@AndrewGarrison More ideas (not trying to overwhelm you guys with huge expectations, just putting ideas out there -- if any of these make it into the update I'll be happy):
To improve performance, why not just remove all the shrubs/bushes from the terrain? I don't think anyone cares about those. Or the windmills.
For the generic gun/cannon part, include a variety of sounds/muzzle flash effects/tracer effects/impact effects and let players choose any combination of these. This would let players make any kind of weapon they want, ranging from realistic guns/cannons to sci-fi weapons.
Similarly, for engines, a generic jet engine part with a variety of nozzle types and exhaust plume effects.
More targets (ships/land bases).
More landing gear types, with a bit more detail and complex animations.
@Stingray Yeah, the F-4 is one reliable old workhorse. Combat pilot stories are the best and I can only envy you getting to hear them first-hand, unlike the sanitized versions most of us get to read about, if at all.
One of the better ones I read was about the A-12: the pilot gets in place behind a tanker for aerial refueling, and the boom operator says to him, "You don't want to go supersonic in this aircraft, sir." Pilot asks why, as she handles just fine. Boom operator goes "The left side of your aircraft is missing, sir." Turned out the blackbird had lost all its radar-absorbent panels on the left side, from the chine and wing leading edges.
@MintLynx I agree with you in that both the building UI and the sandbox need a major overhaul, and that after 4 years, the game should've been much more polished. But keep in mind that it's only the second game by the developers, and their first 3D one, and so the codebase is probably a mess and very hard to change.
The performance problems and flaws with rotators/pistons are pretty bad, I agree, but the developers are hamstrung by the game engine. The problem with building your game on a third-party engine is that the engine will never be able to do some things you need it to do. The only way to have full control is to create your own engine from scratch like, say, the developers of the Sniper Elite series did, and Jundroo just doesn't have the resources for that.
Having said that, I haven't yet found a building game that has progressed beyond the "add a block to another block" method of building. KSP, Minecraft, Brick Rigs, Trailmakers, Avorion, they're all like that. The great thing about SimplePlanes, though, is that they kept the file format open, which means players can build their own tools to create and edit builds. You seem to build a lot of submarines, so are you aware that there is a tool out there that can let you create the kind of shapes you need in minutes?
You can't do that in KSP (or in any other building game, to my knowledge). Every KSP build I've seen has been blocky and clunky. SimplePlanes is currently the only game where it's possible to create builds with smooth curves that fly exactly the way you want them to.
Ultimately, I don't blame you for leaving, but SP just needs a few things changed to be a truly groundbreaking game. I hope the developers can make that happen.
Must not be modded creations, with the exception of the Overloaded Mod.
Does this mean that XML modding done without using Overload is not permitted?
Must not contain parts that are not originally part of the game. I other words, you cannot use parts that are taken from a vehicle that was downloaded. You must use the default parts, such as fuselage blocks, pistons, Boom 50's, etc.
What does this even mean? All builds are made from parts that come with the game, by definition. How would you tell if a given part was taken off a previous build?
Lastly, why tag me? You don't upvote my stuff, which I take to mean you don't like my builds. So what hope would I have in a challenge run by you?
@AndrewGarrison Well, I'd be happy to see any of those make the cut. The glowing materials (as on SR2) would be great. What about a cannon with no moving parts?
I just wondered about the no-physics movers/rotators because the airbrakes work pretty much exactly how I would want - when they're extended they don't wobble, and they do change the hitbox (if you install an airbrake to a part of a build that touches the ground, on extending the airbrake it pushes the build up in a smooth movement). I just wondered if something like that would be possible -- pretty much an airbrake with an attach point on the moving bit.
@Spectre2520 Yes. Only the chassis can have mass. Anything else added to it that has mass will move the center of mass and throw the whole thing off-balance.
@Spectre2520 Did you even run the installer? When you run it, you'll get a dialog box with a button "Select game to install to or uninstall from". Click that, browse to the location of your SimplePlanes.exe. It should be something like
@Aarons123 One more thing: if you add any wings, they must have wingPhysicsEnabled="false". If you add any more engines, they must have powerMultiplier="0".
@Aarons123 Here you go. I've made it so at full throttle, your engines look like they normally would at 30% throttle.
This is very important: if you add any parts to this build, they must have massScale set to 0 and calculateDrag set to false, or flight handling will be degraded.
@Aarons123 Don't you know that at SledDriver Industries, we can get anything to fly, in five minutes or less? Share a link to your post and I'll get back to you with a perfectly flying version.
Some simple suggestions for 1.8 that should be easy to implement:
The option to set a material's ambient property, so we can create glowing parts out of fuselage blocks (or anything), as on SimpleRockets2.
The ability to change the material on a part with an input; this would enable us to make complex shapes that could light up when triggered (using the aforementioned glowing material).
