He should have put some targets to the rear as well. It could have been Scrap-dingers Targets. Were they hit? Were they not hit? We can only tell if he turns around and looks.
I found out in my own testing. That putting the bomb bays "Duration" setting to 0.05s and the "Pause" on just a very high number like 20s. While also having the activation button set on toggle = yes. It only drops 1 bomb at a time.
Maybe, you could add a third rotating servo, which adds a little speed to the thrower, but have it activate on a half second delay when shots are fired for just long enough to have the second two bombs catch up and be released at the right spot. Not tested it myself though but gl! Also rotate the bomb bays so they align with where you aim.
@@VerbotenSpark_47 that's why I'm hoping there's a logic block that can allow for that slight delay needed on just the third servo so it 'shouldnt' mess with the first shots
That's a good idea. I was thinking about plainly speeding the servos up. If you look at 3:03 it seems to do a full rotation between first & second as well as third & fourth bomb; and 3/4ths or 4/5ths between the 2nd and 3rd one. Let's assume it's 4/5ths. If you multiplied the speed by 5, the 2nd and 3rd bomb would launch 4 rotations apart, and the first and second bomb would be 5 rotations apart (same for 3rd and 4th). That means you'd need to go from 2 to 10 servos. If it was 3/4ths of a rotation, you'd need to go from 2 to 8. And if it's in between you could try 16 18 or 20 servos. And then you also need to get the servo speed much more accurately aligned to the release intervals. [edit:] It seems like you need a sum of the servo speeds of about 4.1 -ish for the 1st and 2nd bomb to be EXACTLY 1 rotation apart. Multiplied by 5 it's 11 servos at 1.86 speed and multiplied by 4 that's 9 servos at 1.82 speed.
The first thing that comes to my mind is that there could be 2 sources of inconsistency: - vibration - inconsistent release timing due to the detector not being perfect (meaning it does not detect the arm of your build in the same manner and at the same time) You can kinda see the later when you spin it and look at the detector flash, it does not happen every time (unless i'm crazy :p)
There is a third big one: the physics simulation. Physics in most videogames is not deterministic: depending on the exact timing of the release input, the exact duration of each physics time step for the duration of the arc, and the alignment between the arm's rotation and the time step, you might see small variations in how the same motion is calculated. A high-speed rotary thrower like this is exactly the kind of system that will expand those small variations into big ones.
@@Poldovico indeed, i just wanted to explain simply parts of the problem that are the most likely reason for it, but you are right the underlying reason is mikely to be the physic engine
Just made this comment as well, but yeah, distance sensors are surprisingly limited when it comes to detecting fast-moving objects, which is definitely part of the issue
@@Loop_Kat I was thinking about creating another arm linked to the first one and somehow slowing it down + short arm This would (finger crossed) increase the accuracy of the sensor reading
@@martinferrand4711 The most consistent setup would probably be to make the rotation arm completely symmetrical and create a second, mirrored distance sensor on the opposite side of the main body (these could even be attached to a servo on the opposite side of the rotation arm so that they both move in tandem to adjust throwing angle), then have both sensors point to an OR Gate which points to the AND Gate for activation (using ScrapMan's logic at 5:46). That way, at least one sensor should still trigger even if the other is too slow on its physics update, but I imagine you'd still have inconsistencies You might also be able to add an angle sensor on the rotation arm pointing to the AND Gate, which might make the launches harder to trigger depending on how tight the angle is, but they should be more precise. Not sure if that'd mess with dynamically changing the launch angle though
Same haha. I got 3 to launch with the piston settings at 0.0/0.02/0.02 and the Bomber settings at delay .02. then setting it all to the same key (You have to hold the key when bomber is ready). I couldn't figure out the settings to get all 4 launching flawlessly though.
@@exegeticalapologetics4970 launching 4 is weird, I had to used 2 logic gates with similar duration and pause but separate delays to get it to launch all 4
The Interval between each bomb is 0.5 seconds. So you need consistend 2 rotations per second to lounch all bombs in the same angel. Also the Inconsistency is coming from the bomb launcher itself because the bombs are lounching each time different to feel more natural.
I think the inconsistency is due to frame rate. Physics are usually updated 2? Times/tick, and ticks are based on frames. My guess is the sensor is triggering at SLIGHTLY different positions due to tick rate. Spawning in the target slightly effects frame rate/physics updates, which could lead to that change in impact point after spawning it. Could test by spawning another target and seeing if that changes it. My suggestion: try bumping the frame rate as high as you can without causing inconsistency. Also, add a THIRD servo set to 0, make sure it still functions properly, then TYPE a tiny decimal into it (it will round the displayed number, but preserves the input) to try to adjust grouping. Also, when in doubt, adding connectors one at a time and moving their attachment points changes the b"uild order?" That the pieces get assembled in the engine. That can DRASTICALLY change the physics of the entire craft. I had a super powered thrower that would snap its own arm off. Adding a random connector near a wheel magically fixed the arm breaking itself due to that internal assembly change. I've played this game too much...
