Please raise any questions if you fail to understand what the hell I'm saying. I understand some of the stuff is pretty complicated (especially the bomb solution finder)
@brians1209 German autocannons do have blinding issues, actually. Especially at night.
BK5 (50mm autocannon) mounted on night fighters are even said to cause actual temporary blindness when the pilot fires it at night.
0:32 : Rocket timing calculator
0:39 and many other occasions: proximity fuse cannon
0:42 "pilot's neck"
0:53 and 2:50 Radar on the bottom of the dashboard
1:36 Dual-purpose bombing solution finder (dive bombing mode), and then skip-bombing with the same solution finder (cockpit footage not shown)
2:00 Jager BMW 803 ADV with its predecessor the plain Jager BMW 803
2:11 /unknown/
Question: does it make all ships aggressive to you when you attack one of them?
In vanilla game the aggression are grouped: USS Tiny Two + 2 WWII DD is one group, 2xDestroyer and USS beast is another, and USS Tiny is its own group. You will not trigger aggression from the destroyers when you attacked the USS Tiny, for example.
@marcox43 ugh.... great, now I have to remake both screens....
Well this is supposed to be a tech demostrator to demonstrate the possibility of 1.10.
I think I'll make a separate, historically-accurate version when the update is officially online.
@SnoWFLakE0s It's odd for me too.
I've seen people making very complicated stuff with the beacon light, but I can't even make a light half as complicated as theirs.
@SnoWFLakE0s that code I posted is basically "returns 1 when the torpedo should hit within 50m of the target ship, -1 when its error is greater than 50m"
But in reality, although this code works perfectly in DebugExpressions and piston, it only works on the beacon light when the target is < 300~400m from my plane. That's why I suspect it could be an overflow issue.
Such situations are common when the code involves squares. square makes values much larger. I remember when I was trying to do the AFN2 navigation instrument, and it had similar problems too.
you can mod the damage and the bullet size with XML.
Basically we use normal gun to model smaller, non-explosive guns (up to 20 mm), and use the cannon to model larger guns with explosive ammunition (30mm and above).
@Mod I'm just wondering if it's possible to self-introduce to be featured in the update video? I think my radar can serve well in the update introduction clip.
Actually, I just found out that the remedial clause of the program works even if this is fixed. The remedial clause simply don't get activated at all....
So perhaps, fix it please?
@SnoWFLakE0s The current, very basic auto fuse works fine for MK103's ballistics. It seems that it has something to do with shell velocity.
The rate(TargetDistance) system has two major flaws: gravity and speed change. High shell velocity minimizes both of them. I haven't tried doing a rate(rate(TargetDistance)) (i.e. target acceleration relative to you), but maybe that would address the speed change.
The smallest caliber setting in vanilla game is 50mm, and my prototype works just fine with that (no explosion scalar adjusted). In real life, the smallest shell to have VT fuse was 76mm (40mm bofors was contact fuse, 20mm Hispano was not explosive at all) so I'd say it's working alright. my realistically-modeled MK103 30mm gun can hit fighters from 2.5km away... that's about 3-5 times their effective range IRL.
@BagelPlane I think my best bet is to use FT to control the activation group. Make the piston/rotator only work when the radar's angle fit the target's angle. That way, the dot will only update when the radar sweeps pass the target.
@Notaleopard I think there's already a guy who made an automatic-aiming turret for ground usage.
I may try to make bomber turret but I have to nail the roll/pitch compensation for the "Pilot's neck". They work with similar principles.
@chibikitsune You know what I think I'm running out of choices but to agree with you.
SP is a game and it should stay just that. It should not become a kind of "best builder contest" unless one happens to find that interesting.
@TheReturningHound Well then this post announces that I'm returning to the right track.
It started like 8 months ago where people are "encouraging" me to "improve"...
and then I began to cater to their suggestions more and more.
In the end I found myself to be making stuff that I don't really enjoy making.
