@11qazxc
.
Nope, it's the stabilizer doing its job. Besides, the gun itself is limited to from -10º to 20º, so if the ground slope exceeds that value it obviously won't stabilize. The code for the stabilizer has a mathematical formula that's designed to work on slopes. This is done by dividing the PitchAngle correction by the cosine of the RollAngle in order to obtain the correct adjustment using only gun elevation.
You're not wrong in that this becomes problematic at very high angles like 45º, but no MBT I know of has gun handling that goes to such ranges.
@11qazxc
.
Unfortunately, my paneling skills aren't as good enough, or neither is brute forcing minute increments of rotations and positions well worth my time. By performing calculations, I can ensure that the shape is accurate and no errors are incurred in the process. Besides I can practice some unique geometry I don't really get to touch otherwise, and I also get a kick out of having everything planned out and watching it all click into place. The rod rotation method was attempted actually, but I was quite dissatisfied with the eventual result and resorted to calculation.
Hope that clarifies the reasoning behind my methodology. My aim was to create a perfect (almost) shape. Something as good as a render.
Duck is the common name for numerous species in the waterfowl family Anatidae which also includes swans and geese. Ducks are divided among several subfamilies in the family Anatidae; they do not represent a monophyletic group (the group of all descendants of a single common ancestral species) but a form taxon, since swans and geese are not considered ducks. Ducks are mostly aquatic birds, mostly smaller than the swans and geese, and may be found in both fresh water and sea water.
Well, since Kenneth has decided to pull the trigger and break to you that math does not work that way I'd like to just clarify a couple things.
. explosionScalar implies the explosive power of ordnance is a scalar (constant). Which should already be some red flags as to never perform calculus on it.
Ken did say this, but the derivative of your supposed TNT function (which you claim is exponential) would be some logarithm-related result, which won't really ever be directly proportional to a linear function, unless you meant something else. TNT yields IRL would presumably correlate linearly to the mass of reactant.
Great, this is exactly the kind of implementation I was looking for. I reckon those "noteblock songs" they do in MC could be done also in SP through this.
@Brields95
.
I'm not one to take sides, but I do dislike claims made without adequate evidence. Can you provide explicit evidence that fortifies your assertion?
.
Additionally, @AircraftoftheRedStar , I don't see how that particular fable is applicable here. The essence of that story is the idea of constant, diligent work; it does not correspond with the current situation in which a long break was taken for real-life obligations.
.
Of course, his recent actions were nowhere near optimal, but it deviates from the argument at hand.
.
Both of you are clearly jumping the gun, evidently instigated by other individuals who also are making logical leaps.
@MemeLord21 @Bman01 @Ultra0
.
Reason he's making this is to let others build upon the frame as they see fit, clearly he builds what he wants to and is leaving the base frame for open source.
@randomusername
.
Eh, I'm not wrong in the fact that people were being sentimental. I don't care about who people are, I couldn't care less about someone's reputation. I simply have no obligation to deeply investigate the emotions and sentiment of people beyond what's given to me. So yes, I will only look at the tip of the iceberg, if that's what's presented and matters to most else.
.
The only reason a reply was given is because a select group of individuals seem to want to drag this issue on for a bloody month. None else. I have nothing against all involved, only the fact that it generates needless traffic in my feed bothers me.
.
Anyhow, welcome back. Hopefully, you've also gained at least something out of this, be it for the better or worse. I'll take my leave here.
I can't believe you actually figured it out. Rocket-based systems ATGMs in SP have suffered from insane accelerations and speeds that destroy maneuverability, I didn't know it was this elegant of a solution.
@Linethesmarty A 2013 Macbook can run it fine. Maybe you're not considering the fact that SP builds can get extremely detailed. Remove the "extra blocks"? Funny of you to say something like that when it's clear you don't recognize craftsmanship. When builders reach a certain point there isn't anything called unecessary parts. Everything is purposeful and there for a reason.
@AN2Felllla
.
To begin with, I do agree that this is incredibly basic in essence. I did clarify in the TL;DR that it is no more than annoying trigonometry. Never in the description did I claim to use any complex theory or concept, just applications of simple geometric methods.
.
