better.
They had us in the first part not gonna lie
- You're being creepy again, stop it.
- The C-47 in question has 47 parts and no interior. The only notable difference between it and a civilian DC-3 at that scale is the cargo door (and technically the engine performance, but better to get that so that it flies like it should rather than making the numbers in the editor match up precisely). In short, I do not understand the problem.
+1T, looks awesome!
When you try and get points by copying and pasting the site rules
@ShinyGemsBro Well, definitely the vast majority of (pre-war) J-3 Cubs were yellow with some variation of the black stripe, but the engine cowling on the Bush Plane is definitely based on the later Super Cub (many of which were also yellow, though they are commonly seen in a variety of other colors as well unlike the J-3).
@ShinyGemsBro well achskyually the Bush Plane is closer to a PA-18 Super Cub than a classic J-3
Also,
The Kicking Fish is loosely based on an F-16
The Little Bugger is a Chenowth sand rail
The Sea Plane is a Lake LA-4
And the closest I've found for the Twin Prop is a DA42-style fuselage with PA-23 Apache wings, engines, and tail
@PPLLAANNEE oh sick thanks!
edit: the MIDI is kinda scuffed but it'll still be a huge help; I can still use it as a reference instead of having to do each note by ear now!
I'd also been wondering if something like this was possible but I never had the skill to even attempt it. THIS IS AMAZING!
+2I wonder if I can get it to play Valkyrie Airlines... will have to try that later.
Finally I can download more RAM
+2Your bio says that you are 8 years old. Is this correct?
If so, I think there's another rule you're going to hate.
Edit: I see you have since updated your bio to remove this information. Smooth.
+5@StockPlanesRemastered Hollow fuselages still have the collider of a regular fuselage (i.e. there's no "interior" and the ends are still solid), so if you need something - like a cargo plane - where another object can actually move through the tube while also not wanting to disableAircraftCollisions on the whole thing, this could be quite useful.
+1LEGO disassembling soundsWooo!
I don't, actually.
@phrongus word
@HuskyDynamics01
+1edit: yep
@WisconsinStatePolice you shall NOT slander Burt Rutan in this house
+1@WinsWings Yeah I'm with 32 and Graingy on this, having to pay for certain builds would just instantly make me ditch both games. The whole point of the websites is that anyone can share what they make for anyone else to play with, and locking user-created content behind a paywall is just an abhorrent business practice. I've got enough of a problem with official content being paywall-restricted. DLC for extra parts and whatnot I'd probably support, but outright having to pay to download user creations is a big no-no. This doesn't need to turn into War Thunder with all sorts of premium paywalled builds, when this is supposed to be a fun sandbox game where you can build anything you want.
I do agree with you that some "preset" parts would be neat though, like more landing gears, better wings, tank tracks, and whatnot.
+3@AshdenpawTG22 "Ghosting"? You mean, ramping down updates as they shift focus to a new project?
Remember, Jundroo is literally seven people. They can't really work on two projects on the scale of Juno/SP simultaneously effectively, and Juno - as the newer and significantly more advanced and in-depth project - obviously would receive priority.
It is unrealistic to assume that development on both could continue simultaneously, or that updates for SimplePlanes would just keep coming indefinitely.
I still haven't made up my mind on the free edition of Juno though. On the one hand it's great to get more attention to the game and probably will in fact help with profits ("cash grab" in the videogame sense is not an appropriate term for this though; that would be more like if they had hyped up Juno as a KSP-beater - which they didn't - and then abandoned it two weeks after launch once a bunch of people had bought it), but on the other hand their presentation of it is somewhat misleading in terms of what you'd actually be getting for free.
+3Huh, okay. Well, in order to give my thoughts I'm going to know precisely what you mean by "lack of effort put in by Jundroo," because wrapping up development on a nine-year-old game to finally fully move to their next major project is decidedly not lack of effort.
+1My inability to understand the meaning of this post is further impeded by your inability to communicate in a decipherable manner, as well as an abhorrent lack of both punctuation and any kind of formatting structure.
+1Short version:
+1When you bought the game you did so with the full knowledge that development would eventually come to an end, as with pretty much every other game that doesn't follow the content-as-a-service model, and now that that time has come you're claiming you've been betrayed?
Have y'all not had games reach end-of-life before? They aren't trying to subconsciously convert everyone to Juno so they can axe SP, they're just finished developing SP and have moved on to their next project (and are showing it off here because... people that play both, I guess?).
