@EliteArsenals24
.
Of course, give me the activation parameters, preferably in meters per second though. Nevermind, here's your input... clamp01(TAS - A) * clamp01(B - TAS)
Change TAS to other speed types as you see fit, and set value A to the lower bound (m/s) and B to the upper bound (m/s).
@spefyjerbf
.
repl.it is the one that I know of that works reliably, I suppose there are also other online compilers that can do what you need without making source code visible.
Spefy, if everything is done through the command line, would you mind putting it on repl.it for other platforms perhaps? I'm fairly sure that would work... unless the program needs special resources to run.
@ArcturusAerospace
.
For qualifiers, you need to use boolean logic. That is, something like clamp01(Altitude - 20000) * clamp01(35000 - Altitude). Of course, that's in meters- I do recommend you do look into boolean logic expressions (0 or 1 things).
@Strikefighter04
.
It purely depends on what you want the digital display to display. However, each digit place (hundreds place, tens place etc.) needs a respective conversion into ones form. I can't do a good job of explaining this right now, I'll try to make a better explanation soon. I've also listed Leehopard's rendition of the same type of system (which I believe is vastly superior) on the previously linked document, so try and use that one.
@Strikefighter04
.
Yeah, you should. Although, I'm going to update it soon to version 3.0 with minor bug fixes and improvements, so hold on tight for a bit.
@vcharng
.
Vertical speed is simply cos(PitchAngle)*IAS. I don't know why people keep requesting that. Although, the other ones are valid ideas. I will say though, most things can be done via algebraic methods, if you need any calc you do it by hand and input that expression. Calc is only useful if we get specific functions, say the velocity function.
@sheepsblood
.
Good job! Though, thing you're doing with clamp there is best done with clamp01, in order to simplify things.
Also, as I have said to many others, funky trees only work with things with an inputController. Detachers don't have this, so you cannot use that with detachers.
@sheepsblood
.
That's only a very basic example. Actual implementation of such a system needs slightly more things than that, such as clamp01. Also not very practical. It's nothing but a reference point- check my other work for actual good implementation of inputs.
You are incorrect. You're on the right track, but you have completely neglected the physics of projectile motion that cannon shells follow, both IRL and in SP. For this to be true, cannon shells would have to move like laser beams.
@Thueerra
.
You might have messed up the syntax. As for range and speed, use sinusoidal transformations. Range correlates with amplitude, period the speed.
Tags
.
@spefyjerbf @Thelegitpilot13 @SuperSix
Tags
.
@RussianAS @Blue0Bull @LeonardoEngineering
Tags
.
@emanuelga @BuiltBionixInd10 @Minecraftpoweer
Tags
+2.
@edensk @Dastin @SovietBun
goshdammit i have a typooooooooo
aghhhhh
@EliteArsenals24
.
Of course, give me the activation parameters, preferably in meters per second though. Nevermind, here's your input...
clamp01(TAS - A) * clamp01(B - TAS)Change TAS to other speed types as you see fit, and set value A to the lower bound (m/s) and B to the upper bound (m/s).
Nice job. Spotlighted.
@spefyjerbf
.
repl.it is the one that I know of that works reliably, I suppose there are also other online compilers that can do what you need without making source code visible.
Spefy, if everything is done through the command line, would you mind putting it on repl.it for other platforms perhaps? I'm fairly sure that would work... unless the program needs special resources to run.
@sheepsblood
.
If it's made through a Python script, and should spefy share it, then it's probably not difficult to port it to Mac. Or so I think.
100% agree. Variable assignment is absolutely critical for some longer scripts, I'm having trouble with that as well.
@Pulkit
+1.
That's all there is to it, you have it.
@Numbers
+4.
More XML modding = more ways to make the game better
@CruzerBlade
+2.
You called?
@Pulkit
.
