Make like the thousandth Mustang out here? the hundredth Zero?
Do it justice, and you will be rewarded. While upvotes really aren't a good metric of a build's quality (especially recently- it's a better indicator of popularity), I do think your building can use improvement. The FT inputs certainly are impressive. I can't praise you enough for that. That being said, I think the following is some valid advice.
First of all, the plane feels.... far too "chunky". Your gauges can be far better than that. The main fuselage definitely needs work. You could add an additional 10 parts to help out a bit with that. You're on PC, it's not difficult.
Two. Attention to detail. Despite the fact that your recent build doesn't have much blueprint to go off of, I highly doubt the LG would've looked like that. Often a strong distinguishing factor is the LG. It's a good idea to sink a good amount of effort into it. Also, why is your plane lacking any sort of trim?
I was going to put something for three, but I think the above does it good enough, at least for a start. Your plane's acceleration is also a bit too fast, but in flight performance seems plausible enough. Again, upvotes are inherently a metric of popularity. If you wanted to know about the quality of a build, SP would have a 5-star rating system or something. That's all I have for you right now, keep trying till you find what works.
Why are you in beta?
Mirror issues are likely caused by faulty connections. Duplication, not sure. Check your input hardware, might be a rapid switch on-off thing.
@TrislandianAlliance
.
Ah, forgot that you want Throttle to be a thing. Just add Throttle * to the front of the code I sent earlier. I don't quite understand the second question though, could you perhaps phrase it differently?
@nadvgia
.
So the idea is that if Throttle = 0, you want the whole expression to evaluate to 0 regardless, correct? This can be done using simpler math, no need for logic operators. Add this to your original expression in the form of a factor: ceil(Throttle)
First of all, syntax... Order of operations for logic operators exist, but I would not rely on it. Group your statements.
I also aren't so sure about what you're trying to do with the second statement. It doesn't make sense... Have the statement evaluate to Throttle when it's equal to 0? Seems like an odd choice to me.
Anyhow, if you could possibly explain what you mean by combining the expressions, I could help... I don't quite follow right now.
@AceOfSpade
.
Depends on how you wish to structure it. This one is set to a 15% power increase with AG2 and Throttle = 100% being the operand conditions for setting the 1.15 multiplier to true. It's not hard to write, simply use the boolean operators.
@SkyCloudGaming
.
Nor the LG or the engine will work in 1.9.1. It uses things only available in 1.9.205. I know because I made the code for the engine, and the LG inputs also use smooth.
Hey, welcome to the community!
Cockpits are fairly intimidating, but the general idea is that you want to build larger than what you need, and later scale the cockpit down to match your plane. Functional cockpit instruments are largely done through the use of the Funky Trees system, which you can learn about on snowflake0s.github.io.
@spefyjerbf
.
Due to some issues, rate(anyspeedvar) is kind of broken right now. Regardless, thinking in terms of predefined X-Y-Z components makes things a lot easier, because now you don't have to consider frames of reference.
@Ditsch
.
1. Utilize the data saver script I devised: smooth(X, pow(10, 3)*clamp01(Control))
X is the thing you're measuring, Control is any control boolean (e.g. Activate1)
2. You could modify that particular script above to fit your needs. Something like RollAngle = 0 as the control. I think.
Thanks for the kind comments.
I think I would try to play around with PID a bit more, but for a more rudimentary (surefire) system is to save the RollAngle on the time of activation, subtract from current RollAngle, and create a response curve for different delta amounts.
Again, there are numerous problems with trying to implement mods into the game. The only reason why some where is because the creators of those specific mods were Jundroo developers.
@Chancey21
.
Yes, probably something with smooth... I'll have to figure out the specifics though. What do you mean though, you failed to contact me on Discord?
Do it justice, and you will be rewarded. While upvotes really aren't a good metric of a build's quality (especially recently- it's a better indicator of popularity), I do think your building can use improvement. The FT inputs certainly are impressive. I can't praise you enough for that. That being said, I think the following is some valid advice.
First of all, the plane feels.... far too "chunky". Your gauges can be far better than that. The main fuselage definitely needs work. You could add an additional 10 parts to help out a bit with that. You're on PC, it's not difficult.
Two. Attention to detail. Despite the fact that your recent build doesn't have much blueprint to go off of, I highly doubt the LG would've looked like that. Often a strong distinguishing factor is the LG. It's a good idea to sink a good amount of effort into it. Also, why is your plane lacking any sort of trim?
I was going to put something for three, but I think the above does it good enough, at least for a start. Your plane's acceleration is also a bit too fast, but in flight performance seems plausible enough. Again, upvotes are inherently a metric of popularity. If you wanted to know about the quality of a build, SP would have a 5-star rating system or something. That's all I have for you right now, keep trying till you find what works.
+1@F104Deathtrap
+1.
As AG... Or you could do it the input way, but that's another story. As for the other question... It's a longer explanation. Read here.
Set the activationGroup value to None. It should work. For the 2nd question,
+2!Activate8should do the trick.Why are you in beta?
+2Mirror issues are likely caused by faulty connections. Duplication, not sure. Check your input hardware, might be a rapid switch on-off thing.