The game has been out for over nine years (December 2014 was the first launch, on mobile only; the Steam version came a year later), which is a fairly long time for a video game these days and a rather absurdly long time for an indie game, much less a studio's first truly successful game (sorry SimplePhysics and SR1, but it's kinda true), much less one that was originally just a mobile game. There is no backstabbing or desecration (whatever that would mean in this context); it's been public knowledge for a long time now that SP is built on spaghetti code and became more and more difficult to update over the years (a fate Juno will hopefully avoid now that they know what not to do).
+1The game isn't being worked on anymore because it's almost a decade old and the developers decided it was time to work on something bigger and (arguably) better. That's just how it is.
Also, please don't tag me on things I have not requested to be tagged on.
The Mk. XIV was the most commonly used (and most successful) Spitfire in this role according to my research.
@PlaneFlightX Yep, that was it. Thanks so much! It's been a while since I've worked with FT lol.
+2And now comes the fun part, fine-tuning it so it actually does what I want it to do how I want it to do it
Looking forward to the QoL things and whatever the career expansions turn out to be! (Also, were those some circular solar panel arrays? Neat!)
Can't say I agree with the decision to go free with extra purchases to remove ads and unlock the full game, though. Saying "most of the content in the game is free" is rather misleading when you consider that the things that are now not free are:
If you ask me, that list comprises the majority of the content that keeps the game interesting for more than a few hours (particularly the procedural parts), and saying that "most of the content in the game is free" while locking all of the above behind a paywall is decidedly not the kind of full honesty that I'd come to admire Jundroo for.
+13Eh, maybe I'm griping too much. I already bought the game last year on Steam after all (and have indeed been enjoying it quite a lot), so this doesn't affect me.
One way to check whether it's Firefox or not would be to visit the site in a different browser.
+1Well, I use Firefox as well and this hasn't happened to me (so far, at least), so I'd suggest running a virus scan on your end.
+1Also, what adblock do you use?
@Graingy I think you should see a doctor for that
@ThatKindaWeeb I haven't found any unfortunately (in fact I wasn't sure it was jettisonable until I saw a mention of the belly tank jettison handle in a model cockpit). I presume it'd be basically like any other drop tank, though stable flight is probably even more important than otherwise.
Conformal centerline drop tank.
+1You can scale down the visual size of the wing part (and any other parts, for that matter) using Overload. Basically, they make the wing whatever size they need for it to work, then scale it down with Overload so it can be hidden.
+2Strawberry jam
@Mousewithamachinegun123 bruh it's still not even remotely done
I haven't built anything in SP in like six months and of the two things I could have for a platinum special, one is barely even a fuselage and the other has landing gear that I haven't been able to get to work the way they're supposed to in like a year (it's a quite complex mechanical design that I need to get right, but I haven't been able to)
Update like 24 hours later: I FINALLY FOUND A WORKAROUND FOR THE PROBLEM WITH THE LANDING GEAR WOOOOOOOOOO
We're back in business. Still need wings, tail, interior, external details, and flight controls, but I'm planning to work on those in the coming weeks.
The AI tends to prefer two-circle/Lufbery/rate fights (which, given its fairly simple aggressive programming that more-or-less amounts to "keep the nose pointed at the enemy," makes sense), so if you and the AI have similar capabilities you will probably get locked into a rate fight if you allow yourself to be.
+4The tricky part of a rate fight against a comparable aircraft is that it is very difficult to leave or reverse your turn without opening yourself up to attack. The AI's programming accounts for this, and it can be very difficult to disengage and try for a different attack if you don't have enough energy to stay away from the enemy's nose while reversing your turn.
The best way to avoid this is to not get into a rate fight to begin with, but you can also try to turn the situation to your advantage by moving into the vertical axis, which will cost you energy but decrease your turn radius and help you get around the circle faster.
@ColonelRelford If only the airlines and the FAA still saw it this way... Now it's all about how many boxes they can check off to hit the DEI numbers, not about the competency and experience of their flight crews.
+1I've said it before and I'll say it again: The physical laws of aviation do not care about the race, gender identity, skin tone, or any other social "qualifiers" the flight crew may have. Aviation is the one field where skill and experience should be prioritized over all else, and it pains me that somehow this has been cast aside in order for airlines to fill more DEI checkboxes for better press.