@LoafOfBread I suggest you remove the replica tag. And if you really have such an issue with me commenting on your build you might as well block me. You have the rights to do so.
[DISCLAIMER: I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE BUILDER. I JUST HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE PEOPLE THAT COMMENTED POSITIVELY ABOUT THE PERFORMANCE.]
This build is visually fine, but the performance is god awful. Let's compare the performance of this "replica" to real life performance.
Top speed
Real life: 956 km/h @ deck
SP Build: 515 km/h @ deck
Relative: 53%
@KnightOfRen Because you're pinging 3 people when literally a few minutes later some rando will comment the answer. If you don't know the answer maybe just don't comment. Do you think that Kenneth and Numbers are happy to be pinged like this?
@Strucker SO INSECUREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
CRAWLING IN MY SKIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN
THESE WOUND THEY WILL NOT HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAL
FEAR IS HOW ILL FALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
CONFUSING WHAT IS REAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAL
round(smooth(clamp01(Activate1), Activate1 ? 1/(2 * x) : 1/(2 * y)))
that code allows you to both add a delay on activation and on deactivation. x is the delay for activation, y for deactivation.
I will give this tank a review, since i feel like I am certified to do so, since I have made a Panzer III myself.
Note: my scale ranges from 0 to 10. Everything from a 5-10 is positive. Everything from a 0-5 is negative. This means that this build gives me positive feelings. It is a good score.
Shape: 5/10
The tank is about 70% too big.
Let's start to talk about the general shape. The turret is so incredibly slim that I really doubt that you even used a blueprint. This causes the basket on the rear of the turret to look comically slim.
Also the turret cheeks don't look on point. Besides that the turret roof isn't partially slanted like it should be.
You didn't even try to curve the rear of the turret (I know, that is hard to do).
The hull shape looks decent at first glance, but there is definitely something wrong with the rear of it. You should've used a blueprint in case you didn't. If you did use a blueprint you should've followed it more carefully.
Running Gear: 8/10
I really like the way you made the tracks themselves. They are reasonably part efficient and look great. Though I feel the shape and quantity of the little hollow fuselages on the inside of the tracks are off.
The suspension system is nice. It is adequately detailed. However the torsion bars are too high on the hull. Also the little parts that stop the torsion bars from moving too far are very inaccurate (thereby wasting quite some parts). They should just be simple triangular-like wedges.
The side hatches are just extremely thick and therefore I can't take them seriously.
The sprocket wheel has too many teeth and is basically just a cylinder with 2D texture on it.
The road wheels are decent, but maybe a bit too simple. Also the gap down the middle is way too wide.
The idler wheel is way too thin and it makes the whole running gear look very flimsy.
The tracks are too wide which makes them clip into the hull. Overall I respect that you even tried making a custom running gear instead of simply using the Tracks_2 mod.
Though very plentiful your surface detail is often inaccurate, messy and oversimplified. Still it really does bring together the build as a whole. It adds loads of character.
I won't individually point out all inaccuracies and mistakes, since that would take too long, but I'll run down some that I think are important.
You tried to replicate a Panzer III with added on spaced armour. I respect this, but sadly the armour isn't actually spaced out from the hull, which makes it look like it's just the shape of the hull. I can't tell whether you tried to make the spaced armour on the mantlet, since you did add the bolts, but the rest just looks like the normal mantlet.
The longer grey box on the sides are nice.
The hull machine gun is oversimplified to the point where it significantly sticks out like a sore thumb.
The cup of coffee is a funny little addition, but I don't know why. Germans aren't known for drinking coffee. Maybe a pint of beer would've been better. Definitely a case of quantity over quality here, which definitely isn't a bad thing in SP tank design.
Decals and Paint scheme: 6/10
The main paint is a two toned grey, which is adequate. I recommend using even more tones though. This will make sure all details stick out from their background.
There are not a lot of decals and the decals that are there are very basic and simplistic. The diagonal 31 is not historically accurate as far as I know. The Balkekreuzen are too small to be historically accurate, but at least their placement is. Too basic to be interesting. In my opinion complex decals are very great ways to give a build character, and they are worth spending a lot of parts on.
Performance: 3/10
In the age of Funky Tree it is not acceptable to have turret rotation bound to VTOL.
The traverse is very sluggish and doesn't work at higher speeds.
The wheels in the running gear don't actually turn.
Top speed is way too low, especially considering that the tank is already 70% too big.
The reverse gear is as fast and strong as the forward gears, like some Swedish cheese or French cat. Beside the very basics (and even that is hard for this tank sometimes) this tank really doesn't have anything to offer when it comes to performance.
Conclusion: 6/10
I always love to see WWII tank replicas on this website and this is a decent one. It definitely deserves more upvote than 30. I hope you will use a blueprint next time and spend a bit more time on the performance. I am looking forward to see your next build, and I hope you'll improve even further.
Note: my scale ranges from 0 to 10. Everything from a 5-10 is positive. Everything from a 0-5 is negative. This means that this build gives me positive feelings. It is a good score.
@NaONCo2HCH2 You're falsely accusing him. I don't think Iota has anything to do with that tbh. And he listed edensk and shadowed as a credit, they surely aren't against spbc or something.
