7.5 years ago, I have tried to build a transformable VF-25. That plane took me 3 months. Due to the lack of XML modding and funky trees, the build was barely functioning and it looked terrible. That plane also killed my enthusiasm for variable fighters due to the terrible outcome and burnout.
Now seeing this build. I have complicated feelings. Perhaps it is the best example of the power of time and dedication from Jundroo. Without the integration of funky trees and fuselage slicing, creating accurate geometries without sacrificing the transformation capability will be impossible.
I am not sure if I should try to get back into building variable fighters since I have other things to do. But I am dang sure that if I do, I will do much better than what I have achieved 7 years ago. See you around in SP2.
I am not sure if my suggestion from the last post went through or not. I guess it did not. Therefore, I think I will make some modifications trying to make the front of the car look less flat. Also, for the name, I think Velox is better since it is more modern. Ventus is just too latin and feels ancient.
The middle section is a bit too flat which consequently makes the front end flat. I will make sure to make modifications early this time so that the end product turns out better. I think I will post a modified unlisted version so you can see it better.
@Hanahany To be frank, everywhere is not right for me. The basic outline is correct but every detail is wrong. The wing has the wrong shape and size, the fuselage is too short. The tail is too short. The cockpit is too sort. etc. The moment I tried to make a detailed comparison, the moment I found those modeling errors that can be avoided. Although my previous comment contained the link to my fix. I think I will explicitly put it here
@Rb2h For me, it is just a part limit. I was basically trying to push below 100 parts. I think a better metric should be performance cost since that determines how hard it is to run a vehicle.
@BYardley The rear suspension is just a common suspension component I made a while ago. It works well enough so if a car has a space to hide it, I use it. Although each car will have the suspension modified to accommodate for the behavior I desire. The front suspension is a great way to make an open-wheel suspension after you are done modeling it. I added hinges at places that need rotation and hid the spring within a fuselage block to imitate a push rod design (Pull rod does not work well here, unfortunately). This design is what I use for my Allundra F5 Evo.
@BYardley Unfortunately, Syncro was not the version that was in GT4, Nardo was. I built Syncro first because I cannot find full drawings for the Nardo variant. Now armed with knowledge on the Syncro, I think I can try the Nardo version. That one will probably not be a potato car because I want to try to build the interior and the engine. But such a build would probably take longer than I would liked.
@Rjenteissussy In my opinion, Volkswagen should have built it because it looks so production-ready. But I guess they cannot afford to let this car compete with cars from Porsche and Audi because that is not the purpose of Volkswagen brand.
@OUSSAMAD Then join the potato car gang. It is not that hard to build since you have 100 part limit. I think one of the reasons your craft does not do as well as expected is the thumbnails. The contrast is fine but you need to reduce the FOV to make the craft pop on the thumbnails. Try to fill up the entire thumbnail space with your craft so people can see your planes better. One little trick I use to get multiple screenshots in the thumbnails is picture combiners online. You can combine 3 of your best screenshots and use that one image in the designer suite. In this way, you can get 3 screenshot thumbnails while uploading.
For the potato Volga, I suggest you try to find some vector 3 view drawings online and just download the image. You do not need high-res stuff the website is selling. Then, you scale the drawing to the right size so that your car comes out 1:1 in terms of scale. Then try to use the least amount of parts to recreate the shape of the drawing. That completes a potato build. Car tuning is completely up to you.
@dussts I guess the issue is I like testing cars on custom mod maps. Most of the maps have narrow roads and finer map geometry. Not having a good custom suspension that has a lot of travel and a good funky tree steering greatly hurts the handling. Basically, for me, fine is not enough, great is necessary.
No custom suspension? But I guess not everyone is as obsessed as me when it comes to driving performance. I added the rally suspension and aero to your car and managed 88 parts.
@SuperSuperTheSylph One idea is you can reduce the size of the interface and increase FOV. Then you can grip the sticks in the VR cockpit to fly this thing.