Full XML editing capabilities in the base game so iOS users don't feel frustrated. This doesn't need a fancy UI; it just needs to loop over the part's available attributes and create a list of labeled text fields with minimal/no validation.
Replace the current palette-based material editor with one that lets us input RGB, S, M, and A (ambient) values directly or with sliders.
To add to the current cornerTypes options, could we have a "bevel" corner type?
Better-looking tracers, as in War Thunder (glowing elongated orbs with halos instead of flat, sharp-edged sprites)
A special brush that allows selecting a bunch of parts by painting them with a special "selector" material (make it glow red, or pulse, or something). Parts painted with it can be edited as a group (e.g. cornerTypes, massScale, dragScale, etc.).
Rotational and translational "mover" parts that don't wobble, or trigger drag/angular momentum recalculations in general. The existing airbrake part is a good example of what I mean, except nothing can be attached to it, so it's not very useful. Imagine a "translator" part that could be configured like this: From input range 0 to 0.25, move 0.5 unit along the x-axis; from input range 0.4 to 1, move 2 units along the z-axis. This could be used to make a door that first pops out of the fuselage, then slides along it. These parts don't need a fancy base mesh like the current rotators and pistons, they could be just a rectangular/cylindrical block with two attach points.
A "cannon" part that's basically a detacher, with the difference that it doesn't create additional Bodies and therefore doesn't affect physics; It takes a subassembly as its "shell" and a number attribute as its ammo count. When fired, it spawns the subassembly in real time, and launches it with the desired force. Firing it shouldn't affect the build's physics in any way, except for an optional recoil attribute. The cannon part could be a simple cylinder, without any fancy base mesh -- we can create our own cannon models to attach to it. It would have two attach points, one at the rear and one at the front. As an added bonus (this would be fantastic to have), it could compress longitudinally when fired to simulate recoil, with the rear attach point remaining stationary and the front attach point moving in a gun-recoil motion. So we could create the main gun body out of fuselage blocks and attach it to the rear point, and the barrel out of more fuselage blocks and attach it to the front point. Because this cannon part would fire a subassembly instead of a predefined shell, it could be used to make not just cannons, but ejector seats, missile silos, etc. The cannon would have attributes like speed, impactType (kinetic, explosive, incendiary...), damage, explosionScale, muzzleFlashType, etc.
Meanwhile, I hope all you developers have a great Christmas/NY break, and thanks for building the game that's given me more enjoyment than any other I've ever played.
@Spectre2520 "Files" aren't lame. Would you prefer a 50 MB executable that does all kinds of stuff you don't know about?
First, install Reshade. Then, in your reshade-shaders\Shaders folder, extract the .fx file. Launch SP, Reshade should automatically list the shaders. Enable the one you want. The one I use is "OrangeBlueSaturated."
For the editor background, select the blue space background in skybox pack mod settings, then set the hue to 20, 40, 80.
@Spacedoge12345plane Sure, I could have all kinds of doohickeys hooked up to all seven activation groups, but considering you never upvote my builds -- not even this one -- you obviously think I'm quite a bad builder; so why would you ask me to build anything? :)
To get the distance and bearing from one point to another, all you need is a build that cannot move (a cockpit by itself will do) and one of my hover-builds.
Spawn at your origin point (Yeager in this case).
Spawn the immobile build as an AI plane at your target point.
Target the immobile build to get its distance.
Get the hover-build off the ground and rotate it until it points directly at the target. The compass bearing is the bearing you need to hit the target.
@Bearclaw189 Mods on iOS is never going to happen because of Apple's security policy (which is a good thing). That's why features that people need so badly should be in the base game. I can't imagine why the developers haven't done it a long time ago.
@Spectre2520 There are two videos like that, one is of the Venom taking out three ships with its spread-fire plasma cannon, the other is of the Phalanx which is a mortar that kills all three ships with high-trajectory Boom 50 shots.
@Jim1the1Squid Did you mean modder? Because I'm not one -- I use external scripts, not mods, to build my creations.
As for dogfighting AI, is there any point when most aircraft posted here can barely fly at all? There's other, much more important stuff that needs fixing.
@Stingray All you have to do is, in a code editor, set an attribute disableAircraftCollisions="true" on all parts with a search and replace operation. So if you have:
Part id="1001" partType="Fuselage-Body-1"
you should end up with:
Part disableAircraftCollisions="true" id="1001" partType="Fuselage-Body-1"
Just make sure that if there are any existing disableAircraftCollisions on any parts, you remove them all, otherwise you'll get the same attribute twice on some parts, and the game will refuse to load the file.
Looks good and flies well (apart from inverted yaw), but pitching hard can cause mid-air disintegration. You can build up a library of parts/subassemblies with collisions disabled to avoid this. Or, if you have a PC/Mac, you can use a text editor to set collisions disabled on all parts of a build before uploading.
