man fuck the medulla oblongata it makes my breathing and heartbeat too easy.
All that criticism comming from Cwal728, and I think he has contributed 0% as far as any builds posted in the contraptions section.
I would take his post with a grain of salt.
Cwal728 Put up or shut up.
Sestze I think it is time to start saying to those people "Prove it".
Yeah, instead of Sestze going and proving them wrong himself, can't anyone do it for him instead of just spilling words atleast.
[QUOTE=lazermaniac;14705604]Anyone crying about applyforce is simply pissed off about being unable to use it themselves hth[/QUOTE]
Been there, done that =D
Bah, this is the second thread in a row where i accidentally bump something old =.=
Wow i didn't know that there was so much controversy over sestze's applyForce methods, are people only now starting to ease up?
of course not. they still complain about it in other threads.
Setze: take the [QUOTE=Cwal728]chanlenge[/QUOTE] :science:
[QUOTE=Cwal728;19547980]This is not a true mech because the feet don't actually control the movement. This should be called a hover tank because the legs are just ascetics. This is just the wiremod way of making a hiden wheel mech. Oh and before you ask i have build a true mech. The process is not that hard.
[editline]01:49AM[/editline]
Well you dont even need vector thrusters for a mech. I did it with 5 regular thrusters. Oh and I do under stand applyforce as well. You are just finding the easy way out. I am giving you a chanlenge build a mech that only uses 5 thrusters numpad controlled. I dont care what you use to keeps the legs up: sliders, hydraulics, elastics, ropes, ect.[/QUOTE]
Well done.. you've successfully raped the english language.
honestly what the hell is the big deal about using applyforce - why do people care so much about how I build?
[QUOTE=Sestze;19568988]honestly what the hell is the big deal about using applyforce - why do people care so much about how I build?[/QUOTE]
My personal problem with it, is it seems alot of people have gotten into the habit of making a chip that they can seemingly weld everything to, and it magically works. For instance, a helicopter that's really nothing but a flying pod, everything else being aesthetic. I'd be much more impressed if the apply force was being used to power rotors' lift in such a contraption, but if it's just a plate pretending to be a chopper, or any contraption, it's more like a big fake to alot of people.
I'm not saying thats what your doing, but it's been done so much that people may just have a hard time breaking first impressions.
What I believe the problem is with applyForce is that even if you go through all the trouble of making say, an applyForced VTOL that behaves realistically, it's just not the same as making one that moves with thrusters or propellers or whatever. (please keep in mind that about 90% of everything I make is powered by applyForce) Sure, it could be better in every conceivable way, but they just don't feel quite right, or at least that's what it seems like to me.
It depends upon the model that you use.
The initial thought behind any system is to look at it critically and understand what it is trying to do. You look for patterns, look at the "big picture". You construct a bare-bones mathematical model that fits with what you want your contraption to do using the principle of Occam's Razor. You test the model, and then decide whether or not to shave things off or add more complexity.
It's a fine tool, and a difficult one to master. If you pare things down too far, the model loses meaning or doesn't fit with the data. Too complex, and it becomes too much of a burden or loses flexibility.
An example: A recent expression I made was based around constructing a helicopter system that would allow a chassis a friend made to get airborne. By simplifying the model used down to "drag forces from the fin on the local up/down movement, spinning thing's speed determines lift, control established by movement of mouse", I was able to get a crude representation of what a helicopter would work like.
Instead of going through the motions simulating fins on the blades, rotational inertia, gyroscopic forces, and the like, I pared it down to the simple concept of "spinny thing makes helicopter go flying".
Another example was the "Newton's Retarded Cousin" expression that I made that apparently works like a Gyropod. Simple concept, just wanted a stable platform for a zero-gravity flight system. I later incorporated it with fin to allow for flight. From this system I realized what the fins were doing and set about adding things onto the chip (and even rewriting it) to where I could simulate lift and drag forces.
The initial systems are simple, but if I feel something is lacking that should have been there, I make it more complex until I have a decent approximation of what a physical system would have, without a few of the niggling issues that come with source, with the Fin tool, or with any number of other things.
An example of something I've built that benefitted from the use of simulated things was the expression I made that simulates elastics used in suspension. It went from being a very crude approximation to a more realistic model in a rewrite. The benefits I got from this are many - the system can handle absurdly heavy weights, it's flexible, and uses less constraints.
I don't know how to say this, if these things were so simple, if everything was so easy to put together in E2, wouldn't everyone under the sun have done it already? I wouldn't have been the first, I wouldn't be the only one with a walking expression released. I wouldn't be the only one with a simulated elastic suspension. There would be others who could piece this together and construct their own systems.
Indeed I am not the only one, but there's not many who do, I can count them on one hand.
All of this doesn't answer my question, however. Why do you care how I build or what I use to put things together? You're not aware of the complexity (or noncomplexity) of the system I use, you make assumptions. How I build is my own unique style, and the end products are undeniable. If you had legitimate complaints about how the system works and suggestions for improvement, I'd listen.
However, so far I've recieved nothing but complaints about how it's not "right" or not "in the spirit of GMOD". You're talking about a sandbox game, where you can do pretty much anything you like. I'm not competing with you, and there's no endgame, so drop the "GMOD Purity" argument.
The concept of contraption "purity" is a sad excuse to make others fit into your mould.
Stop with the walls'o'text :(
Sestze knows what he's talking about.
Well said Sestze, well said.
Lots of agreeable oportunities, to say the least.
How come when I posted a applyforce quadrupedal simillar to this but with phx3 I just got bashed by the first 10 comments instead of opinions on how to improve it :|
this thread is older than your thread, for one.
critics need to put up or stfu. Sestze knows what he's doing and if people don't like it, stfu.
[QUOTE=Cantido;19606094]critics need to put up or stfu. Sestze knows what he's doing and if people don't like it, stfu.[/QUOTE]
I don't like it. I really hate his E2's i don't use them at all and even if I did use one i would smear shit all over it because i'm that cool. It's not like all of my mechs, spacecraft, planes, helicopters and tanks use his expressions. And I really hate the way that his E2's are really easy to set up because he tries to make them somewhat user friendly by putting all of the variables in one easy to spot place and labeling them with descriptions of what they do within the E2... I really hate that.
I see all of you are complaining about applyForce and the fact that thrusters are better and that applyForce requires no skill and such. I want you to look at this:
[url]http://www.wiremod.com/forum/wiremod-general-chat/10931-cronus-ultimate-drone.html[/url]
I Just want to see a video of a decent looking mech using this before i download it and waste my life fucking around with it. Anyone? or direct me to a video of it that i can't seem to find. Thanks!
[QUOTE=Skyfire12;20021307]I Just want to see a video of a decent looking mech using this before i download it and waste my life fucking around with it. Anyone? or direct me to a video of it that i can't seem to find. Thanks![/QUOTE]
Go to youtube and type in the search bar "gmod mech". See if that helps.
[QUOTE=Skyfire12;20021307]before i download it[/QUOTE]
There is no download.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
