@Kendog84 From my tests (and pile o' bombs), bomb mass doesn't affect bomb speed either. The plane's performance, on the other hand, is indeed affected by the mass of the bombs... for obvious reasons. Just not the drag.
Also, when combined with the result of this, in which we discovered the explosive radius of a cannon shell is also scalar, plus a rocket = 250mm shell (5 × 50mm) and a missile = 350mm (7 × 50mm) shell, we can basically make everything out of everything!
Hurrah for the innovative, hurrah for the inquisitive, and hurrah for the persevering!
@Kendog84 Sorry for the late reply; as it's written, the calculations performed by the lead-predictor is based on the wing gun/gatling gun with the highest muzzle velocity. Placement in the designer does not seem to have ay effects other than which gun is fired first.
@Sadboye12 Now I can say with a certainty that the predictor follows the muzzle velocity of the highest active bullet-type weapon. Test results are as follows:
Test One:
all muzzle velocities differ, damaging bullet gun highest - HIT
all muzzle velocities differ, non-damaging bullet gun highest - MISS
all muzzle velocities differ, damaging cannon highest - MISS
damaging cannon equals highest bullet velocity - HIT
Conclusion: Predictor based on bullet-type weapon with highest muzzle velocity, cannons are not included in the calculation
Test Two:
all muzzle velocities differ, cannon highest and locked by AG - NO EFFECT
all muzzle velocities differ, bullet gun highest and locked by AG - PREDICTOR CHANGE ON AG
Conclusion: Predictor influenced by the current active bullet-type weapon; cannons are once again ignored.
@Farewellntchii Nah you're forgiven. Most other questgivers (for lack of a better word) I've seen would simply set a hard limit to max HP and bullet damage. There are nuances to how a plane flies and fights, and hitting different parts often begets different results. Hell, early in the Battle of Britain when the both sides were still using LMGs and MMGs, the Heinkel bombers are pretty much only vulnerable in the nose (thanks to their glass nose being made out of, well, glass) and the engine nacelles. Which suits the Brits just fine given their fighters carry eight MMGs apiece, so who cares if a bullet bounced off? Something fragile will give sooner or later under the sheer volume of fire anyways. Not as if the Brits didn't go so far down the "MOAR DAKKA" path that they didn't create a monstrosity with Browning M1919s crammed into every nook and crevice that fits one... Yes, I'm referring to the Hurricane Mk IIB, the only single-engine fighter in history with twelve(!) individual guns.
On a side note, I have, on a technicality, "won" a challenge a few years back... an XML weapon-building challenge posted by a Silver, with two participants in total, both early bronze. To say I was ashamed for even participating there was to say nothing about it.
@Farewellntchii Not at all. Also, on a second thought, I might have botched the damage model on this plane a bit: the prop gearbox and spinner should probably have an HP of 10 or less (any damage and the prop unravels, good luck hitting that though!), but the tail might as well have 2000+ HP and the innermost section of the wings 500, given Robert S. Johnson's plane was hit by over 200 7.7mm rounds and the plane kept chugging along, and the fact that the P-47 was among the few single-engined planes that can eat a 30mm Minengeschoß to the wing and not disintegrate outright.
@V Posted a few fixes and updates using the improvement form.
Quick summary:
new input: LaunchCountermeasures (first seen in this design)
new attribute under CounterMeasureDispenser: autoDispenseDelay (first seen in this design)
Pretty sure LandingGear is boolean, or at least it defaults to -1.
@ZoaMiki Right, Zoa, any updates on this plane? Still wondering whether I should add a set of target/bucket type thrust reversers on the plane's "space engine" when reverse thrust is in effect...
.
..
... Or just a new exhaust nozzle with the reversers installed, to be perfectly honest.
@Sadboye12 Once again, no need to apologize. And yeah... when all else fails, just roll back the version, eh? But IIRC that all but guarantees that whatever new features of 1.11 would not be supported when using PC... which just sorta defeats the purpose of having it on pc...
@Sadboye12 No worries, I figured out from quite a while ago that you're pretty busy. Hell, it's just good to hear from you again - especially after that whole Cerberus schadenfreude.