Oh cool, nice to see my comment helped influence a video. I honestly didn't expect it to work as well as it did just due to how all 4 bombs are forced to drop in sequence. The only thing I could think of to improve your build is to maybe to have the spinning arm activate and deactivate between each bomb drop to try and spawn each one along the same throwing arc, but I honestly don't know how much additional logic that'd require or if it could be done accurately and fast enough in such a small time window As for the inconsistency in accuracy, it could partly be due to how mechanical blocks work in Trailmakers, where having even just two or three mechanical blocks connected to each other can make subsequent blocks down the line noticeably less stable, which usually manifests as unexplainable vibrations or noodle physics. It's also probably due to how distance sensors function. Even though they're a 2x1 block, they only detect objects with one specific 1x1 half of the sensor area (the other 1x1 half literally does nothing) which in itself hurts their ability to detect smaller objects accurately, but on top of that, they actually seem to be really limited when it comes to detecting fast-moving objects. As we saw here, they may only be triggering correctly 50% of the time, sometimes detecting on the leading edge of the sensor, sometimes the tail end, or anywhere in between Another example of this is that I made a radar vehicle a while back with a system of distance sensors that detect a spinning central core to output the approximate detection direction to a light array, but the top speed of the central core had to be _way_ slower than I expected because the distance sensors literally just cannot update fast enough. I did multiple tests with other blocks and setups which all confirmed this behavior, so it seems to be a game logic limitation or even just a side effect of only functionally having a 1x1 sensor area
Quick nerdy semantics lesson for the 0.5 person that actually cares: First person: Look trough the eyes of player (You are the protagonist, they do anything you do) -> Your average shooter game Second person: Standing behind player, looking over their shoulder (You are an equal to the protagonist, "sitting on their shoulders", they do anything you want to do) -> Your average story game, you are technically not in full control of the character like in first person, but "more connected" compared to third person Third person: Standing further behind player, looking past them (You guide the protagonist, they try to do anything you want do) -> Your average fast paced action games, you guide the player to do certain things but they will pathfind/pick fighting moves/etc themselves to keep the pace up Fourth person: Standing even further away, looking at a group of entities (things/players/npcs) (You guide the group, they try to do anything you want to do) -> Your average RPG game where you have companions that follow the player & some basic RTS games Fifth person: You hover above the area, guiding & observing the entity (thing/player/npc) thats watching & guiding the group(s) -> Your average large scale RTS game where you control multiple units as a commander by guiding squad leaders, that themselves guide units It goes further then this in writing (as there you can go "trough" multiple of these stages) but i'm pretty sure Fifth person is where it ends in gaming terminology. So what you were doing there was 4th person, not second 😋
I have an interesting idea for your mortar thingy scrapman. Why not duplicate the spinning bomb bay and make the build symmetrical. That way, at least you get 4 bombs hitting a general area, thus increasing its AOE and accuracy. And it would be nice to see a challenge where you and the squad decide teams, (2 mortars vs 2 escapists.) The team on mortar turrets have to destroy those in vehicles... The last escapist standing is the winner for that round. Make 4 rounds of elimination and the person who survives the onslaught the longest will be deemed the victor. I think you will have to make a small arena as the vehicles would be contained in the general aoe of the mortar turrets, thus creating a balanced enough game, literally decided by luck and timing. Should be fun and i look forward to seeing a lot of epic dramatic and cinematic slo-mo shots. you edit those amazingly well. Love you and your content. Stay experimantal!
11:02 correct. first person is your character view, third person is drone above your character view and second person is the enemy/another character view.
you can have the whole mechanism rotate at the angle difference of the 2 sets of bombs in order to have all 4 launch in the same direction. you should optimize the spin by having it as a on/off button.
It's 1/4 th of a second per bomb drop with a 4 second reload time. I only know this because I already experimented with something similar to this and I've also figured out the "rolling thunder" drop (a continuous dropping of bombs onto the ground.) You put a 1 second delay between 1 bomb bay and another and you'll get 4 bombs drop out of the first and then the next 4 will drop out as if they're part of that same bomb bay as far as timing goes. You need a third rotating servo to add just a little more speed. It's just a little slow, so speeding things up to make the second and fourth bombs fall in line with the first and third would be the most in sync. You're also throwing them to the side. The bombs do retain some modicum of parallel momentum to the direction the bomb bay is dropping them. So you had them dropping towards the support of your turret, they naturally had some momentum throwing them the "left" If you had the bomb bay facing out, you'd get more distance. It's the difference between how you had your first bomber set up and your new bomber setup. The bombs facing back means they're slightly thrown backwards. When they're facing downwards, they're slightly thrown down, which gives a better consistency when bombing. Instead of bombing behind you, you're bombing directly below you.
There's a thing you can do with cannons where you can put them on a piston that extends at max speed just before the cannon fires, and if the shot leaves the cannon while the piston is moving it goes WAY faster and further. I bet this would work for bombs and probably be way more consistent too.
I made a vehicle based on your concept, called it "Ground-based Bomber". It works really well and shoots 16 bombs in siege mode that bombards stuff in front! Thanks for the idea!
15:04 Makes perfect sense if the bombs are physical objects and the launch of each bomb impacts the rotation even slightly, and we know the guns have recoil so why not the bombs? As for the delay between the first set of bombs and second, perhaps you could add a third rotor which is dependant on some logic so that it is triggered say a quarter rotation beforer the first bombs are released and kick right to max power and a speed you'll have to determine so it eliminates as much of the difference in release point as possible? Another angle you could try is a reverse recoil cannon, using pistons you could shot-putt the bomb launcher? Though that'd take real tight timing control to avoid blowing the arm up. Miniature remote drone bomber? just a bomb dropper with some simple wings that you can toss like a paper plane over your target? Not the most reuseable solution though
The inconsistencies comes from the sensor. They are not constantly checking what's in front of them. They are polling X times per second and if the rotation is not perfectly synced to the sensor polling rate, it will have some variance in where exactly it notices the blocks. This is the same reason why it sometimes do not notice very fast moving object, especially if it small too. The spinning servos are not the ones causing the inconsistencies.