@AndrewGarrison More ideas (not trying to overwhelm you guys with huge expectations, just putting ideas out there -- if any of these make it into the update I'll be happy):
- To improve performance, why not just remove all the shrubs/bushes from the terrain? I don't think anyone cares about those. Or the windmills.
- For the generic gun/cannon part, include a variety of sounds/muzzle flash effects/tracer effects/impact effects and let players choose any combination of these. This would let players make any kind of weapon they want, ranging from realistic guns/cannons to sci-fi weapons.
- Similarly, for engines, a generic jet engine part with a variety of nozzle types and exhaust plume effects.
- More targets (ships/land bases).
- More landing gear types, with a bit more detail and complex animations.
- A range of low- to high-poly cockpit models.
+13@Spectre2520 A promising start.
@Stingray Yeah, the F-4 is one reliable old workhorse. Combat pilot stories are the best and I can only envy you getting to hear them first-hand, unlike the sanitized versions most of us get to read about, if at all.
One of the better ones I read was about the A-12: the pilot gets in place behind a tanker for aerial refueling, and the boom operator says to him, "You don't want to go supersonic in this aircraft, sir." Pilot asks why, as she handles just fine. Boom operator goes "The left side of your aircraft is missing, sir." Turned out the blackbird had lost all its radar-absorbent panels on the left side, from the chine and wing leading edges.
That's one psychedelic Phantom...
@MintLynx I agree with you in that both the building UI and the sandbox need a major overhaul, and that after 4 years, the game should've been much more polished. But keep in mind that it's only the second game by the developers, and their first 3D one, and so the codebase is probably a mess and very hard to change.
The performance problems and flaws with rotators/pistons are pretty bad, I agree, but the developers are hamstrung by the game engine. The problem with building your game on a third-party engine is that the engine will never be able to do some things you need it to do. The only way to have full control is to create your own engine from scratch like, say, the developers of the Sniper Elite series did, and Jundroo just doesn't have the resources for that.
Having said that, I haven't yet found a building game that has progressed beyond the "add a block to another block" method of building. KSP, Minecraft, Brick Rigs, Trailmakers, Avorion, they're all like that. The great thing about SimplePlanes, though, is that they kept the file format open, which means players can build their own tools to create and edit builds. You seem to build a lot of submarines, so are you aware that there is a tool out there that can let you create the kind of shapes you need in minutes?
You can't do that in KSP (or in any other building game, to my knowledge). Every KSP build I've seen has been blocky and clunky. SimplePlanes is currently the only game where it's possible to create builds with smooth curves that fly exactly the way you want them to.
Ultimately, I don't blame you for leaving, but SP just needs a few things changed to be a truly groundbreaking game. I hope the developers can make that happen.
@Feanor Good build always gets my upvote, comrade. No thanks necessary.
+1@Jim1the1Squid
Does this mean that XML modding done without using Overload is not permitted?
What does this even mean? All builds are made from parts that come with the game, by definition. How would you tell if a given part was taken off a previous build?
Lastly, why tag me? You don't upvote my stuff, which I take to mean you don't like my builds. So what hope would I have in a challenge run by you?
@AndrewGarrison Well, I'd be happy to see any of those make the cut. The glowing materials (as on SR2) would be great. What about a cannon with no moving parts?
I just wondered about the no-physics movers/rotators because the airbrakes work pretty much exactly how I would want - when they're extended they don't wobble, and they do change the hitbox (if you install an airbrake to a part of a build that touches the ground, on extending the airbrake it pushes the build up in a smooth movement). I just wondered if something like that would be possible -- pretty much an airbrake with an attach point on the moving bit.
+1@PlanesOfOld I'm aware of it, but 1) its UI leaves something to be desired, and 2) I'm also asking for an ambient value field/slider.
@Spectre2520 Yes. Only the chassis can have mass. Anything else added to it that has mass will move the center of mass and throw the whole thing off-balance.
@Spectre2520 Yeah, that sounds right.
@Spectre2520 Did you even run the installer? When you run it, you'll get a dialog box with a button "Select game to install to or uninstall from". Click that, browse to the location of your SimplePlanes.exe. It should be something like
C:\Program Files\Steam\SteamApps\common\SimplePlanes\SimplePlanes.exe
Below the button, there are three options: Direct3D 9, Direct3D 10+, and OpenGL. Select OpenGL. That's it.
+1@Spectre2520 A quick Google search would point you to the ReShade website. The download link is at the bottom. Choose OpenGL during installation.
@Aarons123 One more thing: if you add any wings, they must have wingPhysicsEnabled="false". If you add any more engines, they must have powerMultiplier="0".
@Aarons123 Sure you can, all you need is a kit with all parts set to massScale=0 and calculateDrag=false.
@Aarons123 Here you go. I've made it so at full throttle, your engines look like they normally would at 30% throttle.