Either way, this is what DxDaig have shown:
Card name: Intel(R) HD Graphics 620 Manufacturer: Intel Corporation Chip type: Intel(R) HD Graphics Family DAC type: Internal Device Type: Full Device (POST) Device Key: Enum\PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_5916&SUBSYS_07431028&REV_02 Device Status: 0180200A [DN_DRIVER_LOADED|DN_STARTED|DN_DISABLEABLE|DN_NT_ENUMERATOR|DN_NT_DRIVER] Device Problem Code: No Problem Driver Problem Code: Unknown Display Memory: 6206 MB Dedicated Memory: 128 MB Shared Memory: 6078 MB Current Mode: 1920 x 1080 (32 bit) (60Hz) HDR Support: Not Supported Display Topology: Internal
.
..
...
And my laptop was bought in 2017 and the OS has never been reinstalled. It also worked flawlessly back in 1.10, but when 1.11 came out it just... stopped.
@Grob0s0VBRa So... basically, it's like tanks in 1930s, engines the size of a house with main gun the size of a broom? That said, although early-war Churchills are house-sized pillboxes the late-war variants are both sturdy and powerful in their own right. Perhaps there could be some sort of upgrade kits to their weapons as later variants, like with more coaxial guns and rocket launchers and such?
.
. Granted, the issue about non-chemical weapons is that the energy (and thus damage) output available is directly tied to the reactors - without a powerful enough reactor, you can't power the guns. With a chemical platform (including chemical guns and rockets/missiles), as long as you can support the weight (and recoil) you can use it.
@Grob0s0VBRa So... if it's a T1, why the size? IIRC the NATION is not known for making mobile walls (British infantry tanks * cough * * cough *) so "the size is for armor and shield generators" wouldn't stand, and as far as practical units go unless the size is due to they're made with civilian parts and thus don't have enough power/volume ratio to power the weapons with a smaller chassis...
@Grob0s0VBRa STILL NOT 'NUFF DAKKA YER GIT! ...LOIST YER SWOICHED DA BIG SHOOTA FER DA SOOPA-SHOOTA... STOILL, TA MOIKE DIS STOMPA PROPA' ORKY, BOLT TWO UVVA' BIG SHOOTAZ TA DA SOIDEZ, DA ROKKIT LAUNCHA TA DA TOP, AN' ANUVVA' BIG SHOOTA TA DA GOB IZ A GUD START...
. I wouldn't say it got nearly enough dakka (no coaxial MGs and/or remote weapon stations), but at least what it does have is more powerful... Hell, combine the weapons on the two models and put a coaxial HMG on both sides of the main hull and I'd call it a good start.
.
.
"Just in time" Yup, a day before I start to ramble about this not having enough guns... The NATION doesn't seem to carry that many guns on its platforms, given the last NATION walker is also underarmed for its size.
@Grob0s0VBRa ++ Frak, another Arch Magos with an illustrious career, forever lost to the tides of the empyrean. May Omnissiah forever bless his immortal soul. Gloria Omissiah. ++
@Formula350 Oh, about the secondary guns (the big AA guns above the main turret)... the entire spaghetti code is WAY beyond me... Although according to the original builder (@Sadboye12), the problem is still caused by the gun being mounted too far away from the cockpit - * beep *, he actually said that part of the reason why the flak guns rotate with the main turret is because then you can manually correct that target lead... I think the problem is caused (at least partially) by the fact that the turret is mounted around 10m above and 10m behind the cockpit, which means the shots would constantly miss by about 10 meters, depending on which direction the plane comes from.
@Treadmill103 A lot of Atlas's aesthetics can be best summed as "cold-war / retrofuturistic crossed with the low-poly blockiness of Supreme Commander game series"...
@Grob0s0VBRa DAT IZ DA ROIGHT AN' PROPA ORKY WOI OV DA MEKBOYZ! WAAAAAAAAGGGHHH!!! Silliness aside, that sounds pretty dangerous... to both friends and foes alike. The system seem to share some similarities with the Type 492-C dual-purpose mass driver in the utilisation of particle dispersion technology to create massive amounts of destruction, though.
I! Knew! It! (I was testing something similar w/ that tri-axial rotator thing to keep a missile launcher pointing up, and I soon realized that it can be used for some auto-leading thing like this.) Good job Centuri!
@GESICHERT "the windshield is foldable and you can steer while looking at the left and right windows"
I assume you mean there are two pilots sitting behind their respective windshield-looking-things on the fuselage? Because IIRC if the pilot sits inside the fuselage and looks through the side windows similar to the Spirit of St. Louis you don't really need those windshields.