If they actually do, I hope they take a look at some real CAD softwares.
Extrude, subtract, fillet, offset..... so many commands that could make the game even better.
I took a full CAD course in collage and it's sad I can't put it to use here.
@Strucker If you think so ,so be it.
I have listened enough and twisted my own wishes enough from the beginning of 1.9.
It stops here and now.
Sincerely speaking, why is "egotistic" even supposed to be a bad word?
What's so wrong about putting oneself at first and foremost, especially when one really had enough?
@TheReturningHound My point is that I have done enough to cater to what people tell me to do and from now on I will only do what I want to do.
I have deviated too far from my philosophy in the past 6 months already and this has to stop.
you can see that every time I asked "I did this and that, why doesn't it work (as in, why doesn't it translate to upvotes?)" people just say "BS you haven't done nearly enough"
(or even worse, "when you tried, it is worse than when you haven't tried", like that retard comparing my H11K and my 803)
And there seems to be no end of that.
So if there's no end to that, I have to call it.
And that's what I'm doing now. I'm calling it. All my compromises end here. From now on there will only be what I want to build and what I want to build only.
Originally I could've vented all my stuff in Sunday and carried on. But now you are lengthening my anger into the 3rd day by endlessly replying (basically harassing) me.
There is a reason why this post is in "feelings" subforum. The subforum is for this kind of posts that you feel shouldn't exist. And that's exactly why this subforum exists, to act as a trash can.
Now just allow the subforum to function, and leave.
Now you just shut up and leave. Don't tell me that I must do what if I what. I have made my decision and this OP is my decision. It's final and I do not accept any suggestions.
@SodiumChloride Read my pinned post. I am not trying to change anything so why are you keep suggesting me to do this do that in order to "change" something?
I don't like how it is
and I'm not trying change that.
I will simply revert to just be myself regardless of what others think.
Nobody seems to actually read what I said in this post.
Yes there are things that I have to do in order to make the community see my plane.
I "understand" that. But I don't "like" that.
And this is exactly what I'm saying: That's it, I will stop trying to shape myself to something the community would like.
So stop telling me to do this and do that. This post is exactly announcing that I'm not going to do those.
I'm too lazy to delete all the comments but sincerely none of them should've ever existed (if only there's a "do not allow comment" option). This post is NOT trying to ask for any feedbacks or suggestions whatsoever.
@SodiumChloride Nothing will change if I complain and I'm not even trying to change it.
I can't and won't try to change, for instance, the bias for US planes.
I'm just complaining about it to make myself feel better in order to return to working just for myself, can't you read that already?
What's the point of keep harassing me with notifications?
@Airforcebombervip This plane is based on Fw BMW803 fighter
@ThomasRoderick check the air-to-air rocket part, it answers your question on the plane page.
@ThomasRoderick Your answer is in the thread given above
Please raise any questions if you fail to understand what the hell I'm saying. I understand some of the stuff is pretty complicated (especially the bomb solution finder)
@brians1209 German autocannons do have blinding issues, actually. Especially at night.
BK5 (50mm autocannon) mounted on night fighters are even said to cause actual temporary blindness when the pilot fires it at night.
0:32 : Rocket timing calculator
0:39 and many other occasions: proximity fuse cannon
0:42 "pilot's neck"
0:53 and 2:50 Radar on the bottom of the dashboard
1:36 Dual-purpose bombing solution finder (dive bombing mode), and then skip-bombing with the same solution finder (cockpit footage not shown)
2:00 Jager BMW 803 ADV with its predecessor the plain Jager BMW 803
2:11 /unknown/
Song used: Sabaton - Red Baron
Question: does it make all ships aggressive to you when you attack one of them?
In vanilla game the aggression are grouped: USS Tiny Two + 2 WWII DD is one group, 2xDestroyer and USS beast is another, and USS Tiny is its own group. You will not trigger aggression from the destroyers when you attacked the USS Tiny, for example.
