@Bryan5 Thanks! I like where that's headed. Problem is, you can't see everything, and it changes the aero.
Easy fix: Have piston move camera up outside the plane when you look more than 75ish deg down and 90 deg left or right. Then have rotators spin the rig to the left, right, or below the plane when you are looking in those directions. Want 2 test this later. Still can't see thru the wings and body tho
@spefyjerbf This sounds feasible. It would be long. I found a neat storage function which might help. Heck using this on a plane means you should also take into account all the other forces of wings, drag, torque, etc. Makes it into one giant physics problem XD
@FujiwaraAutoShop True. But I don’t think performance cost takes xml modding into consideration. Ex. Some have auto aim canons with huge calculations which hinder performance. Not sure if the performance cost is based on the graphics or cpu
@TomatoIsAFruit Was trying to push for silver. Now I can use the “update xml” feature! It will be so useful on this plane because I modify the funky trees code real often.
@spefyjerbf Acceleration seems feasible in SP. When finding integrals, a constant is added. Does time go there? You said find the integral twice. So what is 'c' for the second one? I have an exam on this tomorrow and I haven't studied so forgive me if i'm horribly incorrect lol
You said, “inertial velocity vector.” Does that mean what I think it means? It would be possible to have an auto pilot system based on inertia?instead of angles? Like instead of trig? Does this use integrals? I’m curious
@Jundroo
Congrats and thanks for sparking tons of creativity! Every 1 or 2 years I come back to this game with an ambitious idea and determination. Since the funky trees update, so much creative potential has been unlocked! It’s gotten to the point where everyone can modify SP itself, making the bleeding edge of what’s possible in this physics sim the norm. Will development now stagnate?
.
If so, consider expanding the scope to include more objective based building. For example races, combat and challenges performed with others in an interactive online multiplayer setting. This would provide an UNLIMITED amount of build and gameplay objectives because player on player interactions are never the same. Robocraft is a game that exploited that to their advantage. It turned gamers into, building strategists. “Build contests take care of that” you say. I say, you left gamers out of the equation, just made builders better builders. When gamers have no reason to fly, SP will die and the build community will slowly fade.
.
Consider these things for a possible SP update or 2.0 title.
@ZeroWithSlashedO Oh, oh. When you said, "cockpit's variable," I thought you were referring to another regular cockpit on the plane, not the computer module part.
Doesn't the computer module also collect flight data, even without the main cockpit part? Pretty sure it does what you want too. I tried a similar thing to you with a glide bomb. I tried to have it lock on to an enemy as it falls toward it, but you have to be using that camera for it to lock on which defeats the purpose...
@Kevito212 Publicly available specifics about how this plane is programed are limited. Most of what I gather is from videos of it flying, online posts, etc. Still have a lot of programming hurdles to jump before this is really good. I actually sometimes refer to the microsoft flight sim manual for this plane lol. There's a section at the bottom about how it's configured in that sim
@Vincent
@SupremeDorian
Hello. I saw you are a moderator. Do you think you could help me put a gif and 2 pictures under this post? I can't figure out where to get the proper .gif link from imgur. The 2 links are in the description above ^. I never used imgur before :/
Well it does, but it’s triggered automatically as a safety feature. Perhaps with too high g-force or flat spin. It’s actually on my list of stuff to make eventually @CarrotSlicingCompanyCat
It’s so refreshing to find a user on here who actually plays simple planes for the physics sim side of things. So many users just build based off looks so to speak with poor flight models
crazy compact.
@Bryan5 I do. I'll tag u on the test
+1@Bryan5 Thanks! I like where that's headed. Problem is, you can't see everything, and it changes the aero.
+1Easy fix: Have piston move camera up outside the plane when you look more than 75ish deg down and 90 deg left or right. Then have rotators spin the rig to the left, right, or below the plane when you are looking in those directions. Want 2 test this later. Still can't see thru the wings and body tho
@2Papi2Chulo How? Glass?
+1@spefyjerbf This sounds feasible. It would be long. I found a neat storage function which might help. Heck using this on a plane means you should also take into account all the other forces of wings, drag, torque, etc. Makes it into one giant physics problem XD
@FujiwaraAutoShop True. But I don’t think performance cost takes xml modding into consideration. Ex. Some have auto aim canons with huge calculations which hinder performance. Not sure if the performance cost is based on the graphics or cpu
PLEASE SOMEBODY REMAKE THE F-35B! There’s no new ones with reasonable part count :(
@Lemoose @Noname918181
+1I want to see a car with a skyhook work with a plane like this like Batman uses to escape in this clip.
+1@Chk53 Good
+1@TomatoIsAFruit Was trying to push for silver. Now I can use the “update xml” feature! It will be so useful on this plane because I modify the funky trees code real often.
+1Might want to give this some tags like ‘cockpit’ for example
@Thorne @Fordpowerstroke Thanks peeps.
