Complaints about the tail swastika WILL BE IGNORED. I do not support Fascism or Nazis in any way nor do I praise their ideologies, isms, and horrendous activities. It was simply put there for historical representations, fictional or otherwise, and the plane itself is a play on the original German Corsair which caused a ton of controversy in it's heyday but is now seen more as a meme, which many today find hilarious.
. Report all you want if it makes you feel better. My conscience is clear and the moderators know that I have no ill intent.
@ANNYUI I gave no permission whatsoever to this user. I don't have any connections or an account in that website. Autotranslate doesn't always work there too. If you can lend a hand in getting this into attention of good-minded people, I'd be grateful.
@ANNYUI No. It's stolen. If people can band together and take it down, that'd be great. Even the descriptions are copy-pasta'd with translation defects.
@Thelegitpilot13 Okay, key words: certain situations. But the big question here is how often do you think those certain situations present themselves and circumstances allow for one to pull off a stunt like that and actually succeed.
.
Here's some points I've laid down:
- The F-14 and MiG-29 were able to pull it off cause their engines are far apart from each other, which allows boosted asymmetric thrust to let the fighter turn.
- Tomcats aren't in active service anymore. And unless you have an Iranian with their busted up F-14 or Russian pilot with their Flanker or Fulcrum around who's insane enough to do that move in real combat and live to tell the tale, then you got yourself something to tell stories about at the bar.
- The situation. What if your adversary has their missile prox detonator set to have a wider triggering radius? What if they get far enough from you to turn back in and get a gun solution on you? What if they're not alone and someone else gets a bead on you while you pull the maneuver?
- The move was done in a simulated environment(DCS) and scripted to happen and succeed (the movie). Sim/Movie ≠ real life. You and I don't need to argue whether or not DCS is perfect.
- If you're alone, deep in hostile airspace, and you have minimal weapons along with the jet being an outdated, vintage fighter, you're better off just winging it to the closest friendly turf or close enough with whatever gas you have left.
- Combat performance of jets in DCS are not fully accurate to their real life versions. No military would just gladly submit the full specs and stats of their fighters for a game lest they want their enemies/potential enemies to cook up a recipe for their airpower downfall. Especially since that game can just be bought up by anyone who can play it.
.
In conclusion: Realistically, Maverick could've just done a full forward negative G dive, or just used the stick in general to make a regular turn since he had enough airspeed during that scene to move. And DCS is indeed the best combat flight sim readily available for purchase, but it definitely isn't perfect. (which I know you never said, but from the way you put up your reply to me and CommentaryGuy, it looked and felt like you're saying the game is just real life in a screen)
It's largely for cosmetic purposes. If you're planning to build a classic gunpowder cannon, you'd pick the sphere round. Meanwhile the slug is more for current-era/conventional guns.
.
Neither are more explosive or accurate than each other. It's just for looks.
Not to mention that since SP runs on an older Unity setup, it's gonna take a ton more resources to have the parts and simulation that you want to actually work, which might be a major downside for mobile users since they're already at a disadvantage of having lower processing power and RAM. They did add the text labels part for many reasons. One of them is to reduce the reliance of builders on fuselage blocks to create letters and logos for cosmetic purposes, such as tailcodes and roundels, which @hpgbproductions patented a way to make such things possible
@LeaveUsAlone You can pretty much just make your own armor parts via XML editing the health value of that part/plate that you want to be "armored" for now.
I do very much agree with you on the radar aspect, though. Every build having a radar warning receiver right off the bat is kind of ridiculous.
.
but then again, this game is called SimplePlanes for a reason. Not ComplexPlanes. If you're really looking for more realism until whether or not Jundroo will actually implement new stuff, then you might want to stick to DCS or any other flight sim that has what you like.
It's gonna be difficult to implement these features since SP uses an older Unity setup. Jundroo's gonna have to make SP2 for these stuff cause new programming and codes make it easier, which I doubt they'll do at all since they're focusing more on SimpleRockets.
@FirstFish83828 They can. I had a few cases of autocredit problems with my modified build posts and I just tagged one of them to fix it, and they did. (Mostly Bacon, but I'm quite certain all mods have the ability to do so.)
@FirstFish83828 Alright. But it's better off with the autocredit fixed so it'd be immediately known right off the bat that it's a successor to the original. We wouldn't want some smart people going around telling everyone that you "stole" the build. Not everyone thoroughly reads descriptions or comments.
I'll turn this into a quad SAFF-20R Seeker battery if you don't mind-
+2Atlanta, but polis, and half submerged
+1@DrMinh Love your Nahida teri teri profile picture by the way
TENNO HEIKA, BANZAI!!!
+5Lockhead Martini
+1Okay now the photos showed up
+1No images on my end either. Where do you upload your images to?
+1@FirstFish83828
Throw Males
Bookmarked for future modifying reference
+1Next up:
German German
Dr_Livesey_Strut.mp3
+1I fucking knew it
@brentisaac22 peetesd
+1Were the collision detectors/boxes of the islands and structures moved as well? Or only the textures got displaced
So is the tail section shoved into it's ass or
+1@Idksus ok
+1Made with Gmod 2022
@DvalinAirlines
@KudaOni
@Inuyasha8215
YOU GOT A HOLE IN YOUR LEFT WING!!
Carlito de tsoo-tsoo
This is where things get funky.
