54.2k CoolPeach Comments

  • [TEASER] B-25 Mitchell 4.0 years ago

    It’s out, check my bio for the link
    @Bubbatrain6

  • Degradation and SimplePlanes 4.1 years ago

    I barely post, but that doesn’t necessarily mean I don’t put in effort. That’s not a good assumption to make. @ChrisETH

    +1
  • Degradation and SimplePlanes 4.1 years ago

    I respect that, everyone does have different opinions. @ChrisETH

  • Degradation and SimplePlanes 4.1 years ago

    This is not so cool
    ” @KnightOfRen's plane is much better than this. You don't even deserve gold barely posting. Wanna talk about low effort? You've barely posted m8.”
    Hypocrisy looks bad man.
    @ChrisETH

    +2
  • Degradation and SimplePlanes 4.1 years ago

    People are free to express their opinions. You may think that something is good, but many of those example builds you pointed out are pretty average. I also believe that Toxic’s builds are far better than Knights. In the specific example you pointed out, the craftsmanship in the wings alone is superior in every way to Knights, but maybe ur trying to bait us. If anything it’s ironic your attacking Toxic at the end, when you yourself literally said that we should support each other.... hypocrisy much?
    @ChrisETH

    +3
  • Grumman F8F-2 Bearcat 4.1 years ago

    Haha thank you. But this build would need a complete revamp if I wanted to make it again. Very outdated build style and techniques. @KnightOfRen

  • Degradation and SimplePlanes 4.1 years ago

    If someone tells you your planes are bad, there’s obviously a reason. If you had some desire to improve, u would ask them why. Perfection is impossible obviously, but I know that your planes have so much room for improvement. @KnightOfRen

    +5
  • Degradation and SimplePlanes 4.1 years ago

    I think as time goes on, eventually no matter how good or bad you are, if you keep posting you will get to platinum regardless of the quality of your builds. However, lately I feel that there has been a feeling of resentment, that criticism is frowned upon, that “people will play the game how they like”. I know that Bogdan receives a lot of backlash for what is in a lot of cases very accurate feedback. If we want to maintain a decent standard in this community, and we should, then we need to provide feedback that is honest and real, not fluffy and sugarcoated.

    +9
  • USS Missouri "Mighty Mo" (BB-63) - 1984 4.1 years ago

    Only for the AA flak and CIWS, the main guns need to be manually aimed @Star737

  • USS Missouri "Mighty Mo" (BB-63) - 1984 4.1 years ago

    You can reupload it, but the landing gear did work fine so not sure if it’s a significant change @Notrjmm

  • B-25J-5 Mitchell "Apache Princess" 4.1 years ago

    The landing gear only works on High Physics, the suspension acts funny on lower physics, especially on mobile. @Notrjmm

  • SimplePlanes 2 Leaked Screenshots 4.1 years ago

    nah this isn’t just real-time reflections, this is something better @jamesPLANESii

    +6
  • double 4.1 years ago

    Looking great, look forward to seeing more

  • Guess who is gonna work with Lockheed Martin! 4.1 years ago

    Is it April already??

    +17
  • USS Missouri "Mighty Mo" (BB-63) - 1984 4.1 years ago

    Maybe, but I cannot promise anything
    @Queazyairplane16

  • Loading Position Tech Demonstration 4.1 years ago

    Damn, wish I had that on my USS MIssouri. Looks great though, very nice work!

    +3
  • USS Missouri Cinematic Trailer - SimplePlanes 4.1 years ago

    Maybe, but blenders a bit of a different beast. Would allow for much more flexibility though. @TastyTanks

  • USS Missouri "Mighty Mo" (BB-63) - 1984 4.1 years ago

    Thanks for the spotlight! @Marine

    +1
  • USS Missouri "Mighty Mo" (BB-63) - 1984 4.2 years ago

    Thats fine, unlisted builds don't effect me so all good
    @AerospaceGeek

  • USS Missouri "Mighty Mo" (BB-63) - 1984 4.2 years ago

    They probably make up like 1000ish parts, I dunno if that's any better for you. Plus I cannot really be bothered going back and removing parts, its not exactly fun. @UWUSEMPIE

  • USS Missouri "Mighty Mo" (BB-63) - 1984 4.2 years ago

    Nice man, I'd love to see her at some stage in the future @Pilotmario

  • How to become Platinum - Simpleplanes Explained 4.2 years ago

    Just on that last note about successor points, you cannot get successor points for your own successors, it has to be from another user. But you can make your own successor of another users successor, and receive 1/4 of the points the new successor gets

  • My Ambitious Goals and Plans 4.2 years ago

    If you are aiming for Plat or some point milestone, you’ll actually need to upload on a fairly regular basis. While quality is great, and getting builds with +100 upvotes every few months or so is nice, ur more likely to achieve such a goal with builds every week or so that get 30-40 upvotes. This is not my preferred method of building, but it is what many other users who achieve plat quickly do. Here, quantity and quality are equally important.

