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.
@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.
@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.
@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.
@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.
Since your car is dark-colored, you need a bright map to bring contrast. It is especially true for your first screenshot since that is what people will first see. I make that mistake a lot when I screenshot for planes. In addition, I found that lowering the FOV to 30 really helps the car pop. I employed these two techniques for my Lancia Stratos and they do wonders. Custom shader is good but I think it is unnecessary. Cranking the graphics to max is already really beautiful.
@32 This car is also one of my favorites in the class since the tail is rather agile. An agile tail in Rally is important because I love to use trail braking to steer the car.
@CDwagner But the details are completely different. Also, for this type of configuration, you need to push the aerodynamic center as forward as possible. If needed, you may need to invest in Funky Tree fly-by-wire to get an unstable plane to fly.
@GrandPrix Upon reading my original comments, I realized I forgot to mention some points of suspension design. I apologize in advance.
You mentioned your suspension is very bouncy, which means there is not enough damping. Add damping always helps.
Another issue I found that can cause issues (but not necessarily) is small hinges and rotators. Simpleplanes seems to dislike those small parts especially when calculating the damping and constraint between two parts connected via hinges. This will make your suspension surprisingly weak because those swing arms are flopping. To remedy this issue, one of the dimensions must be close to 1. I learn this the hard way when making suspension for Allundra F5 Evo.
Also, remember to adjust the weight of your car with overload.
I think your suspension design also played a role here. The rear is unreasonably stiff so when there is any body roll, the rear wheel will catch air and lose grip. Because the spring in the editor is not compressed, you need to leave room for the spring to compress when it spawns in. One good example of this measure is the Lancia 037 I built. The suspension is very floppy so I left a lot of space for it to compress. I also integrated anti-roll designs to make the car handle better. Your car may not need that amount of travel but some amount is necessary.
Another thing. You can use funky trees to simulate the caster angle through angle of slip feedback. Again, the Lancia I built has the exact algorithm I use. It may be hard to read so I suggest you paste it to a notebook to read it.
Honestly, everything thing you do is magic. Since we are no magicians ourselves, we cannot say anything other than yes. I am always curious about how you research vehicle interiors. Do you use some other games or do you just rely on photos?
@Luky44 I might try the entire Quattro S1 lineage including the original Sport Quattro to the ugly RS 002. I may have to see what @dussts wish to build. If he wishes to focus more on JDM then these cars will probably come out of my hands. But I think more likely, I will try Stratos since that car has much more interesting shapes than the blocky Quattro.
Why not funky tree steering? The car would behave more realistically.
@F1Fan8910 I am not saying it does not work, the structure is not correct and therefore the dynamics are compromised.
@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.
@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.
Looks 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.
@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
@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.
@SuperSuperTheSylph I have uploaded a normal version that feature normal control scheme and camera control version just for Mobile users
@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.
@JA311M I have to say, they are much better than mine.
@JA311M Good luck!
@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.
Since your car is dark-colored, you need a bright map to bring contrast. It is especially true for your first screenshot since that is what people will first see. I make that mistake a lot when I screenshot for planes. In addition, I found that lowering the FOV to 30 really helps the car pop. I employed these two techniques for my Lancia Stratos and they do wonders. Custom shader is good but I think it is unnecessary. Cranking the graphics to max is already really beautiful.
You seriously need to improve your screenshotting skills so that you can attract more upvotes.
Bike in your profile pic when?
@32 This car is also one of my favorites in the class since the tail is rather agile. An agile tail in Rally is important because I love to use trail braking to steer the car.
@CDwagner But the details are completely different. Also, for this type of configuration, you need to push the aerodynamic center as forward as possible. If needed, you may need to invest in Funky Tree fly-by-wire to get an unstable plane to fly.
This plane is broken on so many levels. I suggest you check out my XP-79 to see how I approach this type of wing.
It is so cursed, I love it.
@windshifter1 You don't say. Every car I built have been test driven to death. The issue is the lack of dedicated rally track in SP.
@Alternation Or just CIA being CIA. You know their track record is not always the best.
@dussts Thanks!
@Graingy Wedge
@dussts I would like to challenge you to build a Lamborghini Countach LP400. I am still curious to see how you would build a wedge car.
I will get the Group 4 version ready soon after this remodel.
@dussts Not sure how you would approach this car. Perhaps you can do a better job potatoing this car.
@dussts I just realized I can no longer spotlight you. Congratulations.
@Zaineman Thanks.
This is exactly what I was expecting.
@GrandPrix Upon reading my original comments, I realized I forgot to mention some points of suspension design. I apologize in advance.
You mentioned your suspension is very bouncy, which means there is not enough damping. Add damping always helps.
Another issue I found that can cause issues (but not necessarily) is small hinges and rotators. Simpleplanes seems to dislike those small parts especially when calculating the damping and constraint between two parts connected via hinges. This will make your suspension surprisingly weak because those swing arms are flopping. To remedy this issue, one of the dimensions must be close to 1. I learn this the hard way when making suspension for Allundra F5 Evo.
Also, remember to adjust the weight of your car with overload.
I think your suspension design also played a role here. The rear is unreasonably stiff so when there is any body roll, the rear wheel will catch air and lose grip. Because the spring in the editor is not compressed, you need to leave room for the spring to compress when it spawns in. One good example of this measure is the Lancia 037 I built. The suspension is very floppy so I left a lot of space for it to compress. I also integrated anti-roll designs to make the car handle better. Your car may not need that amount of travel but some amount is necessary.
Another thing. You can use funky trees to simulate the caster angle through angle of slip feedback. Again, the Lancia I built has the exact algorithm I use. It may be hard to read so I suggest you paste it to a notebook to read it.
Honestly, everything thing you do is magic. Since we are no magicians ourselves, we cannot say anything other than yes. I am always curious about how you research vehicle interiors. Do you use some other games or do you just rely on photos?
@Luky44 I might try the entire Quattro S1 lineage including the original Sport Quattro to the ugly RS 002. I may have to see what @dussts wish to build. If he wishes to focus more on JDM then these cars will probably come out of my hands. But I think more likely, I will try Stratos since that car has much more interesting shapes than the blocky Quattro.
I have a car in the works for you.
More, MOOOREEEE! (Full size please)
@dussts Dangit, I did not caught it until you pointed out. Thank you though. Not sure if I should post an updated version.
@dussts Do you approve the potato title?