@Chuckie Well, there is part clipping. I was one of the first to use part clipping, as I accidentally stumbled on it and then a few people taught me more. I only got into XML modding a few months ago, but without it, builds like this and this would be, to put it simply, impossible.
Now, back to part clipping. There are many ways to do it. One is using fuselage parts and adjusting them so they clip over each other, another is rotation the part once to get it to 'stick'. And there is also nudging, which allows for certain things that normally would be impossible without XML(like putting a VTOL inside an aircraft without it sticking out)
Ok, for mac, I'll just give you a simpliefed form. Don't feel like putting it in a proper format, or finding a comment which has it. Basically go to your user, then library, app support, and then it will either be unity.Jundroo.Simpleplanes(in the case I have), or just simple planes. Then there should be a folder called aircraft designs, which holds ALL the aircraft XML's
@Skua Yeah, I figured this out a while ago, lol. Also, I just got into XML modding on mac, but I do know the file location. It'll take a bit to get it into a proper format.
@Skua Well, I planned on doing a youtube thing as a tutorial for SP, though currently, Steam appears to hate XML modding, a lot. Based on this and my own personal experince with modding a prop, I can only assume Steam reverts the XML files upon loading if they have any tampered characteristics while it's being done in the aircraft folder.
Actually, andriod and PC aren't the only ones which can XML mod(technically XML editing, though it was coined as modding a long while back). They are only ones which can truely mod, as in make mods which add parts, physics, and in general changes the way the game operates. Any device which has even a simple text editor and can access the XML files can XML 'mod', which all of the platforms can do with a few minor exceptions(iOS beyond 8.3 needs a JB to access the files, my school restricted macbook requires a work-around method to get through the library, etc). There is a very clear and distinct difference between true modding and XML modding. XML modding is superficial, only changing the property of parts of an aircraft(location, rotation, how many times the input will respond, etc). True modding allows for things such as the WIP Simple Warships mod, which allows for better water physics, more guns, etc, among other things. Though for some reason steam likes to revert any changes in the XML if it invalidates things you can do in the game, like rotate something to NOT a 90 degree angle, or a more powerful prop.
@AnarchistAerospaceIndustries Well, you still have to consider that the devs still have to get the mobile release out of 1.3, and the other platforms other than steam. So yeah, just be patient and wait for a website update before they implement it. IK it's not hard, but it'd take time off them making the mobile release.
@DeezDucks Yeah, that's what I thought. Usually, aircraft will go faster as they lose fuel. Which can only mean you lose weight, because all other varables are constant except weight in those cases.
@RyneKuczy Uhh... Nothing IRL has something like that. I have made it in SP, but it was in an experimental 2-wing plane that didn't work that well(actually one of the planes I uploaded if you look back far enough). tailerons and V-tails and all moving vertical stabilizers though... Actually are around IRL. full moving horizontal and vertical stabilzers have already been made, and a few examples of true tailerons. V-tails, though... I probably have the only example of a working V-tail design, and it's extremely glitchy, to say the least. I mean, instead of asking for what you want, I'd rather want either a rotator with 2 rotational functions at once, or a smaller rotator. Preferably both if at all possible.
@CDUflappy That still doesn't really work... And it still can accurately aim it. There is a LOT more than just dispersion and speed at work here. There is also angle, detacher strength(if any), terminal velocity of the bomb(Idk if it has one, but keep that in mind), weight of the aircraft as a whole, weight of the bomb, drag of the bomb(kinda ties in with the terminal velocity), the gravity of the game, and on and on and on and on. It just doesn't really work. I certainly don't see KSP doing it(well, it kinda does, but it also kinda doesn't), much less a lot of other games. And honestly, the bombs actually give a challenge. It's supposed to be hard to aim.
@AnarchistAerospaceIndustries Andrew and Philip are... Andrew and Philip. They have had the same name as long as I've been on this site. They were the devs who started it all, and given that the devs usually stick to their real names... Yeah.
And Nathan didn't come on the SP website until he became a dev, so my case is rested there.
Uhh... If the rant was pointless, why did you post pointless rant? Lol, jkjkjk.
But you do realize that many times, people don't read the rules just because they want to get on with it? Who here hasn't skipped through a terms of use agreement? They tend to be long, and usually no one bothers to read it. So the bottom idea doesn't actually work, really. And, well, yeah...