Someone put a KMS Tirpitz there..... preferably a damaged one.
@BagelPlane interesting.... I should give it a try next time
@BagelPlane I'm having some problem with the beacon light part, so it'll be hard for me to build a glow-at-night thing.....
@Uchanka well for now it is achievable with angle of attack and angle of slip.... just very troublesome.
@marcox43 Which one? I practically have 4 radar screens now.... and each of them have at least two FT'd parts.
@marcox43 both 404'd.
And don't bother, I have already finished the Lichtenstein display, please don't make me do it again.....
@marcox43 Also, what you found seems to be FuG 224 Berlin A, not Fug 240 Berlin.
The one similar (in interface) to the H2S is also FuG 224.
@marcox43 ugh.... great, now I have to remake both screens....
Well this is supposed to be a tech demostrator to demonstrate the possibility of 1.10.
I think I'll make a separate, historically-accurate version when the update is officially online.
@SnoWFLakE0s It's odd for me too.
I've seen people making very complicated stuff with the beacon light, but I can't even make a light half as complicated as theirs.
@SnoWFLakE0s that code I posted is basically "returns 1 when the torpedo should hit within 50m of the target ship, -1 when its error is greater than 50m"
But in reality, although this code works perfectly in DebugExpressions and piston, it only works on the beacon light when the target is < 300~400m from my plane. That's why I suspect it could be an overflow issue.
Such situations are common when the code involves squares. square makes values much larger. I remember when I was trying to do the AFN2 navigation instrument, and it had similar problems too.
@SnoWFLakE0s Yes I did. Is that a wrong thing to do?
@marcox43 The radar screen is the last picture. It doesn't really follow the historical one because I couldn't find any reference about it.
@SnoWFLakE0s The code is:
this exact same code works for piston and DebugExpression, but only works for beacon light when the target is < 400m away.
you can mod the damage and the bullet size with XML.
Basically we use normal gun to model smaller, non-explosive guns (up to 20 mm), and use the cannon to model larger guns with explosive ammunition (30mm and above).
@WNP78 ah, no wonder it didn't work when I tried.
Thanks.
@PointlessWhyshouldi oh, ok...
erm, just so you know, there is a pinned thread from the moderators that forbids mass tagging...
@WarHawk95 Uh, I though when you tag "mod" it affects every moderator? well, anyway....
Guys there is an update for this. New rules forbid me from tagging everyone but please go take a look!
@Mod I'm just wondering if it's possible to self-introduce to be featured in the update video? I think my radar can serve well in the update introduction clip.
@MinecrackTyler Somebody already did.
@WNP78 As in "deltaAngle(TargetHeading - Heading)"?
Just an extra note, the same formula worked for piston.
So now I just use piston instead of signal light.
Actually, I just found out that the remedial clause of the program works even if this is fixed. The remedial clause simply don't get activated at all....
So perhaps, fix it please?
@SnoWFLakE0s My MK103 is 850 m/s. it has no problem hitting the target head-on from 2.5 km against the WWII challenge.
It can also hit (though difficult) the Wasp in a dogfight. (remember, we're talking about shooting at a jet with a prop fighter)
@SnoWFLakE0s The current, very basic auto fuse works fine for MK103's ballistics. It seems that it has something to do with shell velocity.
The rate(TargetDistance) system has two major flaws: gravity and speed change. High shell velocity minimizes both of them. I haven't tried doing a rate(rate(TargetDistance)) (i.e. target acceleration relative to you), but maybe that would address the speed change.
The smallest caliber setting in vanilla game is 50mm, and my prototype works just fine with that (no explosion scalar adjusted). In real life, the smallest shell to have VT fuse was 76mm (40mm bofors was contact fuse, 20mm Hispano was not explosive at all) so I'd say it's working alright. my realistically-modeled MK103 30mm gun can hit fighters from 2.5km away... that's about 3-5 times their effective range IRL.