@Jaspy190 I probably not going to build that since I have a lot of builds to go through. Building it for the challenge is not quite feasible since the bomber is a lot more complicated.
@SuperSuperTheSylph Unfortunately, this is the by-product of this thing being optimized for VR and PC. I am just unsure of the interaction of variables and flight stick base.
@SuperSuperTheSylph I think you could just flesh out the cockpit of your headhunter and submit it for the challenge (by making the entire plane a sub-assembly and attaching it to the challenge cockpit piece). Hiding the missiles will be a challenge though.
@Rjenteissussy Probably because I decided to take a low-contrast screenshot. I did this because I love the TIE fighter low pass scene from Andor. Thank you very much for the support.
@JA311M Darnit, I now feel like a moron that is just forcing my own values onto others. For that, I apologize. My selfish chase for perfection is like maggots tunneling all over my scalp whenever I see something that can be improved. It honestly turned into zealousness which unfortunately is harmful to the community.
And yes, Chinese is my native language. However, I do not like to use it because I find my autistic tendencies incompatible with such a flexible language. I would still talk in Chinese if necessary.
@JA311M It is hard to explain honestly, building replicas in SP is an art for multiple reasons. Understanding how to craft complex surfaces with limited part geometry options is such a challenge that it took me several years to master. Knowing when to reduce details to reduce part count is also an interesting part of building replicas. The recent trend in Potato cars and PEA is a good demonstration of such art.
I also understand why you want to avoid replicas. But I don't think building replicas is a bad thing. Real cars are designed by masters in the industries and carved to perfection with clay. Only by learning from masters will you achieve something greater when designing original cars. If you do not wish to build, I think drawing the side view of cars is the fastest way to understand the curves and line flows. I am looking forward to more better builds from you.
@JA311M I think I have a better way to put it. The lines of the cars you built do not flow well. It is especially evident when looking at the side view. Your mid-engined car is the prime example of such problem. This car is no different in that regard. In my opinion, you should probably bite the bullet and use the designer suite to recreate the Aston Martin DBS using vector drawings. You do not need to buy the drawing, just right click to save so that you have something to work with. By doing accurate replicas, I think it will help you grasp the line flow of cars and hopefully help you with creating better looking original cars.
@JA311M In my honest opinion, I felt that some of the lines of your build just look weird especially the part right behind the headlight. I am currently thinking about fixing it myself and uploading an unlisted version so you can use it as a reference. Also, your car is turning too sharply which is unrealistic, and is flipping over. I am considering tuning the suspension to fix it. Your stuffs have a lot of potential but there are just some minor problems that are keeping it from perfection.
7.5 years ago, I have tried to build a transformable VF-25. That plane took me 3 months. Due to the lack of XML modding and funky trees, the build was barely functioning and it looked terrible. That plane also killed my enthusiasm for variable fighters due to the terrible outcome and burnout.
Now seeing this build. I have complicated feelings. Perhaps it is the best example of the power of time and dedication from Jundroo. Without the integration of funky trees and fuselage slicing, creating accurate geometries without sacrificing the transformation capability will be impossible.
I am not sure if I should try to get back into building variable fighters since I have other things to do. But I am dang sure that if I do, I will do much better than what I have achieved 7 years ago. See you around in SP2.
@AbdulRivai I think my Rivelta Solaire should be a good example.
Why not funky tree steering? The car would behave more realistically.
@dussts Magical. Somehow works really nicely.
+2@F1Fan8910 I am not saying it does not work, the structure is not correct and therefore the dynamics are compromised.
The suspension... Am I going to fix it again?
+1@JA311M I just expect better screenshot for the final release.
This one looks much less cursed. Keep up the good work!
@JA311M Sounds more modern.
Here is the link to the modified car
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/xlAAnt/Vigilant-M4-concept-Modified
I hope it is helpful. Trying to describe what is wrong is less effective than fixing it.