@Yourcrush Something I just found out. Also, sorry for accidentally deleting my postimage archive so that I have to delete that post as well... Because that post would make zero sense without the pictures...
@Treadmill103 New update: the mortar will be replaced by a 5" railgun with a muzzle velocity of mach 10 - because hitting anything other than a ground emplacement with a mortar is hard, and you don't really need to use a 16" gun to fire a tactical nuke with the yield of 30 tons anyways. Plus, now we can get more rounds inside that thing and that I have a cyberpunk-looking 120mm railgun since quite a while (as in 2.5 years) ago.
Just realized one thing: The LUNA system can usher in a new age of aerostats, and perhaps even starships and steam/dieselpunk fliers (a.k.a. flying battleships and carriers, e.g. @WalrusAircraft). Yeah I know that the Orbidyn is a small (Star Citizen-esque) starship in its own right, but I mean the larger ones, like the Hornet's Domain and the Seraph, or those warships of @Ephwurd (*sniff* may solar winds be always on his side *sniff*). Like seriously, this design allows larger ships to roll to one side to unleash a powerful broadside to enemies on a different altitude, or to pitch up or down to quickly increase/decrease its altitude.
Welcome back Centuri! How's it going?
+2Welcome to the gold club, sister. And congrats.
+2@Kendog84 From my tests (and pile o' bombs), bomb mass doesn't affect bomb speed either. The plane's performance, on the other hand, is indeed affected by the mass of the bombs... for obvious reasons. Just not the drag.
+2Also, when combined with the result of this, in which we discovered the explosive radius of a cannon shell is also scalar, plus a rocket = 250mm shell (5 × 50mm) and a missile = 350mm (7 × 50mm) shell, we can basically make everything out of everything!
Hurrah for the innovative, hurrah for the inquisitive, and hurrah for the persevering!
@SimplePilot28465 Thanks! Feel free to use them in your designs as long as you give credit.
+2@Kendog84 Sorry for the late reply; as it's written, the calculations performed by the lead-predictor is based on the wing gun/gatling gun with the highest muzzle velocity. Placement in the designer does not seem to have ay effects other than which gun is fired first.
+2@FirstFish83828 not 12 inch, the Germans somehow thought a 14-incher is a perfectly normal and sane weapon to mount on a plane...
+2@Grob0s0VBRa Thanks Grobs! And Merry Christmas🎄.
+2@Sadboye12 Now I can say with a certainty that the predictor follows the muzzle velocity of the highest active bullet-type weapon. Test results are as follows:
+2@Sadboye12 Cannons or machine guns? Cannons seem to have their own predictor... but IIRC guns don't work like that?
+2@Farewellntchii Nah you're forgiven. Most other questgivers (for lack of a better word) I've seen would simply set a hard limit to max HP and bullet damage. There are nuances to how a plane flies and fights, and hitting different parts often begets different results. Hell, early in the Battle of Britain when the both sides were still using LMGs and MMGs, the Heinkel bombers are pretty much only vulnerable in the nose (thanks to their glass nose being made out of, well, glass) and the engine nacelles. Which suits the Brits just fine given their fighters carry eight MMGs apiece, so who cares if a bullet bounced off? Something fragile will give sooner or later under the sheer volume of fire anyways. Not as if the Brits didn't go so far down the "MOAR DAKKA" path that they didn't create a monstrosity with Browning M1919s crammed into every nook and crevice that fits one... Yes, I'm referring to the Hurricane Mk IIB, the only single-engine fighter in history with twelve(!) individual guns.
+2On a side note, I have, on a technicality, "won" a challenge a few years back... an XML weapon-building challenge posted by a Silver, with two participants in total, both early bronze. To say I was ashamed for even participating there was to say nothing about it.
@Farewellntchii Not at all. Also, on a second thought, I might have botched the damage model on this plane a bit: the prop gearbox and spinner should probably have an HP of 10 or less (any damage and the prop unravels, good luck hitting that though!), but the tail might as well have 2000+ HP and the innermost section of the wings 500, given Robert S. Johnson's plane was hit by over 200 7.7mm rounds and the plane kept chugging along, and the fact that the P-47 was among the few single-engined planes that can eat a 30mm Minengeschoß to the wing and not disintegrate outright.
+2@IAlsoBuildPlane "Broke in the wrong goddamn rec room didn't you ya bastard!" - Burt Gumner
+2Atlas! I.... it's really you!