4:18 the first shot was about 90 degrees away from the second shot. the third shot was about 30 degrees away from the second shot. the fourth shot was about 90 degrees away from the third shot
The inconsistencies probably are coming from the physics simulation being at a limited rate. Instead of being a continuous rotation, it advances in steps, and sometimes those steps align early with the sensor, resulting in a more vertical launch, other times they line up late and trigger a slightly more forward launch. That explains why despite being inconsistent, it seems to alternate between a few "settings" : while there's theoretically an entire range of angles to trigger the sensor from, the stepping nature at this kind of speed results in only a few of those angles actually happening, and each angle is fairly consistent on its own. If you could somehow get the sensor trigger angle to be more precise I bet the accuracy would be fairly consistent. Though that seems impossible with this system.
I have a cool idea you know how scrap man made a plane he had to reconnect to in a smaller plane he should do that but with two people and at the end they would race to see who could get in their side the fastest
I think a good change for the bomb bay is that if you tap the activation button it only releases 1 bomb but if you hold it for a little bit it drops 2 then 3 for a bit longer and 4 when you hold it all the way. And not like a charge function more like if you let go in the middle of it dropping the bombs it will cancel the bombs after it.
My guess is that the inconsistencies are from the frame rate and timing. The arm is spinning so fast that it could be a degree or 2 off at or between frames in comparison to the previous launch.
I actually tried this with rockets and it's interesting how they're affected. You can put them on the front and greatly increase the range, although the auto-aim will get messed up since it assumes standard speed. Or you can put it on the back of an airplane and have it act as a sort of artillery
Alternate experiment, recreate a german WWII V1 flying bomb. Give it a launch ramp but the only control you have yourself is a launch button. You'll need to figure out how to get the bomb to strike a target some distance away with no active control of the bomb other than what is set at launch.
Instead of trying to get the bombs all in the same spot, lobbing them forward in pairs at a low and high arc could prove useful. More overall saturation of fire towards a target.
Could you somehow use a repeating input for the bomber with a wavelength of the time it takes to rotate once and translation that impacts the angle of the arc for every rotation in trailmakers. I wonder if Trailmakers has that ability in its logic. I know Scrap Mechanic does.
Jus had 2 thoughts, if the spinning arm had two spinning joints where one rotation happens where you have it and then halfway along the arm there is a second rotation point that is timed to complete a shorter rotation inbetween the first set of bombs firing and the second to try and force the bomb bay to face the same direction it was when the first bombs fired. My second thought its rotation atop a steering hinge that flips 90 degrees between sets of bombs firing.
When I first saw the thumbnail, I originally thought it was piston assisted, like with what people do to make cannons fly farther. You might re-visit this trying that method, and seeing if it works the same way as cannons. Maybe figure out how often the bombs drop, and have a piston extend at the same rate.
MM Idea... So each of you build a base with your seat in it. Then you guys have to lob the bombs to try to destroy the other's seat! Could be really fun!
Scrapman, I think you can try using a piston powered motion. You may ask: but the sequence of releases is long, how to do it? The answer is: pistons need to move only at the time of each release, and you can stack them so they're fast as possible. You can time it with logic, that way you can deal with inconsistency of drops issue. Also that way you can shoot bombs in consistent direction. Edit: Use of logic gets rid of vibration issues for sensor triggering
ScrapMan : hello guys to day we are building an artillery piece to destroy the game. next video:Today we re building a bomb throwing machine to make a bomb break the sound barrier.
A relay race of 3v3 where each relay part is powered only by one weapon type recoil could be interesting especially if its a multiple lap relay where each person has to use 3 different vehicles each too
I think the bombs are launching off to the side because the bomb bays open from the side. And naturally they drop out and have some initial momentum to leave the bay. So they go to the left because that's where the opening is. If you rotated it to be vertical instead of horizontal it might go straight. Also what if you had a system to activate on a delay after the first two in order to catch up to speed on the other bombs and hit near the same area? It would allow for a decent coverage to hit more often.
As for the inconsistencies a lot of it has to do with how long you hold the spin button before hitting the release bombs button .. the rpm of the bomb spinner isnt able to hit max speed some of the times , so to figure out if it is tye rpm or not make sure to hold the spin button each time the same amount of time , i would say a good 5 seconds each time you hold the spin botton to give it ample amount of time to reach max speed then hit the bomb release button , you may get more consistant and accurate hits
On a bomber plane, just a helicopter servo with several rows of bomb droppers attacked, configured to fire sequentially would be interesting, first few would drop more or less normally as the servo starts to spin up slowly, and the last ones would get lobbed all over a wide area lol
The reason for the bombs flying off centre is because you have them dropping to the left, it was fine when they were facing the ground as that was their pushed trajectory but the bomb bays exert a little force when dropping the bombs making them fly off to the left. also the spinning servo acts like only the top spins so putting one on top of the other does not add the force, pairing it with the rotating servo would not be a bad idea.