@MrSilverWolf No. Your comment is cringe. You are factually incorrect and you were trying to be funny, but just made yourself look like an absolute fool.
@MisterT I am aware of "part saving tricks" and I am applying them, don't worry.
If this would be the best Puma it wouldn't say much, since there isn't a lot of competition.
20 parts for 5cm^2 is worth it in my opinion. There are other parts of the vehicle that have 0 parts/5cm^2, and it balances out. As I said there will be lower part count versions with the hinges totally removed.
Also I would love to inform you that I am adding another 129 part decal.
Now please stop complaining about my build being too detailed, there is a difference between 8000 and 2500 parts.
@MisterT I aim for it to become around 2000-2500 parts, and from past experience I know this is achievable.
The hinges (assuming you're talking about the hinges of the turret roof) are 5 parts each and I only have 4 of them. I wouldn't call that a waste of parts.
I do agree that I spend an unproportionate amount of parts on decals. However I believe that decals are very good at giving a build a huge amount of character, and therefore I feel it's worth the parts.
I try to be as part efficient as possible without sacrificing the quality of my builds.
The amount of detail might be too much for your standards, but for me it is normal. In my opinion you can't complain about a build being too detailed.
I will off course include stripped down variants so all users can still download and play this vehicle. The lowest part count variant will probably be around 600 parts.
We all want to know, but everyone is too scared to ask. Is your character a futa?
+1Yo dude, do you have an onlyfans?
+15lolicon detected
+2the meme is dead, sir
+1@LoafOfBread I suggest you remove the replica tag. And if you really have such an issue with me commenting on your build you might as well block me. You have the rights to do so.
@asteroidbook345 I wanna see that video comparing his F-80 to the WT model HAHAHA
[DISCLAIMER: I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE BUILDER. I JUST HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE PEOPLE THAT COMMENTED POSITIVELY ABOUT THE PERFORMANCE.]
This build is visually fine, but the performance is god awful. Let's compare the performance of this "replica" to real life performance.
Top speed
Real life: 956 km/h @ deck
SP Build: 515 km/h @ deck
Relative: 53%
Thrust
Real life: 20 kN
SP Build: 50 kN
Relative: 250%
Drag
The build has about 10x too much drag.
It truly baffles me that people even dare to comment that the flight model is "well done". Have they even test flown the plane?
@RadiumOxide Can't tell if that's satire or not
This is amazing so far!
+1@SnoWFLakE0s A combination of you recording that at midnight, a crappy mic and me watching it drunk at midnight lol
@GMen what? why? just look up an online hex colour wheel or something
red is ff0000
@ArkRoyalTheDDhunter I turned bald
@Strucker Oh, I was just finishing your bit. We were singing right? "I've felt this way before"
+1113
That's a cool paint scheme
maybe instead of crying about it on a forum actually try to talk to people
nobody cares
I don't even know who you are
+1@KnightOfRen Because you're pinging 3 people when literally a few minutes later some rando will comment the answer. If you don't know the answer maybe just don't comment. Do you think that Kenneth and Numbers are happy to be pinged like this?
+2Dude come on. That's so over the top. Please turn down the contrast, this is actually hard to look at.
@Strucker SO INSECUREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
CRAWLING IN MY SKIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN
THESE WOUND THEY WILL NOT HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAL
FEAR IS HOW ILL FALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
CONFUSING WHAT IS REAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAL
You can just set a keybind to toggle all the effects.
+1@KnightOfRen tagging people like this is truly cancerous.
+3@Doggg maybe because this is what your builds are
This is not how to get upvotes fast. This is how to get upvotes ethically.
+1I can't decide whether you have a speech impediment or I have a hearing defect
+1
+2round(smooth(clamp01(Activate1), Activate1 ? 1/(2 * x) : 1/(2 * y)))that code allows you to both add a delay on activation and on deactivation. x is the delay for activation, y for deactivation.
I will give this tank a review, since i feel like I am certified to do so, since I have made a Panzer III myself.
Note: my scale ranges from 0 to 10. Everything from a 5-10 is positive. Everything from a 0-5 is negative. This means that this build gives me positive feelings. It is a good score.
Shape: 5/10
The tank is about 70% too big.
Let's start to talk about the general shape. The turret is so incredibly slim that I really doubt that you even used a blueprint. This causes the basket on the rear of the turret to look comically slim.
Also the turret cheeks don't look on point. Besides that the turret roof isn't partially slanted like it should be.
You didn't even try to curve the rear of the turret (I know, that is hard to do).
The hull shape looks decent at first glance, but there is definitely something wrong with the rear of it.
You should've used a blueprint in case you didn't. If you did use a blueprint you should've followed it more carefully.
Running Gear: 8/10
I really like the way you made the tracks themselves. They are reasonably part efficient and look great. Though I feel the shape and quantity of the little hollow fuselages on the inside of the tracks are off.
The suspension system is nice. It is adequately detailed. However the torsion bars are too high on the hull. Also the little parts that stop the torsion bars from moving too far are very inaccurate (thereby wasting quite some parts). They should just be simple triangular-like wedges.
