I appreciate the invite, but I'm so busy these days I would not be able to participate. If I was participating, I'd certainly spotlight your challenge. @FarrowAirlines
@Stellarlabs - It takes time to restore aircraft. I've been on board the USS Lexington 3 times in the last five years and have seen one guy working full time on restoring an F4. Just an example of how much effort it takes, restoration work on the Enola Gay began in 1984 and involved a total of some 300,000 staff hours.
@AndrewGarrison @SledDriver - Encapsulation of parts into a boundary box that allows colliders to be turned off is an intriguing idea. It is more work than simply exposing those properties in the XML, but would be an outstanding way to turn behavior on and off. Nice thinking "outside the box" Andrew.
I've noticed in the past that a few parts scaled very large had a similar effect as multiple parts with no scaling. I run regular expressions on my XML to normalize disparate values like mass. An XML option to disable colliders might work as well. It is low cost for you I think. @AndrewGarrison @SledDriver
@SledDriver - I asked that very same question a year ago, and was chatting about the idea again with someone who I won't mention a few days ago. I can't speak for Jundroo, but I'm not sure what the ROI is for the development work, considering how powerful mobile devices are getting. However, one could argue that it would allow much more creativity in the game since builds could be fantastically large. There are serious memory lags in design-time when builds get to big, so even if the run time is optimized, you will always see a delta between the two. I suspect optimization would need to occur in both to make it happen. I personally would love to see this happen but I wouldn't be surprised if it required game re-architecture.
@CoolPeach Let's check with the main man to see if my assumptions are correct. @AndrewGarrison - Is it accurate to state the reason why concave parts don't exist in the game stems from the fact that Unity does not support concave mesh colliders, which in fact is a physX limitation?
@CoolPeach - And I think one of the reasons why we don't see other interesting parts in the game is that we are restricted to convex parts since Unity no longer supports concave mesh colliders (a PhysX limitation).
@CoolPeach - Yes, that part is just rendered better. It goes to show you that parts can be made sharper. Some parts simply don't have the same smoothness. I think this could be fixed in the game, but it would affect too many builds. New parts like the sphere / half sphere are smooth, but they lack the ability to take on certain shapes.
@CoolPeach - Thanks CoolPeach - I first started using the wheel idea on my Hughes Racer and the curved blocks on my C-47, but I guess I used it on my B-29 as well. Congratulations on your B-17. I have not tried that out yet, but I will soon.
The Germans were desperate at the end of the war to stop the Allies, so this plane was not used for its intended purpose. I thought it was interesting, so I added the torpedo as I've seen in photos / drawings. @shipster
@Shakazulumx - That's a good question, and a great catch of this bug. I think the relative expression I ran did not catch all the parts, and I was too distracted to notice. I might have just forgot to run the script in the first place. Normally I find massScale="[-+]?[0-9]*.?[0-9]+ and replace it with massScale="0 I suspect this is the reason. I might need to unlist this and upload a new version based on your finding.
@dootdootbananabus @Liquidfox - I built this for the game. The bomber in the game is mine as well, with some modifications to simplify the body.
Best Ki-44 on here
Absolutely stunning
Nice job. You clearly put may tedious hours into this.
I appreciate the invite, but I'm so busy these days I would not be able to participate. If I was participating, I'd certainly spotlight your challenge. @FarrowAirlines
Thanks! @Dllama4
I heard a small dog ran off with the only blueprints and was never seen again. @Stellarlabs
Kidding..... maybe....
@Stellarlabs - It takes time to restore aircraft. I've been on board the USS Lexington 3 times in the last five years and have seen one guy working full time on restoring an F4. Just an example of how much effort it takes, restoration work on the Enola Gay began in 1984 and involved a total of some 300,000 staff hours.
@Blue0Bull - Thanks!
I worked on it last night and added a cockpit, but it is over 800 parts. I'm kind of torn if I should release that version. @temporaryaccount
Thanks @SpiritusRaptor You have some neat builds I need to check out!
@AndrewGarrison @SledDriver - Encapsulation of parts into a boundary box that allows colliders to be turned off is an intriguing idea. It is more work than simply exposing those properties in the XML, but would be an outstanding way to turn behavior on and off. Nice thinking "outside the box" Andrew.