My idea to make them all 4 being shot in the relative same area would be adding third servo that would move only a little bit after set delay. so it would launch 2 bombs, then the servo would move forward a little bit, putting the second relase of 2 bombs a bit forward making them launch into same direction, then you would need to fine tune it to perfection
I think how long it is spinning before to launch also has something to do with where it will land. If it spins around two or three times it will always land in one area but if it spins say five or more times it will always land in a different area.
I'm pretty sure the bomb bay launches the bombs away from it(the speed is not a lot compared to the rest) so with the bom bays pointing to the right of the launcher you get the bombs a little to the right of where you pointing.
You probably could’ve done a 12 x 12 for the target instead of 9 x 9 for the circles but that’s just my guess and turns a bigger area to help with the bombs 15:19
could've just used a piston design that flicks forward as the bombs are deployed 4 times in a row with perfect timing, causing all 4 of them to fly perfectly straight with no instability
So insanity is trying the same thing repeatedly expecting different results. Apparently the cause of insanity is trying the same thing repeatedly and getting different results.
Question... Why are you spinning it to begin with? Just place it sideways? and use a piston to fling it sideways? the bombs release when the spring/piston extends. flinging them forward?
Theoretically if xou know how long it takes to drop another bomb, you can calculate the how fast you need to spin it so the bom bay is roughly at same place. From that you can calculate the speed of spinning and it should work
The only thing I can think of that would make it work for your idea. Scrap man is won the old carnival rides. But instead of the seat you put the pump is in place
Well, I have an idea. You use 2 sets of bomb bays, on 2 arms making a "V" shape and the angle has to be calculated according to the release time between each bomb and how much speed the bomb bay has. 2 sets of bomb bay helps as each bay launches 4 and 2 of them goes together, thus you launch 4 bombs at the target and also the angle between the arms and the speed of rotation of the arms can help launch the other 4 bombs at the target. Atleast, that is what I think will work. The thing is I don't play trailmakers and don't know how the parts work. Yeah, I don't know. 🙄
If you watch the bombs releasing they come out with a some what random direction, they are affected by the movement of the throwing arm consistently. Though, because of the variability in direction at release that's why you're getting inconsistencies. Essentially, the bombs don't come out straight.
Another bit of tweaking you could do is adjust the rotation speeds gradually to get a perfect rotation timed with the release sequence. I don't know what is causing it to release the way it is now, but I think it's possible to tweak it gradually and match it perfectly.
![Can PARTY BALLOONS Break The Sound Barrier? [Trailmakers]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/15jJJl46Ehg/mqdefault.jpg)
![เปิดคำทำนาย นอสตราดามุส - บาบา วานก้า ปี 2025 คนทั่วโลกต้องเจออะไรบ้าง? | แฉ 11 ธ.ค. 67 [2/3] |GMM25](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/xmTIKWJUMPM/mqdefault.jpg)
![1v1 Dogfight with GUN POWERED PLANES! And We Can Only Shoot Backwards! [Trailmakers]](/img/n.gif)
If you set the duration to à certain amount, you can control the number of bomb launched
Total duration for the bombs dropping, that's makes sense
Increases the time between bombs?
@@akahunter1910 No it regulates how long it fires
I tought so too
Maybe a # of bombs setting could correlate to the bomb’s size, damage, and reload time.
@@Dragonion8855 they should add that
Scrapman discovering quantum bomb physics. If a target is where a bomb lands, it will change its trajectory to miss
Maybe the bombs are scared of the target
He should have put some targets to the rear as well. It could have been Scrap-dingers Targets. Were they hit? Were they not hit? We can only tell if he turns around and looks.
Scrapman becoming a professional bomber
That sounds quite concerning 😶
🤨
the vid is uploaded 30 min ago and this comment 38 min ago i dont understand
true and relatable wait what
Scary
I found out in my own testing. That putting the bomb bays "Duration" setting to 0.05s and the "Pause" on just a very high number like 20s. While also having the activation button set on toggle = yes. It only drops 1 bomb at a time.
I think this is the way to go, launching only one or two bombs at a time per bey and just having multiple bomb bays!
Maybe, you could add a third rotating servo, which adds a little speed to the thrower, but have it activate on a half second delay when shots are fired for just long enough to have the second two bombs catch up and be released at the right spot. Not tested it myself though but gl!
Also rotate the bomb bays so they align with where you aim.
@@VerbotenSpark_47 that's why I'm hoping there's a logic block that can allow for that slight delay needed on just the third servo so it 'shouldnt' mess with the first shots
That's a good idea. I was thinking about plainly speeding the servos up. If you look at 3:03 it seems to do a full rotation between first & second as well as third & fourth bomb; and 3/4ths or 4/5ths between the 2nd and 3rd one.
Let's assume it's 4/5ths. If you multiplied the speed by 5, the 2nd and 3rd bomb would launch 4 rotations apart, and the first and second bomb would be 5 rotations apart (same for 3rd and 4th). That means you'd need to go from 2 to 10 servos.
If it was 3/4ths of a rotation, you'd need to go from 2 to 8. And if it's in between you could try 16 18 or 20 servos.
And then you also need to get the servo speed much more accurately aligned to the release intervals. [edit:] It seems like you need a sum of the servo speeds of about 4.1 -ish for the 1st and 2nd bomb to be EXACTLY 1 rotation apart. Multiplied by 5 it's 11 servos at 1.86 speed and multiplied by 4 that's 9 servos at 1.82 speed.