TBH, you can't really make bomb sights. Seriously, it's trial and error. Bombs don't follow a bomb sight, and the ones used on bombers, while good, only worked on a level, flat, and straight flightpath, and even then, it was a crap shoot wether it would land near the target. WWII, the biggest target you could reliably hit with a bombing run from a strategic bomber, was a city. Think about that. Sure, dive bombers can hit small targets like tanks, but their dive bombers. They come within a few hundred feet of their target before dropping their bomb. It's literally point at target, drop bomb, pull up before you hit something, and boom. Dive bombing required practice. No bomb sights, no cameras, no nothing, just eyesight and the plane. Strategic/heavy bombers and even medium bombers usually couldn't hit the broadside of farm, even if their life depended on it. That's why they carried so many bombs, because they were so horribly inaccurate that the only way to hit most targets was to dump tons and tons of munitions on top of it without any regard. Of course, that's WWII, but still...
@Droslash It's ok. I've been around for a long time. Longer than the points system has been around. Platinum was pretty recent, IMAO. But yeah, platinum is supposed to be hard. I mean, look how many golds there are. It's easy compared to it. But TBH, the ranking system doesn't mean too much.
@simpleplanesmaster Dude, we had to wait 6 months for the update with fuselage blocks. This is nothing to complain about by comparison. Sure, the fuselage update had them all at the same time, but still. Waiting a month and a half for mobile to get it is pretty decent when you consider it.
^^^ Yeah, I just flew a route around all the possible routes between the 2 islands, only the original 2 carriers. Are you sure you haven't mistaken it for the USS Jundroo/USS Beast?
@bjac0 I didn't say anything on that... I was mostly making a rebuttal that just because it's a sandbox game, doesn't mean it won't last long. In fact, it's contridictory to what usually happens on youtube. And yeah, I just got my own youtube channel started, so why would I agrue? I want to make videos of Simple Planes, will for quite a while. But yeah, people copying other people's aircraft is annoying... 5 minutes builds, couldn't care less, and modifications, even less. I mean, people making short and not very good builds is their choice, not mine or ours. Copies are another matter... Honestly dislike them. I mean, you can make it for private upload so you don't forget them, but why make them public if it's just for that, or in this case, youtubers?
@DogeZ Uhh... On the contrary, sandbox games are VERY popular. Minecraft is proof of that. And what do you call Kerbal Space Program, Space Engineers, Empryion, blockheads, and others? Sandbox games. And in many cases, they spend months on them with youtube, others, years(AKA minecraft). Sandbox games tend to be more of what the gaming Youtube community does. Scary games? Maybe a few episodes in a row for the series, which include FNaF, Stairs, and others. Action? Only lasts for as long as it's interesting. Any other genre except games with great replayablity that isn't boring will generally only last a few days at best. Sandbox games are some of the only truly replayable, and enjoyable, kind of game genre. Or games where there is some kind of thing where you can build new tracks, maps, etc, like happy wheels. Basically, if it ain't replayable, it isn't going to last too long on youtube unless there is sequels or interesting plot outside the games normal context, FNaF as an example. Basically, there is exceptions, but sand boxes are generally the norm of Youtube for long lasting play series. So simple planes will last a while on youtube.
Of course, looks good, as usual. I already know what I'm going to be doing with that 1m gun :) (slaps it on a light cruiser size monitor, because that's not illogical at all).
@General360 Well, I completely forgot about it... But I got to play AW and get the type 59, as well as try out a new game, so it wasn't in vain. Hopefully I'll release it tomorrow. And if the 5" gun didn't already spoil it... Well, Not going to spoil it until I wake up tomorrow.
@Chuckie Well, there is part clipping. I was one of the first to use part clipping, as I accidentally stumbled on it and then a few people taught me more. I only got into XML modding a few months ago, but without it, builds like this and this would be, to put it simply, impossible.
Now, back to part clipping. There are many ways to do it. One is using fuselage parts and adjusting them so they clip over each other, another is rotation the part once to get it to 'stick'. And there is also nudging, which allows for certain things that normally would be impossible without XML(like putting a VTOL inside an aircraft without it sticking out)
Ok, for mac, I'll just give you a simpliefed form. Don't feel like putting it in a proper format, or finding a comment which has it. Basically go to your user, then library, app support, and then it will either be unity.Jundroo.Simpleplanes(in the case I have), or just simple planes. Then there should be a folder called aircraft designs, which holds ALL the aircraft XML's
@Skua Yeah, I figured this out a while ago, lol. Also, I just got into XML modding on mac, but I do know the file location. It'll take a bit to get it into a proper format.