I've noticed in the past that a few parts scaled very large had a similar effect as multiple parts with no scaling. I run regular expressions on my XML to normalize disparate values like mass. An XML option to disable colliders might work as well. It is low cost for you I think. @AndrewGarrison @SledDriver
@SledDriver - I asked that very same question a year ago, and was chatting about the idea again with someone who I won't mention a few days ago. I can't speak for Jundroo, but I'm not sure what the ROI is for the development work, considering how powerful mobile devices are getting. However, one could argue that it would allow much more creativity in the game since builds could be fantastically large. There are serious memory lags in design-time when builds get to big, so even if the run time is optimized, you will always see a delta between the two. I suspect optimization would need to occur in both to make it happen. I personally would love to see this happen but I wouldn't be surprised if it required game re-architecture.
More or less, yes it is. Kevin Murphy needed to simplify the fuselage for the game. @Strikefighter04
Thank you, sir! @dsr1aviation
@CoolPeach Let's check with the main man to see if my assumptions are correct. @AndrewGarrison - Is it accurate to state the reason why concave parts don't exist in the game stems from the fact that Unity does not support concave mesh colliders, which in fact is a physX limitation?
@CoolPeach - And I think one of the reasons why we don't see other interesting parts in the game is that we are restricted to convex parts since Unity no longer supports concave mesh colliders (a PhysX limitation).
@CoolPeach - Yes, that part is just rendered better. It goes to show you that parts can be made sharper. Some parts simply don't have the same smoothness. I think this could be fixed in the game, but it would affect too many builds. New parts like the sphere / half sphere are smooth, but they lack the ability to take on certain shapes.
@AtomicCashew - OK, so if I make a new airship, what would you like to see?
@temporaryaccount - I'll update it tonight. I've fixed it, and just need to upload.
@CoolPeach - Thanks CoolPeach - I first started using the wheel idea on my Hughes Racer and the curved blocks on my C-47, but I guess I used it on my B-29 as well. Congratulations on your B-17. I have not tried that out yet, but I will soon.
@Cedy117 (Thanks Cedy. Nice to see you here) @Tibbsey (Yes, Thank you and yes, I do remember you!)
Thank you very much. @ThePrototype
Thank you, Sir! You are a gentleman and a scholar. @TheLatentImage
I've owned many lemons over the years, mostly Fords... Lemons are overrated. I'd keep your upvotes.
Thank you! @DestinyAviation
Have an upvote!
No, I did not embed a bomb in it. @lolcreeper45
I made several. Which one did you like the most? @AtomicCashew
Than you - @Trainzo
The Germans were desperate at the end of the war to stop the Allies, so this plane was not used for its intended purpose. I thought it was interesting, so I added the torpedo as I've seen in photos / drawings. @shipster
Thank you. This has remained unfinished for too long. @TheMutePaper
@EpicPigster1 - Thanks!
@Mostly - Apparently it did torpedo
@awesomejoshy789 Hey man language is taken very seriously here. But for installing the update, I need to know what platform you have it on.
@Shakazulumx - That's a good question, and a great catch of this bug. I think the relative expression I ran did not catch all the parts, and I was too distracted to notice. I might have just forgot to run the script in the first place. Normally I find massScale="[-+]?[0-9]*.?[0-9]+ and replace it with massScale="0 I suspect this is the reason. I might need to unlist this and upload a new version based on your finding.
Thank you. @KidKromosone
Thanks @IAmMyBoss Since it made it into the update video, I figured I needed to fix it.
@Notapier Thanks man!
Huge congratulations to the team for this update!
@temporaryaccount - Yes, this Sr. speaking. No worries!
@anjulmusic - I aim to please.
@temporaryaccount - I will try, but my regular job is very demanding.
@temporaryaccount - Yes. Sorry for the delay in my response.
Thanks for confirming. @uzair1903
Back several releases ago this worked, but now it does not fly when you detach the cockpit from the airplane. @Irobert55
Thank you very much. @kingofsteam
Thank you for the kind words. Good luck with your builds! @blueangels111
Another incredible build!