+2* [inhales] * WELCOME BACK ATLAS!
@V Posted a few fixes and updates using the improvement form.
+2Quick summary:
new input:
LaunchCountermeasures(first seen in this design)new attribute under CounterMeasureDispenser:
autoDispenseDelay(first seen in this design)Pretty sure LandingGear is boolean, or at least it defaults to -1.
@ZoaMiki Right, Zoa, any updates on this plane? Still wondering whether I should add a set of target/bucket type thrust reversers on the plane's "space engine" when reverse thrust is in effect...
+2.
..
... Or just a new exhaust nozzle with the reversers installed, to be perfectly honest.
You're back! Welcome back, sir.
+2@MAPA Right, Snowstone has no "final approach" air start, unlike the other three...
+2@Sadboye12 Once again, no need to apologize. And yeah... when all else fails, just roll back the version, eh? But IIRC that all but guarantees that whatever new features of 1.11 would not be supported when using PC... which just sorta defeats the purpose of having it on pc...
+2@Sadboye12 No worries, I figured out from quite a while ago that you're pretty busy. Hell, it's just good to hear from you again - especially after that whole Cerberus schadenfreude.
Either way, this is what DxDaig have shown:
+2Card name: Intel(R) HD Graphics 620Manufacturer: Intel CorporationChip type: Intel(R) HD Graphics FamilyDAC type: InternalDevice Type: Full Device (POST)Device Key: Enum\PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_5916&SUBSYS_07431028&REV_02Device Status: 0180200A[DN_DRIVER_LOADED|DN_STARTED|DN_DISABLEABLE|DN_NT_ENUMERATOR|DN_NT_DRIVER]Device Problem Code: No ProblemDriver Problem Code: UnknownDisplay Memory: 6206 MBDedicated Memory: 128 MBShared Memory: 6078 MBCurrent Mode: 1920 x 1080 (32 bit) (60Hz)HDR Support: Not SupportedDisplay Topology: Internal.
..
...
And my laptop was bought in 2017 and the OS has never been reinstalled. It also worked flawlessly back in 1.10, but when 1.11 came out it just... stopped.
@Sadboye12 I'm alive, just.... not building much. The laptop can't quite work with 1.11 somehow.
+2@YEEEETplane Well, technically speaking you weren't wrong...
+2@Tookan Soon enough, someone will make their simulated humans play a simulated flight simulator that's slowly turning into a human simulator....
+2@Grob0s0VBRa So... basically, it's like tanks in 1930s, engines the size of a house with main gun the size of a broom? That said, although early-war Churchills are house-sized pillboxes the late-war variants are both sturdy and powerful in their own right. Perhaps there could be some sort of upgrade kits to their weapons as later variants, like with more coaxial guns and rocket launchers and such?
+2.
.
Granted, the issue about non-chemical weapons is that the energy (and thus damage) output available is directly tied to the reactors - without a powerful enough reactor, you can't power the guns. With a chemical platform (including chemical guns and rockets/missiles), as long as you can support the weight (and recoil) you can use it.
@Grob0s0VBRa So... if it's a T1, why the size? IIRC the NATION is not known for making mobile walls (British infantry tanks * cough * * cough *) so "the size is for armor and shield generators" wouldn't stand, and as far as practical units go unless the size is due to they're made with civilian parts and thus don't have enough power/volume ratio to power the weapons with a smaller chassis...
+2@Grob0s0VBRa
+2STILL NOT 'NUFF DAKKA YER GIT! ...LOIST YER SWOICHED DA BIG SHOOTA FER DA SOOPA-SHOOTA... STOILL, TA MOIKE DIS STOMPA PROPA' ORKY, BOLT TWO UVVA' BIG SHOOTAZ TA DA SOIDEZ, DA ROKKIT LAUNCHA TA DA TOP, AN' ANUVVA' BIG SHOOTA TA DA GOB IZ A GUD START...
.
I wouldn't say it got nearly enough dakka (no coaxial MGs and/or remote weapon stations), but at least what it does have is more powerful... Hell, combine the weapons on the two models and put a coaxial HMG on both sides of the main hull and I'd call it a good start.
.
.
"Just in time"
Yup, a day before I start to ramble about this not having enough guns... The NATION doesn't seem to carry that many guns on its platforms, given the last NATION walker is also underarmed for its size.