However, I do have a problem with you labelling this as some form of intellectualism. I dunno where jargon was used except for terms like apothem (although, that's something that most people who've taken a course in geometry will understand). I also left a TL;DR for that explicit purpose. I don't quite understand why you've read through the long version on choice and are pointing out an issue with that. How else do you want me to describe an orthographic projection of a pentagon? Use the adjacent leg of the inclined triangle as the inner radius for the pentagon shape? Besides, that bit is intentionally written as documentation (which, again, is not for average joe).
.
Quite frankly, I don't know what you have against using specific mathematical language because there's an incredible amount of rigor and discipline that I get consequences for not doing otherwise in my normal life. It is genuinely the way I think, and is the most effective way to communicate to others interested in the very specifics of methods I've used.
.
To add, I have not actively expressed an interest in gathering clout amongst the many young people of the community. I build for my enjoyment (this one was really on a whim) and for some others who appreciate it for what it is. I think my demeanor towards KoR and Co. well expresses my stance on that particular matter. Anyhow, thank you for the compliments. I intend to try making a more complex shape next.
a. Not very familiar with the engineering world
b. Not sure about how seriously to take this
Let me clarify: this is the equivalent of a 5 year old hitting up a publisher saying that his book idea about a guy flying in a cape is very nice and should be published.
@Bob9998
.
Weird. My first "serious" build- one I built when I was not very well known, at bronze, was awarded with 50+ upvotes. Bronze users- more accurately, newer users- tend to lack apt building technique, which prevents them from making the quality builds that most (but not all) platinum builders do.
Hey! As someone who's in fairly regular contact with the devs, I'm here to give you some reasons as to why this is not happening (at least in the forseeable future).
First and foremost, the MP mod as of its current state is extremely bugged and is at a barebones functionality level. As it stands, it's as good as just watching others exist in the same map. Devs will not integrate a half-baked mod into the game.
Two, development is very difficult. Jundroo is a pretty small team and there simply isn't enough manpower to continue working on all their active games at the same time. For now, their prime developmental focus is SR2, which means extremely groundbreaking functionality for SP is unlikely.
Third, SP is very old at this point. We've moved along very far, but for SP was not built with multiplayer support in mind. This means the codebase for SP is just simply more difficult to work with- if anything, if SP2 is a thing, MP might come with it.
Fourth. Honestly, mobile users don't get to complain about mods- the SP app is straight up cheaper. If you want the heightened functionality, buy the PC version.
@Tang0five
.
Oh heck yes! It's as simple as using Overload and writing something in there- every platform has Overload. (A bit more than that, but oh well) If you're not well oriented with the system, I suggest you check out my online guide.
I just can't. This is the best humanoid walker I've ever seen in my time here on SP. It has so much preprogrammed functions, it's just... Wow. All the kudos for the effort.
Solution:
- Block
- Don't make complaining post
- Profit
+25Hey, not to be condescending, but:
That doesn't really line up, does it...
+24@WNP78
+14.
Can we ban these posts? Kinda need rules for the forums now...
This is amazing. An stunning improvement over the original. Great successor!
+11- Your "fire truck" is okay, but has a couple details that are subpar in quality.
- Top builders often tag other users.
- Top builders have followers.
- "Every thing is working well" is not enough. Want upvotes? Go over the top.
- There's plenty of examples of random bronze users who hit it big on their first build. There just exist many counterexamples for your contention.
- Build better, not complain.
- Develop a building niche. Most top builders have some sort of niche they specialize in.
+11Imagine paying less and wanting equal treatment
+9Nobody broke rules, lol. It's just people being sentimental.
+9Cursed
+8Does... "driving model" count?
+7I think I did that one fairly well enough.
@11qazxc
.
Nope, it's the stabilizer doing its job. Besides, the gun itself is limited to from -10º to 20º, so if the ground slope exceeds that value it obviously won't stabilize. The code for the stabilizer has a mathematical formula that's designed to work on slopes. This is done by dividing the PitchAngle correction by the cosine of the RollAngle in order to obtain the correct adjustment using only gun elevation.
You're not wrong in that this becomes problematic at very high angles like 45º, but no MBT I know of has gun handling that goes to such ranges.