    +3
  • USS Missouri "Mighty Mo" (BB-63) - 1984 4.2 years ago

    Thanks for the spotlight! @WIZARD2017

  • USS Missouri "Mighty Mo" (BB-63) - 1984 4.2 years ago

    Hmm, you’d be right. It’s not really my sort of thing, I just like having interiors and details @Misterhmar

  • USS Missouri "Mighty Mo" (BB-63) - 1984 4.2 years ago

    I’m actually super proud of the hull, especially the bottom half. When I smoothed it out it looked pretty much seamless. Maybe the top half could’ve been built differently to take advantage of the smoothing but that was before it was ever a thing, @Zanedavid

  • USS Missouri "Mighty Mo" (BB-63) - 1984 4.2 years ago

    Thanks very much, glad that you both like it!
    @KerlonceauxIndustries @Blue0Bull

  • USS Missouri "Mighty Mo" (BB-63) - 1984 4.2 years ago

    Thank you, she’s a great ship to have a model of
    @CharlesDeGaulle

  • USS Missouri "Mighty Mo" (BB-63) - 1984 4.2 years ago

    I might take a look at the H-45, but its so massive I’m not sure if I will be able to build and run it properly. I’ve also seen your H-44, very nice build. @RussianAce

    +1
  • USS Missouri "Mighty Mo" (BB-63) - 1984 4.2 years ago

    Thanks very much @EternalDarkness!

  • USS Missouri "Mighty Mo" (BB-63) - 1984 4.2 years ago

    Geez 600m long lol and 90m wide, what is that behemoth ahahah!
    @RussianAce

    +4
  • USS Missouri "Mighty Mo" (BB-63) - 1984 4.2 years ago

    @WarHawk95 Yeah it is, give or take like a foot

  • USS Missouri "Mighty Mo" (BB-63) - 1984 4.2 years ago

    @Feanor
    Thanks for the spotlight!

    +1
  • USS Missouri Cinematic Trailer - SimplePlanes 4.2 years ago

    True, but I think this is ok, and it keeps the comments less cluttered @BMilan

  • USS Missouri Cinematic Trailer - SimplePlanes 4.2 years ago

    See below:
    Link to Ship
    .
    @PeePeePoo_Poo @Zoomzoom999

  • USS Missouri Cinematic Trailer - SimplePlanes 4.2 years ago

    See below:
    Link to Ship
    .
    @KnightOfRen @Grandma @tsampoy

  • USS Missouri Cinematic Trailer - SimplePlanes 4.2 years ago

    I think its better if I tag you with the link, given the recent tagging changes, Link to Ship
    .
    @Someterribleuser @BMilan @Zanedavid

  • Platinum through forums alone? 4.2 years ago

    Yeah but I’m talking like multiple successors, like points you get for successors of successors etc
    @UtsuhoReiuji

  • Platinum through forums alone? 4.2 years ago

    Could be successor points, I could be wrong though
    @UtsuhoReiuji

  • Platinum through forums alone? 4.2 years ago

    Well that’s not exactly a reliable source, I don’t think u get points for comment upvotes, pretty sure that was stated in the original post where they introduced the feature. @tsampoy

  • Platinum through forums alone? 4.2 years ago

    Who confirmed it?
    @tsampoy

  • Platinum through forums alone? 4.2 years ago

    Do comments give points, I feel like they don’t

  • Possibly the most important game suggestion ever made 4.2 years ago

    Yeah many others have already pointed out some of the potential issues. While on the surface it seems like a decent idea, I mean I do think the divide and the learning is quite steep especially if you’re going through it alone, having an ambiguous ’advanced mode’ seems like it may act as another barrier to entry for beginners.
    .
    I remember when I first downloaded the game and I thought that the only way to build crafts was with those terrible premade block pieces. That was before I downloaded a craft and realised that most people actually built with fuselage blocks (which I had assumed to just be round cylinders that could not be edited). I feel an advanced mode would just confuse beginners more, and kinda deter them away.
    .
    Instead I think that the in game tutorial isn’t enough, it barely teaches you anything substantial. However I’m not too sure how willing the devs would be to commit to adding a better tutorial in SP, but perhaps for SP2 in future.

    +6
  • USS Missouri Cinematic Trailer - SimplePlanes 4.2 years ago

    You cannot, I set up a tracking camera on the Missouri to track the 3 jets at the end. The scenes with the F-4 are done separately in a different take. @Star737

  • SP Can Look Nice Sometimes 4.2 years ago

    I mean, it took me years before I realised there was a realtime reflections setting, and while it absolutely kills performance, it makes the game look pretty damn hot sometimes

  • USS Missouri Cinematic Trailer - SimplePlanes 4.2 years ago

    Around 3500 @AerospaceGeek

  • USS Missouri Cinematic Trailer - SimplePlanes 4.2 years ago

    Nice, it’s good that someone will be able to fully enjoy this beauty @Daylight

  • USS Missouri Cinematic Trailer - SimplePlanes 4.2 years ago

    Yea you would lol, it’s at 3500 parts and I very much doubt anything would be left by the time I got rid of 2500 parts. @KnightOfRen

  • USS Missouri Cinematic Trailer - SimplePlanes 4.2 years ago

    It’s actually war thunder with SP skins @EDEN971