The first thing that comes to my mind is that there could be 2 sources of inconsistency:
- vibration
- inconsistent release timing due to the detector not being perfect (meaning it does not detect the arm of your build in the same manner and at the same time)
You can kinda see the later when you spin it and look at the detector flash, it does not happen every time (unless i'm crazy :p)
There is a third big one: the physics simulation.
Physics in most videogames is not deterministic: depending on the exact timing of the release input, the exact duration of each physics time step for the duration of the arc, and the alignment between the arm's rotation and the time step, you might see small variations in how the same motion is calculated. A high-speed rotary thrower like this is exactly the kind of system that will expand those small variations into big ones.
@@Poldovico indeed, i just wanted to explain simply parts of the problem that are the most likely reason for it, but you are right the underlying reason is mikely to be the physic engine
Just made this comment as well, but yeah, distance sensors are surprisingly limited when it comes to detecting fast-moving objects, which is definitely part of the issue
@@Loop_Kat I was thinking about creating another arm linked to the first one and somehow slowing it down + short arm
This would (finger crossed) increase the accuracy of the sensor reading
@@martinferrand4711 The most consistent setup would probably be to make the rotation arm completely symmetrical and create a second, mirrored distance sensor on the opposite side of the main body (these could even be attached to a servo on the opposite side of the rotation arm so that they both move in tandem to adjust throwing angle), then have both sensors point to an OR Gate which points to the AND Gate for activation (using ScrapMan's logic at 5:46). That way, at least one sensor should still trigger even if the other is too slow on its physics update, but I imagine you'd still have inconsistencies
You might also be able to add an angle sensor on the rotation arm pointing to the AND Gate, which might make the launches harder to trigger depending on how tight the angle is, but they should be more precise. Not sure if that'd mess with dynamically changing the launch angle though
I made something like this except using pistons, and lemme tell you it's as confusing as it was for you.
Same haha. I got 3 to launch with the piston settings at 0.0/0.02/0.02 and the Bomber settings at delay .02. then setting it all to the same key (You have to hold the key when bomber is ready). I couldn't figure out the settings to get all 4 launching flawlessly though.
@@exegeticalapologetics4970 launching 4 is weird, I had to used 2 logic gates with similar duration and pause but separate delays to get it to launch all 4
@@therayofdoomtrod365 lol
Love your channel been 3 three years and im still loving your channel
the most consistent thing about this video is scrapman saying things are inconsistent 😂
The Interval between each bomb is 0.5 seconds. So you need consistend 2 rotations per second to lounch all bombs in the same angel.
Also the Inconsistency is coming from the bomb launcher itself because the bombs are lounching each time different to feel more natural.
I think the inconsistency is due to frame rate. Physics are usually updated 2? Times/tick, and ticks are based on frames. My guess is the sensor is triggering at SLIGHTLY different positions due to tick rate.
Spawning in the target slightly effects frame rate/physics updates, which could lead to that change in impact point after spawning it. Could test by spawning another target and seeing if that changes it.
My suggestion: try bumping the frame rate as high as you can without causing inconsistency. Also, add a THIRD servo set to 0, make sure it still functions properly, then TYPE a tiny decimal into it (it will round the displayed number, but preserves the input) to try to adjust grouping.
Also, when in doubt, adding connectors one at a time and moving their attachment points changes the b"uild order?" That the pieces get assembled in the engine. That can DRASTICALLY change the physics of the entire craft. I had a super powered thrower that would snap its own arm off. Adding a random connector near a wheel magically fixed the arm breaking itself due to that internal assembly change.
I've played this game too much...
You need to make this into battleship, 4v4 or 6v6 maybe? Have a wall between teams and lob bombs with this device
This my frien is pure and utter chaos and I love it
I like how he just didn't notice that he can change the interval in the bomb settings
Oh cool, nice to see my comment helped influence a video. I honestly didn't expect it to work as well as it did just due to how all 4 bombs are forced to drop in sequence. The only thing I could think of to improve your build is to maybe to have the spinning arm activate and deactivate between each bomb drop to try and spawn each one along the same throwing arc, but I honestly don't know how much additional logic that'd require or if it could be done accurately and fast enough in such a small time window
As for the inconsistency in accuracy, it could partly be due to how mechanical blocks work in Trailmakers, where having even just two or three mechanical blocks connected to each other can make subsequent blocks down the line noticeably less stable, which usually manifests as unexplainable vibrations or noodle physics. It's also probably due to how distance sensors function. Even though they're a 2x1 block, they only detect objects with one specific 1x1 half of the sensor area (the other 1x1 half literally does nothing) which in itself hurts their ability to detect smaller objects accurately, but on top of that, they actually seem to be really limited when it comes to detecting fast-moving objects. As we saw here, they may only be triggering correctly 50% of the time, sometimes detecting on the leading edge of the sensor, sometimes the tail end, or anywhere in between
Another example of this is that I made a radar vehicle a while back with a system of distance sensors that detect a spinning central core to output the approximate detection direction to a light array, but the top speed of the central core had to be _way_ slower than I expected because the distance sensors literally just cannot update fast enough. I did multiple tests with other blocks and setups which all confirmed this behavior, so it seems to be a game logic limitation or even just a side effect of only functionally having a 1x1 sensor area
i like how modern sandboxes require from you knowing basics phisics to do fun things with this
Those experiment is cool
b o t ?