+7Please make a readable post
+7ahhhh
@11qazxc
+6.
Unfortunately, my paneling skills aren't as good enough, or neither is brute forcing minute increments of rotations and positions well worth my time. By performing calculations, I can ensure that the shape is accurate and no errors are incurred in the process. Besides I can practice some unique geometry I don't really get to touch otherwise, and I also get a kick out of having everything planned out and watching it all click into place. The rod rotation method was attempted actually, but I was quite dissatisfied with the eventual result and resorted to calculation.
Hope that clarifies the reasoning behind my methodology. My aim was to create a perfect (almost) shape. Something as good as a render.
Just use your 40 African children in the basement to get money for you
+6Look at this ripoff of the default seaplane
+6If you're uploading more than 10 a day something is wrong...
+6B) and C) are the same thing matey
+6Duck is the common name for numerous species in the waterfowl family Anatidae which also includes swans and geese. Ducks are divided among several subfamilies in the family Anatidae; they do not represent a monophyletic group (the group of all descendants of a single common ancestral species) but a form taxon, since swans and geese are not considered ducks. Ducks are mostly aquatic birds, mostly smaller than the swans and geese, and may be found in both fresh water and sea water.
+6@brians1209
+6.
Yeah, I'm in my senior year and I have to start getting ready for college applications- just a tad bit busy.
Report if you have been harassed, not complain on the forums.
+6@Rickyjasper2
+6.
That's not Jundroo's problem, that's Google's. Please stop.
It's not a bug. It's your design.
+6Well, since Kenneth has decided to pull the trigger and break to you that math does not work that way I'd like to just clarify a couple things.
.
explosionScalarimplies the explosive power of ordnance is a scalar (constant). Which should already be some red flags as to never perform calculus on it.Ken did say this, but the derivative of your supposed TNT function (which you claim is exponential) would be some logarithm-related result, which won't really ever be directly proportional to a linear function, unless you meant something else. TNT yields IRL would presumably correlate linearly to the mass of reactant.
+5No, you don't get a fully humanlike walk cycle. The elliptical movement does not work like bipedal legs at all.
+5Great, this is exactly the kind of implementation I was looking for. I reckon those "noteblock songs" they do in MC could be done also in SP through this.
+5Incorrect- a very late spotlight can cause such things.
+5@Brields95
+5.
I'm not one to take sides, but I do dislike claims made without adequate evidence. Can you provide explicit evidence that fortifies your assertion?
.
Additionally, @AircraftoftheRedStar , I don't see how that particular fable is applicable here. The essence of that story is the idea of constant, diligent work; it does not correspond with the current situation in which a long break was taken for real-life obligations.
.
Of course, his recent actions were nowhere near optimal, but it deviates from the argument at hand.
.
Both of you are clearly jumping the gun, evidently instigated by other individuals who also are making logical leaps.
@MemeLord21 @Bman01 @Ultra0
+5.
Reason he's making this is to let others build upon the frame as they see fit, clearly he builds what he wants to and is leaving the base frame for open source.
No.
+5@randomusername
+5.
Eh, I'm not wrong in the fact that people were being sentimental. I don't care about who people are, I couldn't care less about someone's reputation. I simply have no obligation to deeply investigate the emotions and sentiment of people beyond what's given to me. So yes, I will only look at the tip of the iceberg, if that's what's presented and matters to most else.
.
The only reason a reply was given is because a select group of individuals seem to want to drag this issue on for a bloody month. None else. I have nothing against all involved, only the fact that it generates needless traffic in my feed bothers me.
.
Anyhow, welcome back. Hopefully, you've also gained at least something out of this, be it for the better or worse. I'll take my leave here.
There is no perfect build.
+5I can't believe you actually figured it out. Rocket-based systems ATGMs in SP have suffered from insane accelerations and speeds that destroy maneuverability, I didn't know it was this elegant of a solution.
+5Not sure if I'm not catching something, but:
Already in the game? The winch part? This was in from 1.8...
Also added in this update, 1.9? Am I the odd one out? This is under the view options button.
I'm not sure what you mean by height, but if it's altitude, it's already a Flight Data input added with 1.9...
Maybe you're a bit out of the loop.
+5Holy moly, thanks Andrew.