The side hatches are just extremely thick and therefore I can't take them seriously.
The sprocket wheel has too many teeth and is basically just a cylinder with 2D texture on it.
The road wheels are decent, but maybe a bit too simple. Also the gap down the middle is way too wide.
The idler wheel is way too thin and it makes the whole running gear look very flimsy.
The tracks are too wide which makes them clip into the hull.
Overall I respect that you even tried making a custom running gear instead of simply using the Tracks_2 mod.
+3
Greebles: 8/10
Though very plentiful your surface detail is often inaccurate, messy and oversimplified. Still it really does bring together the build as a whole. It adds loads of character.
I won't individually point out all inaccuracies and mistakes, since that would take too long, but I'll run down some that I think are important.
You tried to replicate a Panzer III with added on spaced armour. I respect this, but sadly the armour isn't actually spaced out from the hull, which makes it look like it's just the shape of the hull. I can't tell whether you tried to make the spaced armour on the mantlet, since you did add the bolts, but the rest just looks like the normal mantlet.
The longer grey box on the sides are nice.
The hull machine gun is oversimplified to the point where it significantly sticks out like a sore thumb.
The cup of coffee is a funny little addition, but I don't know why. Germans aren't known for drinking coffee. Maybe a pint of beer would've been better.
Definitely a case of quantity over quality here, which definitely isn't a bad thing in SP tank design.
Decals and Paint scheme: 6/10
The main paint is a two toned grey, which is adequate. I recommend using even more tones though. This will make sure all details stick out from their background.
There are not a lot of decals and the decals that are there are very basic and simplistic. The diagonal 31 is not historically accurate as far as I know. The Balkekreuzen are too small to be historically accurate, but at least their placement is.
Too basic to be interesting. In my opinion complex decals are very great ways to give a build character, and they are worth spending a lot of parts on.
Performance: 3/10
In the age of Funky Tree it is not acceptable to have turret rotation bound to VTOL.
The traverse is very sluggish and doesn't work at higher speeds.
The wheels in the running gear don't actually turn.
Top speed is way too low, especially considering that the tank is already 70% too big.
The reverse gear is as fast and strong as the forward gears, like some Swedish cheese or French cat.
Beside the very basics (and even that is hard for this tank sometimes) this tank really doesn't have anything to offer when it comes to performance.
Conclusion: 6/10
I always love to see WWII tank replicas on this website and this is a decent one. It definitely deserves more upvote than 30. I hope you will use a blueprint next time and spend a bit more time on the performance. I am looking forward to see your next build, and I hope you'll improve even further.
Note: my scale ranges from 0 to 10. Everything from a 5-10 is positive. Everything from a 0-5 is negative. This means that this build gives me positive feelings. It is a good score.
+1@K2K I like how that's your point of criticism when the turret is like 3 times too slim.
It's Focke-Wulf.... Fokker is a totally unrelated Dutch aircraft manufacturer.
Karaoke Youth Sadness
build an actually good WWII replica
@NaONCo2HCH2 sounds like a guaranteed way to get banned lol
@NaONCo2HCH2 You're falsely accusing him. I don't think Iota has anything to do with that tbh. And he listed edensk and shadowed as a credit, they surely aren't against spbc or something.
Not even credit for inventing gradients :(
My one legacy has been forgotten
Quite amazing. Very impressive.
@EternalDarkness This is exactly why I wanna be able to delete commenst on my own posts. For self-moderation.
r u gril?
75% complete means you still gotta put in at least twice the effort
@MrSilverWolf No. Your comment is cringe. You are factually incorrect and you were trying to be funny, but just made yourself look like an absolute fool.
+1no
+1@goboygo1 Of course I did :)
This is nice.
@TheNightmareCompany Pt. stands for Partikulierenunderstutzungsaufgaben
This is a literal war crime
@MisterT I am aware of "part saving tricks" and I am applying them, don't worry.
+1If this would be the best Puma it wouldn't say much, since there isn't a lot of competition.
20 parts for 5cm^2 is worth it in my opinion. There are other parts of the vehicle that have 0 parts/5cm^2, and it balances out. As I said there will be lower part count versions with the hinges totally removed.
Also I would love to inform you that I am adding another 129 part decal.
Now please stop complaining about my build being too detailed, there is a difference between 8000 and 2500 parts.
@MisterT I aim for it to become around 2000-2500 parts, and from past experience I know this is achievable.
+1The hinges (assuming you're talking about the hinges of the turret roof) are 5 parts each and I only have 4 of them. I wouldn't call that a waste of parts.
I do agree that I spend an unproportionate amount of parts on decals. However I believe that decals are very good at giving a build a huge amount of character, and therefore I feel it's worth the parts.
I try to be as part efficient as possible without sacrificing the quality of my builds.
The amount of detail might be too much for your standards, but for me it is normal. In my opinion you can't complain about a build being too detailed.
I will off course include stripped down variants so all users can still download and play this vehicle. The lowest part count variant will probably be around 600 parts.
why did the artist draw a wall in like 1/3 of the frame
+2@AWESOMENESS360 idc