@Skua Well, I planned on doing a youtube thing as a tutorial for SP, though currently, Steam appears to hate XML modding, a lot. Based on this and my own personal experince with modding a prop, I can only assume Steam reverts the XML files upon loading if they have any tampered characteristics while it's being done in the aircraft folder.
Actually, andriod and PC aren't the only ones which can XML mod(technically XML editing, though it was coined as modding a long while back). They are only ones which can truely mod, as in make mods which add parts, physics, and in general changes the way the game operates. Any device which has even a simple text editor and can access the XML files can XML 'mod', which all of the platforms can do with a few minor exceptions(iOS beyond 8.3 needs a JB to access the files, my school restricted macbook requires a work-around method to get through the library, etc). There is a very clear and distinct difference between true modding and XML modding. XML modding is superficial, only changing the property of parts of an aircraft(location, rotation, how many times the input will respond, etc). True modding allows for things such as the WIP Simple Warships mod, which allows for better water physics, more guns, etc, among other things. Though for some reason steam likes to revert any changes in the XML if it invalidates things you can do in the game, like rotate something to NOT a 90 degree angle, or a more powerful prop.
Uhh... Haven't experinced it. Though, then again, the steam release doesn't like to save it. IDK.
@AnarchistAerospaceIndustries Well, you still have to consider that the devs still have to get the mobile release out of 1.3, and the other platforms other than steam. So yeah, just be patient and wait for a website update before they implement it. IK it's not hard, but it'd take time off them making the mobile release.
Hmm... Sounds like a good suggestion, though it'll probably have to wait until a website update happens.
Yeah, I just noticed the turret... I was like, WTF happened to the front turret? Though it looks good otherwise(in school, so yeah)
@DeezDucks Yeah, that's what I thought. Usually, aircraft will go faster as they lose fuel. Which can only mean you lose weight, because all other varables are constant except weight in those cases.
@RyneKuczy Uhh... Nothing IRL has something like that. I have made it in SP, but it was in an experimental 2-wing plane that didn't work that well(actually one of the planes I uploaded if you look back far enough). tailerons and V-tails and all moving vertical stabilizers though... Actually are around IRL. full moving horizontal and vertical stabilzers have already been made, and a few examples of true tailerons. V-tails, though... I probably have the only example of a working V-tail design, and it's extremely glitchy, to say the least. I mean, instead of asking for what you want, I'd rather want either a rotator with 2 rotational functions at once, or a smaller rotator. Preferably both if at all possible.
We already have them. It's called rotators and a structural wing. Also, all moving ailerons? What?
@CDUflappy That still doesn't really work... And it still can accurately aim it. There is a LOT more than just dispersion and speed at work here. There is also angle, detacher strength(if any), terminal velocity of the bomb(Idk if it has one, but keep that in mind), weight of the aircraft as a whole, weight of the bomb, drag of the bomb(kinda ties in with the terminal velocity), the gravity of the game, and on and on and on and on. It just doesn't really work. I certainly don't see KSP doing it(well, it kinda does, but it also kinda doesn't), much less a lot of other games. And honestly, the bombs actually give a challenge. It's supposed to be hard to aim.
@AeroEngineering Currently, nothing...
@AnarchistAerospaceIndustries Andrew and Philip are... Andrew and Philip. They have had the same name as long as I've been on this site. They were the devs who started it all, and given that the devs usually stick to their real names... Yeah.
And Nathan didn't come on the SP website until he became a dev, so my case is rested there.
@AnarchistAerospaceIndustries Uhh... I already knew this. I saw it myself in the time when the game wasn't released yet, IIRC.
Uhh... If the rant was pointless, why did you post pointless rant? Lol, jkjkjk.
But you do realize that many times, people don't read the rules just because they want to get on with it? Who here hasn't skipped through a terms of use agreement? They tend to be long, and usually no one bothers to read it. So the bottom idea doesn't actually work, really. And, well, yeah...
TBH, you can't really make bomb sights. Seriously, it's trial and error. Bombs don't follow a bomb sight, and the ones used on bombers, while good, only worked on a level, flat, and straight flightpath, and even then, it was a crap shoot wether it would land near the target. WWII, the biggest target you could reliably hit with a bombing run from a strategic bomber, was a city. Think about that. Sure, dive bombers can hit small targets like tanks, but their dive bombers. They come within a few hundred feet of their target before dropping their bomb. It's literally point at target, drop bomb, pull up before you hit something, and boom. Dive bombing required practice. No bomb sights, no cameras, no nothing, just eyesight and the plane. Strategic/heavy bombers and even medium bombers usually couldn't hit the broadside of farm, even if their life depended on it. That's why they carried so many bombs, because they were so horribly inaccurate that the only way to hit most targets was to dump tons and tons of munitions on top of it without any regard. Of course, that's WWII, but still...