13:35 “I made changes and something changed”
New T-shirt idea!
Quick nerdy semantics lesson for the 0.5 person that actually cares:
First person: Look trough the eyes of player (You are the protagonist, they do anything you do)
-> Your average shooter game
Second person: Standing behind player, looking over their shoulder (You are an equal to the protagonist, "sitting on their shoulders", they do anything you want to do)
-> Your average story game, you are technically not in full control of the character like in first person, but "more connected" compared to third person
Third person: Standing further behind player, looking past them (You guide the protagonist, they try to do anything you want do)
-> Your average fast paced action games, you guide the player to do certain things but they will pathfind/pick fighting moves/etc themselves to keep the pace up
Fourth person: Standing even further away, looking at a group of entities (things/players/npcs) (You guide the group, they try to do anything you want to do)
-> Your average RPG game where you have companions that follow the player & some basic RTS games
Fifth person: You hover above the area, guiding & observing the entity (thing/player/npc) thats watching & guiding the group(s)
-> Your average large scale RTS game where you control multiple units as a commander by guiding squad leaders, that themselves guide units
It goes further then this in writing (as there you can go "trough" multiple of these stages) but i'm pretty sure Fifth person is where it ends in gaming terminology.
So what you were doing there was 4th person, not second 😋
I feel like you could go incredibly high and detach a creation from your vehicle which will slowly float down while dropping a *TON* of bombs
I have an interesting idea for your mortar thingy scrapman. Why not duplicate the spinning bomb bay and make the build symmetrical. That way, at least you get 4 bombs hitting a general area, thus increasing its AOE and accuracy.
And it would be nice to see a challenge where you and the squad decide teams, (2 mortars vs 2 escapists.) The team on mortar turrets have to destroy those in vehicles... The last escapist standing is the winner for that round. Make 4 rounds of elimination and the person who survives the onslaught the longest will be deemed the victor.
I think you will have to make a small arena as the vehicles would be contained in the general aoe of the mortar turrets, thus creating a balanced enough game, literally decided by luck and timing. Should be fun and i look forward to seeing a lot of epic dramatic and cinematic slo-mo shots. you edit those amazingly well.
Love you and your content. Stay experimantal!
0:49 that was actually kind of Epic, yeah ScrapMan
Can you try with pistons instead? It will remove the aiming inconsistancies at the cost of range error, I think
That's what I'm saying
11:02 correct. first person is your character view, third person is drone above your character view and second person is the enemy/another character view.
you can have the whole mechanism rotate at the angle difference of the 2 sets of bombs in order to have all 4 launch in the same direction. you should optimize the spin by having it as a on/off button.
It's 1/4 th of a second per bomb drop with a 4 second reload time. I only know this because I already experimented with something similar to this and I've also figured out the "rolling thunder" drop (a continuous dropping of bombs onto the ground.) You put a 1 second delay between 1 bomb bay and another and you'll get 4 bombs drop out of the first and then the next 4 will drop out as if they're part of that same bomb bay as far as timing goes.
You need a third rotating servo to add just a little more speed. It's just a little slow, so speeding things up to make the second and fourth bombs fall in line with the first and third would be the most in sync. You're also throwing them to the side. The bombs do retain some modicum of parallel momentum to the direction the bomb bay is dropping them. So you had them dropping towards the support of your turret, they naturally had some momentum throwing them the "left" If you had the bomb bay facing out, you'd get more distance. It's the difference between how you had your first bomber set up and your new bomber setup. The bombs facing back means they're slightly thrown backwards. When they're facing downwards, they're slightly thrown down, which gives a better consistency when bombing. Instead of bombing behind you, you're bombing directly below you.
There's a thing you can do with cannons where you can put them on a piston that extends at max speed just before the cannon fires, and if the shot leaves the cannon while the piston is moving it goes WAY faster and further. I bet this would work for bombs and probably be way more consistent too.
I want to see an extreme bomber plane where it's basically the entire bottom of the plain and you set delays where you can bomb a whole mile of road
I made a vehicle based on your concept, called it "Ground-based Bomber". It works really well and shoots 16 bombs in siege mode that bombards stuff in front! Thanks for the idea!
15:04 Makes perfect sense if the bombs are physical objects and the launch of each bomb impacts the rotation even slightly, and we know the guns have recoil so why not the bombs?
As for the delay between the first set of bombs and second, perhaps you could add a third rotor which is dependant on some logic so that it is triggered say a quarter rotation beforer the first bombs are released and kick right to max power and a speed you'll have to determine so it eliminates as much of the difference in release point as possible?
Another angle you could try is a reverse recoil cannon, using pistons you could shot-putt the bomb launcher? Though that'd take real tight timing control to avoid blowing the arm up.
Miniature remote drone bomber? just a bomb dropper with some simple wings that you can toss like a paper plane over your target? Not the most reuseable solution though
The inconsistencies comes from the sensor. They are not constantly checking what's in front of them. They are polling X times per second and if the rotation is not perfectly synced to the sensor polling rate, it will have some variance in where exactly it notices the blocks. This is the same reason why it sometimes do not notice very fast moving object, especially if it small too. The spinning servos are not the ones causing the inconsistencies.