This is very important: if you add any parts to this build, they must have massScale set to 0 and calculateDrag set to false, or flight handling will be degraded.
@Aarons123 OK, how do you want it to fly: like a regular airplane, or a spaceship that can hover, strafe, fly backwards, etc.)?
@Aarons123 Don't you know that at SledDriver Industries, we can get anything to fly, in five minutes or less? Share a link to your post and I'll get back to you with a perfectly flying version.
@Spectre2520 I think you missed this part in my instructions:
Some simple suggestions for 1.8 that should be easy to implement:
@AndrewGarrison
+6Somewhat less simple suggestions:
Meanwhile, I hope all you developers have a great Christmas/NY break, and thanks for building the game that's given me more enjoyment than any other I've ever played.
@AndrewGarrison
+4@IssaIwan Damn right.
@Spectre2520 No problem. Look forward to seeing more complex builds from you, now that you have a PC.
@Spectre2520 Did you install Reshade first? Do the Reshade menu/messages/dialog show up when you launch the game?
@Spectre2520 "Files" aren't lame. Would you prefer a 50 MB executable that does all kinds of stuff you don't know about?
First, install Reshade. Then, in your reshade-shaders\Shaders folder, extract the .fx file. Launch SP, Reshade should automatically list the shaders. Enable the one you want. The one I use is "OrangeBlueSaturated."
For the editor background, select the blue space background in skybox pack mod settings, then set the hue to 20, 40, 80.
@Strikefighter04 Yeah... now what I need is a car that can make my work commute in less than a kilometre.
+1@Spacedoge12345plane Sure, I could have all kinds of doohickeys hooked up to all seven activation groups, but considering you never upvote my builds -- not even this one -- you obviously think I'm quite a bad builder; so why would you ask me to build anything? :)
To get the distance and bearing from one point to another, all you need is a build that cannot move (a cockpit by itself will do) and one of my hover-builds.
- Spawn at your origin point (Yeager in this case).
- Spawn the immobile build as an AI plane at your target point.
- Target the immobile build to get its distance.
- Get the hover-build off the ground and rotate it until it points directly at the target. The compass bearing is the bearing you need to hit the target.
+1@Bearclaw189 Mods on iOS is never going to happen because of Apple's security policy (which is a good thing). That's why features that people need so badly should be in the base game. I can't imagine why the developers haven't done it a long time ago.
@Spectre2520 Sorry, I don't do part requests. You and other iOS users would be better off asking for XML editing functionality in the base game.
@Spectre2520 There are two videos like that, one is of the Venom taking out three ships with its spread-fire plasma cannon, the other is of the Phalanx which is a mortar that kills all three ships with high-trajectory Boom 50 shots.
@F104Deathtrap Some said he was a developer, some said he wasn't human at all...
+2Thanks, @Spectre2520
@Spectre2520 Which cannon is that, the Phalanx mortar?
@Jim1the1Squid Well, I'm not sure what part of my bio gave you that impression, but I'm not one of the game developers.
@Jim1the1Squid Did you mean modder? Because I'm not one -- I use external scripts, not mods, to build my creations.
As for dogfighting AI, is there any point when most aircraft posted here can barely fly at all? There's other, much more important stuff that needs fixing.
@Stingray All you have to do is, in a code editor, set an attribute disableAircraftCollisions="true" on all parts with a search and replace operation. So if you have:
Part id="1001" partType="Fuselage-Body-1"
you should end up with:
Part disableAircraftCollisions="true" id="1001" partType="Fuselage-Body-1"
Just make sure that if there are any existing disableAircraftCollisions on any parts, you remove them all, otherwise you'll get the same attribute twice on some parts, and the game will refuse to load the file.
@Spectre2520 No, not yet. Open to suggestions.
Looks good and flies well (apart from inverted yaw), but pitching hard can cause mid-air disintegration. You can build up a library of parts/subassemblies with collisions disabled to avoid this. Or, if you have a PC/Mac, you can use a text editor to set collisions disabled on all parts of a build before uploading.
+1@ChisP trial and error, with some calculation thrown in.
Thanks, @ChallengerHellcat, I'm quite happy with how this one turned out as well.
@ChickenMcNuggets007 Don't get me wrong, it's absolutely fine if you like it; it's just not my thing, that's all.
Thanks, @TRex63
Thanks, @ViciousTNT
@ChickenMcNuggets007 Well, to me it still looks silly. The whole flying upright thing is super silly as well.
@Latios22 Why, isn't the Hercules close enough?
@F104Deathtrap Uhh, a man calling me beautiful makes me very uncomfortable, and why lunatic?
+1@WIZARD2017 Try lining up two ships and pushing one into the other. Or you can push a ship aground.
@ChickenMcNuggets007 Wow, that's the silliest-looking ship I've ever seen.
Merci beaucoup, @grizzlitn