I've always done ctrl+L(or in my case, command+L, cause this is a macbook).
@Droslash It's ok. I've been around for a long time. Longer than the points system has been around. Platinum was pretty recent, IMAO. But yeah, platinum is supposed to be hard. I mean, look how many golds there are. It's easy compared to it. But TBH, the ranking system doesn't mean too much.
@Droslash Almost. Bronze is 100, Silver and Gold are correct, and the black is called platinum.
@LegnaK ... Ok.
@simpleplanesmaster Dude, we had to wait 6 months for the update with fuselage blocks. This is nothing to complain about by comparison. Sure, the fuselage update had them all at the same time, but still. Waiting a month and a half for mobile to get it is pretty decent when you consider it.
Hmm... You know what, I just may try something. Nano CFA-44 with EML's :D . Though it may or may not end up being classified as micro...
^^^ Yeah, I just flew a route around all the possible routes between the 2 islands, only the original 2 carriers. Are you sure you haven't mistaken it for the USS Jundroo/USS Beast?
@DeezDucks well, it's replacing my ipad entirely until a later time, unless I absolutely need it. But yeah.
@bjac0 Lol.
@DeezDucks Yeah, screwed up the first one... But I got it! Also, just a little announcement... I can offically XML mod on my Mac now.
@bjac0 I didn't say anything on that... I was mostly making a rebuttal that just because it's a sandbox game, doesn't mean it won't last long. In fact, it's contridictory to what usually happens on youtube. And yeah, I just got my own youtube channel started, so why would I agrue? I want to make videos of Simple Planes, will for quite a while. But yeah, people copying other people's aircraft is annoying... 5 minutes builds, couldn't care less, and modifications, even less. I mean, people making short and not very good builds is their choice, not mine or ours. Copies are another matter... Honestly dislike them. I mean, you can make it for private upload so you don't forget them, but why make them public if it's just for that, or in this case, youtubers?
@DeezDucks
@AeroEngineering I know that... But still.
I'm going to be honest, but I have so many things I would want that I don't want to bother saying them out loud.
@DogeZ Uhh... On the contrary, sandbox games are VERY popular. Minecraft is proof of that. And what do you call Kerbal Space Program, Space Engineers, Empryion, blockheads, and others? Sandbox games. And in many cases, they spend months on them with youtube, others, years(AKA minecraft). Sandbox games tend to be more of what the gaming Youtube community does. Scary games? Maybe a few episodes in a row for the series, which include FNaF, Stairs, and others. Action? Only lasts for as long as it's interesting. Any other genre except games with great replayablity that isn't boring will generally only last a few days at best. Sandbox games are some of the only truly replayable, and enjoyable, kind of game genre. Or games where there is some kind of thing where you can build new tracks, maps, etc, like happy wheels. Basically, if it ain't replayable, it isn't going to last too long on youtube unless there is sequels or interesting plot outside the games normal context, FNaF as an example. Basically, there is exceptions, but sand boxes are generally the norm of Youtube for long lasting play series. So simple planes will last a while on youtube.
Yes! Nice job.
... Really?
Of course, looks good, as usual. I already know what I'm going to be doing with that 1m gun :) (slaps it on a light cruiser size monitor, because that's not illogical at all).
This is kinda like my cruise missile rig, only without the bombs :P
Welcome to the website!
Looks nice. Anyway, welcome to the website!
... Ok? Anyway, welcome to the website! Here's some points to get you started.
Indeed.
@Nagasawa Your welcome.
@General360 Well, I completely forgot about it... But I got to play AW and get the type 59, as well as try out a new game, so it wasn't in vain. Hopefully I'll release it tomorrow. And if the 5" gun didn't already spoil it... Well, Not going to spoil it until I wake up tomorrow.
Looks nice. Welcome to the website!
@General360 Well, I based this off an old aircraft, which was more or less a failed B-52 project which was WAY oversized.
@General360 I didn't intend that, lol. I just though the colors looked good.
@ProKillaV12 ... Uhh... Wasn't it already said it was likely going to come out mid-late january? There hasn't been a specific date yet.
... They don't have them yet.
@ProKillaV12 Uhh... what? The update for iOS isn't coming for a while(at least until January)
Nice! I'll try it when I get home.