4:18 the first shot was about 90 degrees away from the second shot. the third shot was about 30 degrees away from the second shot. the fourth shot was about 90 degrees away from the third shot
*Trebuchet Challenges:*
[1] Pumpkin Chuckin' (distance)
[2] Balloon Popping (destroy pirate war balloons)
[3] Carpet Bombing (5 seconds to destroy a many chirpo statues as possible)
[4] Trebuchet Tank Free-for-all
LET'S GOOOOO!
Dang. Still hard to believe his whole background is just a green screen.
Scrapman finding out trebuchet are a to whom it may concern rather than 100% predictable 😂
The inconsistencies probably are coming from the physics simulation being at a limited rate.
Instead of being a continuous rotation, it advances in steps, and sometimes those steps align early with the sensor, resulting in a more vertical launch, other times they line up late and trigger a slightly more forward launch.
That explains why despite being inconsistent, it seems to alternate between a few "settings" : while there's theoretically an entire range of angles to trigger the sensor from, the stepping nature at this kind of speed results in only a few of those angles actually happening, and each angle is fairly consistent on its own.
If you could somehow get the sensor trigger angle to be more precise I bet the accuracy would be fairly consistent. Though that seems impossible with this system.
I have a cool idea you know how scrap man made a plane he had to reconnect to in a smaller plane he should do that but with two people and at the end they would race to see who could get in their side the fastest
I think a good change for the bomb bay is that if you tap the activation button it only releases 1 bomb but if you hold it for a little bit it drops 2 then 3 for a bit longer and 4 when you hold it all the way. And not like a charge function more like if you let go in the middle of it dropping the bombs it will cancel the bombs after it.
bro this guy always has good ideas
the new Cutter really like to zoom to Scrapmans Face .... :D :D
Really wanted scrapman to attach his first mortar cannon to the top of a plane, had a cluster bomb effect
My guess is that the inconsistencies are from the frame rate and timing. The arm is spinning so fast that it could be a degree or 2 off at or between frames in comparison to the previous launch.
It's one thing I thought about when you first made the bomber in the air campaign, trying to make the dauntless's bomb dropping system.
The sensor light was flashing inconsistently, maybe that had some play in the launch inconsistency.
Is there a reset timer on those detectors maybe? I havent used one yet so I dont know
I was having that exact idea! Awesome
Imagine launching a missile with a timed bomb dropper inside and explosive head for the last hit😂😂
Interesting experiment. ... and ScrapMan learned lesson 1 of this universe: " I changed something and something changed." 😉😁
I saw an idea on the AA v Bomber video of this
Remember this Scrapman; Mario DOES NOT say “it’s Morbin time” and we will not let you forget it.
If you watch the sensor, it can't keep up with the speed of the rotating arm, so it's triggering in different locations across the face of the sensor.
I actually tried this with rockets and it's interesting how they're affected. You can put them on the front and greatly increase the range, although the auto-aim will get messed up since it assumes standard speed. Or you can put it on the back of an airplane and have it act as a sort of artillery
Alternate experiment, recreate a german WWII V1 flying bomb. Give it a launch ramp but the only control you have yourself is a launch button. You'll need to figure out how to get the bomb to strike a target some distance away with no active control of the bomb other than what is set at launch.
had me worried i waited for the upload all day yesterday 😂
Instead of trying to get the bombs all in the same spot, lobbing them forward in pairs at a low and high arc could prove useful. More overall saturation of fire towards a target.
How about mounting the bomb bays so the ejection is straight out. May get more distance and maybe be more consistent.
Agreed, rotate the bomb bay so that the direction of release is the same as the direction of rotation.
Could you somehow use a repeating input for the bomber with a wavelength of the time it takes to rotate once and translation that impacts the angle of the arc for every rotation in trailmakers.
I wonder if Trailmakers has that ability in its logic. I know Scrap Mechanic does.
Jus had 2 thoughts, if the spinning arm had two spinning joints where one rotation happens where you have it and then halfway along the arm there is a second rotation point that is timed to complete a shorter rotation inbetween the first set of bombs firing and the second to try and force the bomb bay to face the same direction it was when the first bombs fired. My second thought its rotation atop a steering hinge that flips 90 degrees between sets of bombs firing.
10:58 - Yeah, that's second person.
When I first saw the thumbnail, I originally thought it was piston assisted, like with what people do to make cannons fly farther. You might re-visit this trying that method, and seeing if it works the same way as cannons. Maybe figure out how often the bombs drop, and have a piston extend at the same rate.
MM Idea... So each of you build a base with your seat in it. Then you guys have to lob the bombs to try to destroy the other's seat! Could be really fun!
Scrapman, I think you can try using a piston powered motion. You may ask: but the sequence of releases is long, how to do it? The answer is: pistons need to move only at the time of each release, and you can stack them so they're fast as possible. You can time it with logic, that way you can deal with inconsistency of drops issue. Also that way you can shoot bombs in consistent direction.
Edit: Use of logic gets rid of vibration issues for sensor triggering
Idk but you could possibly mess with the duration to achieve the consistency.
The game has been around for a couple of years. And only now we're concerned about safety features of our weapons in creation ahahahahah
ScrapMan : hello guys to day we are building an artillery piece to destroy the game.
next video:Today we re building a bomb throwing machine to make a bomb break the sound barrier.