@Grob0s0VBRa ++ Frak, another Arch Magos with an illustrious career, forever lost to the tides of the empyrean. May Omnissiah forever bless his immortal soul. Gloria Omissiah. ++
+2Errr... could you please update the codes for the 1.11 update? Like, the missile lock codes or something like that?
+2@Sergio666 There is one, but I highly doubt if that's what you're looking for...
+2@Formula350 Oh, about the secondary guns (the big AA guns above the main turret)... the entire spaghetti code is WAY beyond me... Although according to the original builder (@Sadboye12), the problem is still caused by the gun being mounted too far away from the cockpit - * beep *, he actually said that part of the reason why the flak guns rotate with the main turret is because then you can manually correct that target lead... I think the problem is caused (at least partially) by the fact that the turret is mounted around 10m above and 10m behind the cockpit, which means the shots would constantly miss by about 10 meters, depending on which direction the plane comes from.
+2@Sadboye12 [gives a big hug] No worries... If anyone I'd be the one who started it all...
+2@Treadmill103 A lot of Atlas's aesthetics can be best summed as "cold-war / retrofuturistic crossed with the low-poly blockiness of Supreme Commander game series"...
+2@Grob0s0VBRa
+2DAT IZ DA ROIGHT AN' PROPA ORKY WOI OV DA MEKBOYZ! WAAAAAAAAGGGHHH!!!
Silliness aside, that sounds pretty dangerous... to both friends and foes alike. The system seem to share some similarities with the Type 492-C dual-purpose mass driver in the utilisation of particle dispersion technology to create massive amounts of destruction, though.
My therapist: the Hindhog isn't real, it can't hurt you
+2The Hindhog:
@Raptor787 He don't make historical planes, only things that shouldn't fly whatsoever.
+2Nice ta see ya 'gain, Kako!
+2Congratz Rez!
+2I! Knew! It! (I was testing something similar w/ that tri-axial rotator thing to keep a missile launcher pointing up, and I soon realized that it can be used for some auto-leading thing like this.) Good job Centuri!
+2@FujiwaraAutoShop
+2function = "MultiRole"
@GESICHERT
+2"the windshield is foldable and you can steer while looking at the left and right windows"
I assume you mean there are two pilots sitting behind their respective windshield-looking-things on the fuselage? Because IIRC if the pilot sits inside the fuselage and looks through the side windows similar to the Spirit of St. Louis you don't really need those windshields.
So... is Karvakia China?
+2@spefyjerbf Well it feels more reassuring knowing that my friend won't die to a great ball of nuclear fire anytime soon :3
+2@Yourcrush Something I just found out. Also, sorry for accidentally deleting my postimage archive so that I have to delete that post as well... Because that post would make zero sense without the pictures...
+2NOT 'NUFF DAKKA YA GROT! PUT MORE DAKKA ON 'DIS 'TING!
+2@Treadmill103 New update: the mortar will be replaced by a 5" railgun with a muzzle velocity of mach 10 - because hitting anything other than a ground emplacement with a mortar is hard, and you don't really need to use a 16" gun to fire a tactical nuke with the yield of 30 tons anyways. Plus, now we can get more rounds inside that thing and that I have a cyberpunk-looking 120mm railgun since quite a while (as in 2.5 years) ago.
+2Nice to see you again, Kako!
+2@Treadmill103 @YourCrush @TomekHellFire Now with dogfighting abilities! Note: use slow motion, and be easy on the controls.
+2@spefyjerbf @Yourcrush @Treadmill103
+2Just updated the saucer; now it should fly even nicer.
Just realized one thing: The LUNA system can usher in a new age of aerostats, and perhaps even starships and steam/dieselpunk fliers (a.k.a. flying battleships and carriers, e.g. @WalrusAircraft). Yeah I know that the Orbidyn is a small (Star Citizen-esque) starship in its own right, but I mean the larger ones, like the Hornet's Domain and the Seraph, or those warships of @Ephwurd (*sniff* may solar winds be always on his side *sniff*). Like seriously, this design allows larger ships to roll to one side to unleash a powerful broadside to enemies on a different altitude, or to pitch up or down to quickly increase/decrease its altitude.
+2@EliteArsenals24 The point is that the shot dispersion decreases as more bullets are fired...
+2Just realized one thing: Did Hyperion make this thing?
+2