+1@GorillaGuerrilla lol that scenario when you make a mistake then change the entire craft. I do this too
+1@spefyjerbf Acceleration seems feasible in SP. When finding integrals, a constant is added. Does time go there? You said find the integral twice. So what is 'c' for the second one? I have an exam on this tomorrow and I haven't studied so forgive me if i'm horribly incorrect lol
Can i use this? You will have 0 regrets.
Edit: iF yOur ReAdiNG ThIs itS Too lAte
My one man army will destroy you.
@KONOJERRYDA Because
+1Landing gear? In Robocraft?!
+2You said, “inertial velocity vector.” Does that mean what I think it means? It would be possible to have an auto pilot system based on inertia?instead of angles? Like instead of trig? Does this use integrals? I’m curious
@Jundroo
+1Congrats and thanks for sparking tons of creativity! Every 1 or 2 years I come back to this game with an ambitious idea and determination. Since the funky trees update, so much creative potential has been unlocked! It’s gotten to the point where everyone can modify SP itself, making the bleeding edge of what’s possible in this physics sim the norm. Will development now stagnate?
.
If so, consider expanding the scope to include more objective based building. For example races, combat and challenges performed with others in an interactive online multiplayer setting. This would provide an UNLIMITED amount of build and gameplay objectives because player on player interactions are never the same. Robocraft is a game that exploited that to their advantage. It turned gamers into, building strategists. “Build contests take care of that” you say. I say, you left gamers out of the equation, just made builders better builders. When gamers have no reason to fly, SP will die and the build community will slowly fade.
.
Consider these things for a possible SP update or 2.0 title.
This plane is bonkers 😂 I enjoy the story too. Fighting the other guys plane and all
@TRD6932 it worked with discord! Thanks so much! The Imgur links I tried weren’t working
+2@ZeroWithSlashedO Oh, oh. When you said, "cockpit's variable," I thought you were referring to another regular cockpit on the plane, not the computer module part.
Doesn't the computer module also collect flight data, even without the main cockpit part? Pretty sure it does what you want too. I tried a similar thing to you with a glide bomb. I tried to have it lock on to an enemy as it falls toward it, but you have to be using that camera for it to lock on which defeats the purpose...
@Kevito212 Publicly available specifics about how this plane is programed are limited. Most of what I gather is from videos of it flying, online posts, etc. Still have a lot of programming hurdles to jump before this is really good. I actually sometimes refer to the microsoft flight sim manual for this plane lol. There's a section at the bottom about how it's configured in that sim
+1@Kevito212 When I do that, the text disappears. Starting to think linking images is limited to silver or above or something like that
+1@SimplePilot28465 Thanks! fyi I did not build the body. Programmed it a TON & slapped on weapons
+1@UltraLight @TomatoIsAFruit @DameTheMobileFriendly
+1So
@KONOJERRYDA @Kevito212 @Esjope
+1close
@WinsWings @ShiroNeko @GorillaGuerrilla
+2to sliver.
@R3N13L @Bryan5
+1Thanks for the spotlight guys! I had to remove the old plane though. Major oversight in the way it transitioned from STOL to CTOL.
That top view isn’t accurate. There is no hole.
+3@Vincent
+1@SupremeDorian
Hello. I saw you are a moderator. Do you think you could help me put a gif and 2 pictures under this post? I can't figure out where to get the proper .gif link from imgur. The 2 links are in the description above ^. I never used imgur before :/
Wheel. Genius. Extraordinary. Inspirational. Simply…wheelie cool. I’ll let myself out.
+1No. I refuse to complicate the building process. But not the xml ;)
+5Genius. Why the heck is there a stick under the plane?! Carrier takeoff???
Spotlight...this..got spot lit...
How’d you make the rope?
+1P.s. you can pin a max of 3 users per comment. After that the pinned users won’t get a notification
+1Dude! This is awesome! The only plane that can legit drift through the sky!! 😂 Cooler than Starscream the transformer
+1@Kevito212 I can help u out with the VTOL if your feeling lost. Have some experience with em. Give it auto-eject!
Jeez dude! 1 month in and your killing it. Can’t wait for an F-35b from you.Your part count:quality ratio is 10/10. Like @Lemoose
Well it does, but it’s triggered automatically as a safety feature. Perhaps with too high g-force or flat spin. It’s actually on my list of stuff to make eventually @CarrotSlicingCompanyCat
+1This is to cool
+1I need a video demo/tutorial. This is so tricky to fly. It’ll just spin no matter what I do
Plane is cool, but part count is killer. :( can’t even run it on my toaster. smh.
Saw some of your posts and thought you might be interested. @UmbrellaCorporation
+1I hear ya. Been toying with some “flexible” kite ideas. Thanks for the tips and info! I’ve never seen a para-plane in SP before. Very cool @UltraLight
It’s so refreshing to find a user on here who actually plays simple planes for the physics sim side of things. So many users just build based off looks so to speak with poor flight models