Pumpkin Chuckin' comes to Trailmakers
great vidoe man
A relay race of 3v3 where each relay part is powered only by one weapon type recoil could be interesting especially if its a multiple lap relay where each person has to use 3 different vehicles each too
I think the bombs are launching off to the side because the bomb bays open from the side. And naturally they drop out and have some initial momentum to leave the bay. So they go to the left because that's where the opening is. If you rotated it to be vertical instead of horizontal it might go straight.
Also what if you had a system to activate on a delay after the first two in order to catch up to speed on the other bombs and hit near the same area? It would allow for a decent coverage to hit more often.
You can make a challenge with your friends (like Kosmos) on who can make the most target hits wins despite the very low accuracy
Then: makes a rocket launcher
Scrap man: nah I think I’m just gonna throw bombs
Maybe ask the devs about adding additional bomb bay settings, since you play with them every now and again?
one of the earliest ive been!
As for the inconsistencies a lot of it has to do with how long you hold the spin button before hitting the release bombs button .. the rpm of the bomb spinner isnt able to hit max speed some of the times , so to figure out if it is tye rpm or not make sure to hold the spin button each time the same amount of time , i would say a good 5 seconds each time you hold the spin botton to give it ample amount of time to reach max speed then hit the bomb release button , you may get more consistant and accurate hits
Me bombastic meme plays
This looks like an amazing feature for a plane or vehicle. Just throw around multiple bombs at a time to eliminate your enemies
On a bomber plane, just a helicopter servo with several rows of bomb droppers attacked, configured to fire sequentially would be interesting, first few would drop more or less normally as the servo starts to spin up slowly, and the last ones would get lobbed all over a wide area lol
The reason for the bombs flying off centre is because you have them dropping to the left, it was fine when they were facing the ground as that was their pushed trajectory but the bomb bays exert a little force when dropping the bombs making them fly off to the left. also the spinning servo acts like only the top spins so putting one on top of the other does not add the force, pairing it with the rotating servo would not be a bad idea.
Is setting the duration setting to like a quarter of a second functional in limiting how many come out?
Also, does the piston push glitch work?
My idea to make them all 4 being shot in the relative same area would be adding third servo that would move only a little bit after set delay. so it would launch 2 bombs, then the servo would move forward a little bit, putting the second relase of 2 bombs a bit forward making them launch into same direction, then you would need to fine tune it to perfection
I think how long it is spinning before to launch also has something to do with where it will land. If it spins around two or three times it will always land in one area but if it spins say five or more times it will always land in a different area.
1:00 - Explosive Trebuchet?
I'm pretty sure the bomb bay launches the bombs away from it(the speed is not a lot compared to the rest) so with the bom bays pointing to the right of the launcher you get the bombs a little to the right of where you pointing.
Dont forget a piston set at -100 goes insanely fast, trailmakers Negative speed is for some reason faster than positive speed
My man reinvented artillery
dont understand why the bomb bay was built to release sideways when it could of released inline, it would of helped a little bit keep things lined up
You probably could’ve done a 12 x 12 for the target instead of 9 x 9 for the circles but that’s just my guess and turns a bigger area to help with the bombs 15:19
I feel like the bombs going backwards are more precise
Bro the new airborne update is amazing!
could've just used a piston design that flicks forward as the bombs are deployed 4 times in a row with perfect timing, causing all 4 of them to fly perfectly straight with no instability
how about a bomber that has so many bomb bays it literally rains bombs. could be prreeetyy cooool
Also an idea would be Batte ship vs planes
So insanity is trying the same thing repeatedly expecting different results. Apparently the cause of insanity is trying the same thing repeatedly and getting different results.
idea for multiplayer: mobile bomb throwers and you need to hit various kinds of targets, 1 point for each bomb that hit a target.
Question... Why are you spinning it to begin with? Just place it sideways? and use a piston to fling it sideways? the bombs release when the spring/piston extends. flinging them forward?
At the end, this just turned into golf with bombs
Theoretically if xou know how long it takes to drop another bomb, you can calculate the how fast you need to spin it so the bom bay is roughly at same place. From that you can calculate the speed of spinning and it should work
Whats your background music at 16 min scrapman? Is that from catarinth?
I think I see the problem. You need a bigger target. 😁
With all these new parts maybe it is time for a new survival series.
Survival?
The only thing I can think of that would make it work for your idea. Scrap man is won the old carnival rides. But instead of the seat you put the pump is in place
Well, I have an idea.
You use 2 sets of bomb bays, on 2 arms making a "V" shape and the angle has to be calculated according to the release time between each bomb and how much speed the bomb bay has. 2 sets of bomb bay helps as each bay launches 4 and 2 of them goes together, thus you launch 4 bombs at the target and also the angle between the arms and the speed of rotation of the arms can help launch the other 4 bombs at the target.
Atleast, that is what I think will work. The thing is I don't play trailmakers and don't know how the parts work.
Yeah, I don't know. 🙄
If you watch the bombs releasing they come out with a some what random direction, they are affected by the movement of the throwing arm consistently. Though, because of the variability in direction at release that's why you're getting inconsistencies. Essentially, the bombs don't come out straight.
A helpful modification would be to put the spinning on an altitude sensor so it constantly spins.
Another bit of tweaking you could do is adjust the rotation speeds gradually to get a perfect rotation timed with the release sequence. I don't know what is causing it to release the way it is now, but I think it's possible to tweak it gradually and match it perfectly.