+1@PPLLAANNEE Yeah, my bad I forgor the arbreks
+2Keep it classic mil green with
SP-AOO
+1Simple-chan
+3Boing C-17 Worldlord the third
+2@Khanhlam Probably would. Assuming I don't wreck the base plane build when I replace the regular fuselage with a hollow one for the cockpit
+2@SheriffHackdogMCPE Then what's with the heads up? I never said anything in the description about the USAF using the F4U in Europe.
+2@SheriffHackdogMCPE I never mentioned anything about the USAF using it in the European Front.
+2Yeet bois
@Alisuchanka - for the WEP FunkyTrees code
@BogdanX - For the Corsair base
YEET BOIS
Complaints about the tail swastika WILL BE IGNORED. I do not support Fascism or Nazis in any way nor do I praise their ideologies, isms, and horrendous activities. It was simply put there for historical representations, fictional or otherwise, and the plane itself is a play on the original German Corsair which caused a ton of controversy in it's heyday but is now seen more as a meme, which many today find hilarious.
.
Report all you want if it makes you feel better. My conscience is clear and the moderators know that I have no ill intent.
@LeaveUsAlone Not everyone who plays SP owns an iPad like you
+2The Tomcat before the Tomcat
@ANNYUI I gave no permission whatsoever to this user. I don't have any connections or an account in that website. Autotranslate doesn't always work there too. If you can lend a hand in getting this into attention of good-minded people, I'd be grateful.
@ANNYUI No. It's stolen. If people can band together and take it down, that'd be great. Even the descriptions are copy-pasta'd with translation defects.
@Thelegitpilot13 Okay, key words: certain situations. But the big question here is how often do you think those certain situations present themselves and circumstances allow for one to pull off a stunt like that and actually succeed.
+1.
Here's some points I've laid down:
- The F-14 and MiG-29 were able to pull it off cause their engines are far apart from each other, which allows boosted asymmetric thrust to let the fighter turn.
- Tomcats aren't in active service anymore. And unless you have an Iranian with their busted up F-14 or Russian pilot with their Flanker or Fulcrum around who's insane enough to do that move in real combat and live to tell the tale, then you got yourself something to tell stories about at the bar.
- The situation. What if your adversary has their missile prox detonator set to have a wider triggering radius? What if they get far enough from you to turn back in and get a gun solution on you? What if they're not alone and someone else gets a bead on you while you pull the maneuver?
- The move was done in a simulated environment (DCS) and scripted to happen and succeed (the movie). Sim/Movie ≠ real life. You and I don't need to argue whether or not DCS is perfect.
- If you're alone, deep in hostile airspace, and you have minimal weapons along with the jet being an outdated, vintage fighter, you're better off just winging it to the closest friendly turf or close enough with whatever gas you have left.
- Combat performance of jets in DCS are not fully accurate to their real life versions. No military would just gladly submit the full specs and stats of their fighters for a game lest they want their enemies/potential enemies to cook up a recipe for their airpower downfall. Especially since that game can just be bought up by anyone who can play it.
.
In conclusion: Realistically, Maverick could've just done a full forward negative G dive, or just used the stick in general to make a regular turn since he had enough airspeed during that scene to move. And DCS is indeed the best combat flight sim readily available for purchase, but it definitely isn't perfect. (which I know you never said, but from the way you put up your reply to me and CommentaryGuy, it looked and felt like you're saying the game is just real life in a screen)
It's largely for cosmetic purposes. If you're planning to build a classic gunpowder cannon, you'd pick the sphere round. Meanwhile the slug is more for current-era/conventional guns.
+1.
Neither are more explosive or accurate than each other. It's just for looks.
@teddyone02 ok
Not to mention that since SP runs on an older Unity setup, it's gonna take a ton more resources to have the parts and simulation that you want to actually work, which might be a major downside for mobile users since they're already at a disadvantage of having lower processing power and RAM. They did add the text labels part for many reasons. One of them is to reduce the reliance of builders on fuselage blocks to create letters and logos for cosmetic purposes, such as tailcodes and roundels, which @hpgbproductions patented a way to make such things possible
+2@LeaveUsAlone You can pretty much just make your own armor parts via XML editing the
+2healthvalue of that part/plate that you want to be "armored" for now.I do very much agree with you on the radar aspect, though. Every build having a radar warning receiver right off the bat is kind of ridiculous.
.
but then again, this game is called SimplePlanes for a reason. Not ComplexPlanes. If you're really looking for more realism until whether or not Jundroo will actually implement new stuff, then you might want to stick to DCS or any other flight sim that has what you like.
It's gonna be difficult to implement these features since SP uses an older Unity setup. Jundroo's gonna have to make SP2 for these stuff cause new programming and codes make it easier, which I doubt they'll do at all since they're focusing more on SimpleRockets.
+1If it chonks, it flonks.
omaigad nyoo nem chens eksdee beri gud gud eksdee
XDXDXDXDXDXDXDXDeksdee
Yonkers
+2@FirstFish83828 They can. I had a few cases of autocredit problems with my modified build posts and I just tagged one of them to fix it, and they did. (Mostly Bacon, but I'm quite certain all mods have the ability to do so.)
@FirstFish83828 Alright. But it's better off with the autocredit fixed so it'd be immediately known right off the bat that it's a successor to the original. We wouldn't want some smart people going around telling everyone that you "stole" the build. Not everyone thoroughly reads descriptions or comments.
@FirstFish83828 So you did this from scratch and not modified the original?
@BaconAircraft Successor fix pls
@Talon7192 Dump tea into the sea
Killing
Fish
Chips