I am not sure if my suggestion from the last post went through or not. I guess it did not. Therefore, I think I will make some modifications trying to make the front of the car look less flat. Also, for the name, I think Velox is better since it is more modern. Ventus is just too latin and feels ancient.
@JA311M This post contains the modified sections I was talking about. They are color-coded for clarity.
Explicit link:
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/9BAbzR/Vigilant-M4-concept-Modified
The middle section is a bit too flat which consequently makes the front end flat. I will make sure to make modifications early this time so that the end product turns out better. I think I will post a modified unlisted version so you can see it better.
Is this a double wishbone or Mcpherson strut design because I cannot figure it out myself.
@Hanahany To be frank, everywhere is not right for me. The basic outline is correct but every detail is wrong. The wing has the wrong shape and size, the fuselage is too short. The tail is too short. The cockpit is too sort. etc. The moment I tried to make a detailed comparison, the moment I found those modeling errors that can be avoided. Although my previous comment contained the link to my fix. I think I will explicitly put it here
https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/q3FL88/sbd-fix
+1@Chazsaviation I seriously don't know because I sketched the plane before building it.
+1@Rjenteissussy Make it six.
+1I tried to fix your SBD to a degree but could not make it perfect as there are many inherent modeling errors.
+1@Rb2h For me, it is just a part limit. I was basically trying to push below 100 parts. I think a better metric should be performance cost since that determines how hard it is to run a vehicle.
@BYardley The rear suspension is just a common suspension component I made a while ago. It works well enough so if a car has a space to hide it, I use it. Although each car will have the suspension modified to accommodate for the behavior I desire. The front suspension is a great way to make an open-wheel suspension after you are done modeling it. I added hinges at places that need rotation and hid the spring within a fuselage block to imitate a push rod design (Pull rod does not work well here, unfortunately). This design is what I use for my Allundra F5 Evo.
+1I just took the lazy approach and locked the pitch and roll in landing mode in my TIE fighter.
+1Looks like you made Soviet T-35 tank into a helicopter.
I think you need a funky tree based flight system to make it more like how it is portrayed in the anime.
This is just MABUR's F-35. Please give credit. The auto credit is not working here because his account was deleted. AG1 to go into hover mode I think.
工程沙盒里最忌惮下载别人的东西然后重发，你至少把原作者写在描述里，这次因为原作者的号被删了就放过你。下不为例。
+2@BYardley Unfortunately, Syncro was not the version that was in GT4, Nardo was. I built Syncro first because I cannot find full drawings for the Nardo variant. Now armed with knowledge on the Syncro, I think I can try the Nardo version. That one will probably not be a potato car because I want to try to build the interior and the engine. But such a build would probably take longer than I would liked.
+1@Rjenteissussy In my opinion, Volkswagen should have built it because it looks so production-ready. But I guess they cannot afford to let this car compete with cars from Porsche and Audi because that is not the purpose of Volkswagen brand.
+1@OUSSAMAD Then join the potato car gang. It is not that hard to build since you have 100 part limit. I think one of the reasons your craft does not do as well as expected is the thumbnails. The contrast is fine but you need to reduce the FOV to make the craft pop on the thumbnails. Try to fill up the entire thumbnail space with your craft so people can see your planes better. One little trick I use to get multiple screenshots in the thumbnails is picture combiners online. You can combine 3 of your best screenshots and use that one image in the designer suite. In this way, you can get 3 screenshot thumbnails while uploading.
For the potato Volga, I suggest you try to find some vector 3 view drawings online and just download the image. You do not need high-res stuff the website is selling. Then, you scale the drawing to the right size so that your car comes out 1:1 in terms of scale. Then try to use the least amount of parts to recreate the shape of the drawing. That completes a potato build. Car tuning is completely up to you.
Volga V8 version
@SuperSuperTheSylph @Zaineman I think I have created something that is not supposed to work. Yet it does.