@JustDatGuy
.
Sure.
If you're making 5 a day they can't be of good quality.
+4@TrislandianAlliance
.
Ah, forgot that you want Throttle to be a thing. Just add
Throttle *to the front of the code I sent earlier. I don't quite understand the second question though, could you perhaps phrase it differently?@TrislandianAlliance
.
Input. Almost all basic FAQ should be answered here.
@V22Osprey
.
No.
@Kakhikotchauri1
.
Devs have nothing to do with MP. It's a mod, mate.
@TrislandianAlliance
.
Since we want = 0 whenever vertical g force is negative, simply use
clamp01(!(sign(VertcialG) = -1))I think this should work.
Easy. Just set the engine's input to evaluate to 0 if sign(VerticalG) is -1.
@Tiseth
.
The code required for that function does not work on mobile.
@Tiseth
.
Are you on mobile?
@MTakach
.
That isn't something the mods can create.
@nadvgia
.
Glad to help.
@nadvgia
.
So the idea is that if Throttle = 0, you want the whole expression to evaluate to 0 regardless, correct? This can be done using simpler math, no need for logic operators. Add this to your original expression in the form of a factor:
ceil(Throttle)That is, your final expression should look like
ceil(Throttle) * ((TAS>1000 | Altitude>10000) ? clamp(smooth(Throttle, 0.01), 0, 0.4) : smooth(Throttle, 0.01))
Hope this helped.
First of all, syntax... Order of operations for logic operators exist, but I would not rely on it. Group your statements.
I also aren't so sure about what you're trying to do with the second statement. It doesn't make sense... Have the statement evaluate to Throttle when it's equal to 0? Seems like an odd choice to me.
Anyhow, if you could possibly explain what you mean by combining the expressions, I could help... I don't quite follow right now.
@AceOfSpade
.
Depends on how you wish to structure it. This one is set to a 15% power increase with AG2 and Throttle = 100% being the operand conditions for setting the 1.15 multiplier to true. It's not hard to write, simply use the boolean operators.
@SkyCloudGaming
.
Nor the LG or the engine will work in 1.9.1. It uses things only available in 1.9.205. I know because I made the code for the engine, and the LG inputs also use
smooth.Cursed
+9@AzureCorp
.
Strange, it hasn't changed... try again maybe? SnoWFLakE0s#7577
@edensk
.
No, only one.
@Pophead @edensk
.
If he means burst fire, it's already been done and is possible.
@edensk @Pophead
+1.
Major mistake here!
SelectedWeaponis a variable, not a function! SelectedWeapon cannot be modified.You'd have to do this using pistons and fuselage blocks for a makeshift digital display.
Hey, welcome to the community!
Cockpits are fairly intimidating, but the general idea is that you want to build larger than what you need, and later scale the cockpit down to match your plane. Functional cockpit instruments are largely done through the use of the Funky Trees system, which you can learn about on snowflake0s.github.io.
@SpiritusRaptor
.
Thanks!
@ChisP
+3.
If you thought SD would respond nicely to anyone who doesn't worship him, you're very new here.
@CRJ900Pilot
.
Simple logic & booleans. I guess something like (IAS < 18mphmetricequivalent) & (Altitude < 120ftmetricequivalent)
@spefyjerbf
+1.
Due to some issues, rate(anyspeedvar) is kind of broken right now. Regardless, thinking in terms of predefined X-Y-Z components makes things a lot easier, because now you don't have to consider frames of reference.
@cedblox332
.
Here
@ElevatorEnthusiast488
.
https://snowflake0s.github.io
@MRMDAWURM
.
If you don't have a good reason, then make it a successor.
@Chancey21
.
I'll say yes... I'll think about the other options though.
Cool. I think this is the first time I've seen anyone use inverselerp. Noted!
@TakeYourLife3000
+2.
You can remove any comments on this post.
@Planeboi49620
.
Reference the comment below for the correct terminology... I was going off the top of my head.
@jamesPLANESii
.
Something along those lines... I forgot what it was lmao
In-game: Press the menu button and click "publish".
+1I like this.
+1@Ditsch
.
1. Utilize the data saver script I devised:
smooth(X, pow(10, 3)*clamp01(Control))X is the thing you're measuring, Control is any control boolean (e.g. Activate1)
2. You could modify that particular script above to fit your needs. Something like
RollAngle = 0as the control. I think.Thanks for the kind comments.
I think I would try to play around with PID a bit more, but for a more rudimentary (surefire) system is to save the RollAngle on the time of activation, subtract from current RollAngle, and create a response curve for different delta amounts.
@Chancey21
.
Try again: SnoWFLakE0s#7577
Again, there are numerous problems with trying to implement mods into the game. The only reason why some where is because the creators of those specific mods were Jundroo developers.
+1@Chancey21
.
Yes, probably something with
smooth... I'll have to figure out the specifics though. What do you mean though, you failed to contact me on Discord?@lemoose
.
Go ahead, will be judged separately.
You can't just expect people to be online.
+3No.
+59@Shippy456
.
Why do you think they are "plat PC" players in the first place?