+5@Linethesmarty A 2013 Macbook can run it fine. Maybe you're not considering the fact that SP builds can get extremely detailed. Remove the "extra blocks"? Funny of you to say something like that when it's clear you don't recognize craftsmanship. When builders reach a certain point there isn't anything called unecessary parts. Everything is purposeful and there for a reason.
+5@SpiritusRaptor Always exploring the limits of game mechanics, I see. Although, this seems pretty darn cool to work with.
+5@AN2Felllla
+4.
To begin with, I do agree that this is incredibly basic in essence. I did clarify in the TL;DR that it is no more than annoying trigonometry. Never in the description did I claim to use any complex theory or concept, just applications of simple geometric methods.
.
However, I do have a problem with you labelling this as some form of intellectualism. I dunno where jargon was used except for terms like apothem (although, that's something that most people who've taken a course in geometry will understand). I also left a TL;DR for that explicit purpose. I don't quite understand why you've read through the long version on choice and are pointing out an issue with that. How else do you want me to describe an orthographic projection of a pentagon? Use the adjacent leg of the inclined triangle as the inner radius for the pentagon shape? Besides, that bit is intentionally written as documentation (which, again, is not for average joe).
.
Quite frankly, I don't know what you have against using specific mathematical language because there's an incredible amount of rigor and discipline that I get consequences for not doing otherwise in my normal life. It is genuinely the way I think, and is the most effective way to communicate to others interested in the very specifics of methods I've used.
.
To add, I have not actively expressed an interest in gathering clout amongst the many young people of the community. I build for my enjoyment (this one was really on a whim) and for some others who appreciate it for what it is. I think my demeanor towards KoR and Co. well expresses my stance on that particular matter. Anyhow, thank you for the compliments. I intend to try making a more complex shape next.
미쳤습니까 휴먼?
+4@Numbers
.
In case you either are:
a. Not very familiar with the engineering world
b. Not sure about how seriously to take this
Let me clarify: this is the equivalent of a 5 year old hitting up a publisher saying that his book idea about a guy flying in a cape is very nice and should be published.
+4Already ingame. Try harder.
+4BMP-2 by @BaconAircraft.
I spent an hour or so keyframing the heck outta the vid. I think it was worth the effort, lol.
+4@Abakan12
+4.
-and Jundroo bears all the additional server upkeep costs for that.
@shipster
+4.
Haha. Yep, it's me!
Developers cannot magically upgrade your hardware.
+4@Bob9998
+4.
Weird. My first "serious" build- one I built when I was not very well known, at bronze, was awarded with 50+ upvotes. Bronze users- more accurately, newer users- tend to lack apt building technique, which prevents them from making the quality builds that most (but not all) platinum builders do.
Hey! As someone who's in fairly regular contact with the devs, I'm here to give you some reasons as to why this is not happening (at least in the forseeable future).
First and foremost, the MP mod as of its current state is extremely bugged and is at a barebones functionality level. As it stands, it's as good as just watching others exist in the same map. Devs will not integrate a half-baked mod into the game.
Two, development is very difficult. Jundroo is a pretty small team and there simply isn't enough manpower to continue working on all their active games at the same time. For now, their prime developmental focus is SR2, which means extremely groundbreaking functionality for SP is unlikely.
Third, SP is very old at this point. We've moved along very far, but for SP was not built with multiplayer support in mind. This means the codebase for SP is just simply more difficult to work with- if anything, if SP2 is a thing, MP might come with it.
Fourth. Honestly, mobile users don't get to complain about mods- the SP app is straight up cheaper. If you want the heightened functionality, buy the PC version.
Thanks.
+4If you're making 5 a day they can't be of good quality.
+4@rainskaos
+4.
Use the script I provided in the comment below.
@Tang0five
+4.
Oh heck yes! It's as simple as using Overload and writing something in there- every platform has Overload. (A bit more than that, but oh well) If you're not well oriented with the system, I suggest you check out my online guide.
Well, ComplicatedPlanes has been a thing since forever.
+4I just can't. This is the best humanoid walker I've ever seen in my time here on SP. It has so much preprogrammed functions, it's just... Wow. All the kudos for the effort.
+4