@BagelPlane I think my best bet is to use FT to control the activation group. Make the piston/rotator only work when the radar's angle fit the target's angle. That way, the dot will only update when the radar sweeps pass the target.
@Notaleopard I think there's already a guy who made an automatic-aiming turret for ground usage.
I may try to make bomber turret but I have to nail the roll/pitch compensation for the "Pilot's neck". They work with similar principles.
@BagelPlane Go ahead, it's never a bad thing to have parallel systems.
I am also wondering how I'm gonna make the radar dot "update upon sweep"...
@marcox43 go ahead
@chibikitsune You know what I think I'm running out of choices but to agree with you.
SP is a game and it should stay just that. It should not become a kind of "best builder contest" unless one happens to find that interesting.
Last but not least.
There shouldn't be ANY replies to this post from the very beginning.
@TheReturningHound Well then this post announces that I'm returning to the right track.
It started like 8 months ago where people are "encouraging" me to "improve"...
and then I began to cater to their suggestions more and more.
In the end I found myself to be making stuff that I don't really enjoy making.
If they actually do, I hope they take a look at some real CAD softwares.
Extrude, subtract, fillet, offset..... so many commands that could make the game even better.
I took a full CAD course in collage and it's sad I can't put it to use here.
@Strucker If you think so ,so be it.
I have listened enough and twisted my own wishes enough from the beginning of 1.9.
It stops here and now.
Sincerely speaking, why is "egotistic" even supposed to be a bad word?
What's so wrong about putting oneself at first and foremost, especially when one really had enough?
@TheReturningHound My point is that I have done enough to cater to what people tell me to do and from now on I will only do what I want to do.
I have deviated too far from my philosophy in the past 6 months already and this has to stop.
you can see that every time I asked "I did this and that, why doesn't it work (as in, why doesn't it translate to upvotes?)" people just say "BS you haven't done nearly enough"
(or even worse, "when you tried, it is worse than when you haven't tried", like that retard comparing my H11K and my 803)
And there seems to be no end of that.
So if there's no end to that, I have to call it.
And that's what I'm doing now. I'm calling it. All my compromises end here. From now on there will only be what I want to build and what I want to build only.
@soldier289 yeah, good build.
Originally I could've vented all my stuff in Sunday and carried on. But now you are lengthening my anger into the 3rd day by endlessly replying (basically harassing) me.
There is a reason why this post is in "feelings" subforum. The subforum is for this kind of posts that you feel shouldn't exist. And that's exactly why this subforum exists, to act as a trash can.
Now just allow the subforum to function, and leave.
Now you just shut up and leave. Don't tell me that I must do what if I what. I have made my decision and this OP is my decision. It's final and I do not accept any suggestions.
@SodiumChloride I don't CARE what you are saying.
This post is about a complaint and I am not expecting ANY response.
@SodiumChloride Read my pinned post. I am not trying to change anything so why are you keep suggesting me to do this do that in order to "change" something?
I don't like how it is
and I'm not trying change that.
I will simply revert to just be myself regardless of what others think.
Is that clear enough?
Nobody seems to actually read what I said in this post.
Yes there are things that I have to do in order to make the community see my plane.
I "understand" that. But I don't "like" that.
And this is exactly what I'm saying: That's it, I will stop trying to shape myself to something the community would like.
So stop telling me to do this and do that. This post is exactly announcing that I'm not going to do those.
I'm too lazy to delete all the comments but sincerely none of them should've ever existed (if only there's a "do not allow comment" option). This post is NOT trying to ask for any feedbacks or suggestions whatsoever.
@SodiumChloride Nothing will change if I complain and I'm not even trying to change it.
I can't and won't try to change, for instance, the bias for US planes.
I'm just complaining about it to make myself feel better in order to return to working just for myself, can't you read that already?
What's the point of keep harassing me with notifications?