First set your hinge rotator to a range of 45º, then try the following.
abs(Brake - 1) * ((-1 * clamp01(GS - 100) * clamp01(200 - GS)) + (0.18 * clamp01(GS - 200))) + -BrakeI think it should work. It's something I made in a hurry, sorry that it looks bad.
+1@Pulkit
.
So the brake part ignores speed?
+1@jamesPLANESii
.
Hmm... I'll have to think about it for a while.
@retroship12
.
Settings > Predictor
You're breaking the physics engine with unconventionally modded parts.
+1@robloxweponco
.
Check out spefyjerbf's profile, he made a tutorial post on that subject.
@ArcturusAerospace
+2.
For qualifiers, you need to use boolean logic. That is, something like
clamp01(Altitude - 20000) * clamp01(35000 - Altitude). Of course, that's in meters- I do recommend you do look into boolean logic expressions (0 or 1 things).@Pulkit
+1.
Please don't use the <, > type qualifiers- they're outdated and are incompatible with 1.9 inputs.
@Strikefighter04
.
It purely depends on what you want the digital display to display. However, each digit place (hundreds place, tens place etc.) needs a respective conversion into ones form. I can't do a good job of explaining this right now, I'll try to make a better explanation soon. I've also listed Leehopard's rendition of the same type of system (which I believe is vastly superior) on the previously linked document, so try and use that one.
Looks a lot like a DShK!
Christ... This is insane.
+2충성!! 복귀 기다릴게요!!
@Strikefighter04
.
X is whatever value you're measuring. Throttle amount, speed etc.
@Strikefighter04
.
Yeah, you should. Although, I'm going to update it soon to version 3.0 with minor bug fixes and improvements, so hold on tight for a bit.
Use either this system for digital displays by me, or try modify the one made my Leehopard.
I might get around to doing some data farming soon. Probably will include fuel consumption rates, spring constants, power, and the like.
+1@GeneralPatrick2
+1.
Nope, there is, and that's what I'm doing. Kinematics for the win!
@vcharng
.
My mistake, although the point still stands that most expressions can be done through algebraic means.
Currently?
This.
Upcoming build is about 30% more complicated.
This is a secret society
+1@vcharng
+1.
Vertical speed is simply
cos(PitchAngle)*IAS. I don't know why people keep requesting that. Although, the other ones are valid ideas. I will say though, most things can be done via algebraic methods, if you need any calc you do it by hand and input that expression. Calc is only useful if we get specific functions, say the velocity function.@Thueerra
.
Make it an inverse ratio function. Simple math there.
@Brields95
.
Use sinusoids instead of the default movement method, they work a lot better.
@sheepsblood
.
Good job! Though, thing you're doing with clamp there is best done with clamp01, in order to simplify things.
Also, as I have said to many others, funky trees only work with things with an inputController. Detachers don't have this, so you cannot use that with detachers.
@sheepsblood
.
That's only a very basic example. Actual implementation of such a system needs slightly more things than that, such as
clamp01. Also not very practical. It's nothing but a reference point- check my other work for actual good implementation of inputs.@robloxweponco
.
The old inputs (v<x style) are incompatible with the new input system.
The horrors!
@sheepsblood
.
That's riiiight in there. Regardless, I think I can add a couple more complex examples, I'll do so soon.
There is no perfect build.
+5@CRJ900Pilot
.
I can, but I'm too lazy rn...
You are incorrect. You're on the right track, but you have completely neglected the physics of projectile motion that cannon shells follow, both IRL and in SP. For this to be true, cannon shells would have to move like laser beams.
+1@Thueerra
+2.
You might have messed up the syntax. As for range and speed, use sinusoidal transformations. Range correlates with amplitude, period the speed.
@Leehopard
.
제건 원래 더 더러웠어요ㅋ 범위를 묶지 않고 각 숫자마다 해버려서 ㅋ
@X4JB
.
Pretty much, a bit simplified though.
@Leehopard
.
Slightly different system.
@goboygo1
.
The original poster.