+1@WinsWings Sorry for bugging you. This is just an experiment, not the official entry. But I hope you give it a try since it is weird.
@CallsignGizmo It is a very small dome that has an advanced camera suite and IRST.
@dussts I guess the issue is I like testing cars on custom mod maps. Most of the maps have narrow roads and finer map geometry. Not having a good custom suspension that has a lot of travel and a good funky tree steering greatly hurts the handling. Basically, for me, fine is not enough, great is necessary.
@JA311M Its a common knowledge. I really like the screenshot. Feels cinematic.
Martini shaken not stirred
+2No custom suspension? But I guess not everyone is as obsessed as me when it comes to driving performance. I added the rally suspension and aero to your car and managed 88 parts.
+1With our help, you will be forced to be good at this game.
+2Would probably ditch the fuselage wing in favor of 4 missiles. Still, a great build.
+5@SuperSuperTheSylph I have uploaded a normal version that feature normal control scheme and camera control version just for Mobile users
@SuperSuperTheSylph One idea is you can reduce the size of the interface and increase FOV. Then you can grip the sticks in the VR cockpit to fly this thing.
+1@Jaspy190 I probably not going to build that since I have a lot of builds to go through. Building it for the challenge is not quite feasible since the bomber is a lot more complicated.
@SuperSuperTheSylph Unfortunately, this is the by-product of this thing being optimized for VR and PC. I am just unsure of the interaction of variables and flight stick base.
+1@SuperSuperTheSylph Well, I am unsure since digging through the variables is hard. All I would suggest is to use gyro and see if it feels better.
+1@SuperSuperTheSylph I think you could just flesh out the cockpit of your headhunter and submit it for the challenge (by making the entire plane a sub-assembly and attaching it to the challenge cockpit piece). Hiding the missiles will be a challenge though.
+1@Rjenteissussy Probably because I decided to take a low-contrast screenshot. I did this because I love the TIE fighter low pass scene from Andor. Thank you very much for the support.
+1@JA311M I have to say, they are much better than mine.
@JA311M Good luck!
@JA311M Darnit, I now feel like a moron that is just forcing my own values onto others. For that, I apologize. My selfish chase for perfection is like maggots tunneling all over my scalp whenever I see something that can be improved. It honestly turned into zealousness which unfortunately is harmful to the community.
And yes, Chinese is my native language. However, I do not like to use it because I find my autistic tendencies incompatible with such a flexible language. I would still talk in Chinese if necessary.
+1@JA311M It is hard to explain honestly, building replicas in SP is an art for multiple reasons. Understanding how to craft complex surfaces with limited part geometry options is such a challenge that it took me several years to master. Knowing when to reduce details to reduce part count is also an interesting part of building replicas. The recent trend in Potato cars and PEA is a good demonstration of such art.
I also understand why you want to avoid replicas. But I don't think building replicas is a bad thing. Real cars are designed by masters in the industries and carved to perfection with clay. Only by learning from masters will you achieve something greater when designing original cars. If you do not wish to build, I think drawing the side view of cars is the fastest way to understand the curves and line flows. I am looking forward to more better builds from you.
+1@JA311M I think I have a better way to put it. The lines of the cars you built do not flow well. It is especially evident when looking at the side view. Your mid-engined car is the prime example of such problem. This car is no different in that regard. In my opinion, you should probably bite the bullet and use the designer suite to recreate the Aston Martin DBS using vector drawings. You do not need to buy the drawing, just right click to save so that you have something to work with. By doing accurate replicas, I think it will help you grasp the line flow of cars and hopefully help you with creating better looking original cars.
@JA311M In my honest opinion, I felt that some of the lines of your build just look weird especially the part right behind the headlight. I am currently thinking about fixing it myself and uploading an unlisted version so you can use it as a reference. Also, your car is turning too sharply which is unrealistic, and is flipping over. I am considering tuning the suspension to fix it. Your stuffs have a lot of potential but there are just some minor problems that are keeping it from perfection.