Not signed in (Sign In)

Discussion Tag Cloud

Categories

Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

    •  
      CommentAuthorBolt789
    • CommentTimeApr 15th 2014
     
    And to think we thought Vekoma's SLC restraints were a problem...
  1.  
    Uh, yeah, never-mind about that, I don't want to ride it anymore.
    •  
      CommentAuthorllamaboy
    • CommentTimeApr 15th 2014
     
    I'd ride it once. Just so I could say I did it.
    • CommentAuthorJAKool
    • CommentTimeApr 15th 2014
     
    The fabric is colored brown because of all the dried head blood from past unfortunate riders.
    •  
      CommentAuthorXpress
    • CommentTimeApr 15th 2014
     
    You guys forget that duct tape binds the universe together.
    •  
      CommentAuthorParadox
    • CommentTimeApr 16th 2014
     
    ^Made in the Walmart factories.
  2.  

    I think that actually looks more comfortable than my bed.

  3.  

    The best sidewinder in the world? I think not...
  4.  
    Posted By: HZGarfield

    My god, that transition is egregious; imagine the pain going through that so called, "inversion"...
    •  
      CommentAuthorKingRCT3
    • CommentTimeApr 16th 2014
     
    That transition is so awful it has been posted TWICE in the WTF thread! :p (see previous page)
    • CommentAuthorReal
    • CommentTimeApr 16th 2014
     
    Walmart probably mainly sells duck brand DUCT tape and its worthless.

    You need 3m or a good HVAC brand of DUCT tape that doesnt fall apart in days.
    •  
      CommentAuthorBolt789
    • CommentTimeApr 16th 2014 edited
     
    At home sick-->Boredom-->playing Coaster Crazy on my iPod-->level of game requires completion of barely-constructed launched Vekoma-SLC-style ride-->decided to make own version of the infamous immelman in question:



    I also made another one which the train enters going the other direction:


    Now, I wonder why my coaster's final score never came close to making it onto the online leaderboards...
    •  
      CommentAuthorKingRCT3
    • CommentTimeApr 27th 2014 edited
     
    It's not "WTF" but how would you rate these elements if they were on a coaster uploaded to the exchange?


    Lack of heartline. -5 points.


    Weird supports on the left. Mack would never do that.


    Beware of the lateral g's..!


    Undersupported.


    Smooth that thing, dammit!

    A lot more pictures here. It was part of the awesome CoastersWorld.fr meeting! We were over 50, and it was amazing! We had an ERT on Alpina, went to the backstage areas, rode the Mack indoor coaster with the lights on... Wow, we really had a great day.
    • CommentAuthorSohcahtoa
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2014
     
    Most of the pictures you posted are just Photobucket placeholders saying that the person moved or deleted the image. The link to the forum you posted also requires a login. The only thing that appeared was the first image of a blue Intamin track.
    •  
      CommentAuthorParadox
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2014 edited
     
    ^It is a mack. Look at the connectors. And yea only the first photo is working.
  5.  
    That last picture is a neat shot. Really strange shaping. It's like Mack's equivalent to Intamin's finish to the Mega-Lites. Their's looks so screwed up.
  6.  
    ^It makes me appreciate Intamins godly shaping.
    • CommentAuthorbigjoe97
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2014
     
    Sometimes when I build rides I pretend to not heartline them because it looks cool

    that was completely irrelevant

    I do love Intamin/Mack shaping, though - the combination of seemingly unheartlined areas with obviously heartlined sections of track is very interesting.
    •  
      CommentAuthorKingRCT3
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2014 edited
     
    Oh I thought I deleted that post because the images weren't working, my bad. Thanks Sohcah, but it's not even a Photobucket problem, I only forget to put the first " in the html link... :x Repaired.
    I agree everyone should use Imgur instead of Photobucket, though, but those aren't my pics.

    Posted By: SohcahtoaThe link to the forum you posted also requires a login.

    Shout, I totally forgot about that. Anyways I posted the most interesting pics here. The others are from the meeting.

    Back to Alpina, it really rides well. Seems strange from outside but everything is fine once onboard. Only the last transition has a little jerk in it when it becomes straight again. By the way, this coaster was designed by Buro Stengel.
    • CommentAuthorAyTrane
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2014
     
    Posted By: KingRCT3Back to Alpina... By the way, this coaster was designed by Buro Stengel.


    Where did you hear that?
    •  
      CommentAuthorKingRCT3
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2014
     
    In this interview, Rodolphe Gélis said that the final design was made by Stengel.
    •  
      CommentAuthorXpress
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2014
     
    Lack of heartline: What is there is not always seen. Manufacturers might also purposely design certain areas without a heartline to give a certain ride effect, whether it be what the riders feel or perhaps to help with the flow.

    Weird supports: What's so weird about it? Manufacturers will support a ride however it needs to be supported with cost efficiency and structural integrity. Not every support has to be pretty, remember, their job is to keep the ride from collapsing.

    Lateral G's: Your point again here? I do recall some highly rated Intamins to have laterals. Just because it's made of steel doesn't mean you have to eliminate all lateral movement. Plus there's no evidence that there are laterals at that particular point.

    Under supported: Says who? You? What makes you think it's under supported?

    Smoothing: Who says it doesn't ride smooth? smooth to you is rough to others and visa versa.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAJClarke0912
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2014 edited
     
    Posted By: XpressWeird supports: What's so weird about it?

    Well, they look weird, that's why. We're not saying they're dysfunctional, it's just really odd and we haven't seen much like that before.



    That first picture is interesting because it reminds me of something I did on Aftermath. I basically made the Intamin Mega-Lite turning hill, except I didn't really unbank it properly so it looked a lot like Mack's rendition. It just holds you there at the bank and follows through.

    Concerning the "Lateral G's" picture, I think the shaping looks excellent through there. It definitely has Mack flavors that you can see toward the rear-end of the element, where the FVD style of the element is more noticeable to what Intamins would have. I'm kind-of interested in seeing how it would ride in real life and how that compares to Intamins. It looks like it would have a more graceful finish.

    That last picture is still super screwed up to me lol. The Intamins already had a weird end to their rides, but at least they finished the bank before the hill's completion into the brakes. This Mack one looks like somebody just put some hill forces in Newton and threw the center, tension, and any other roll customization out the window. And then kinked the lats at the end.

    I suddenly want to ride that now, just to see how these elements feel. Alpina looked like weaker rendition of Piraten/Kawasemi, but if it's loaded with that kind of wacky shaping it could be quite an interesting ride!
    •  
      CommentAuthorskyasaurus
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2014
     
    i think the heartline is there and follows pretty clearly. its a convex curve so no matter how it banks the banking will be outward. it just looks straight because complex 3D shape in 2D camera output.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAJClarke0912
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2014 edited
     
    Yeah, I feel like everyone seems to think the manufacturers change the heartline to accommodate new shapes except for rare cases. I don't think it's this as much as it is just "detailed" shaping. Lateral G control, vertical G control, etc. You can get these shapes easily in FVD/Newton if you know what you're doing.
    •  
      CommentAuthorKingRCT3
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2014
     
    Xpress, I agree with your point of view, it was just to make fun of the comments you can hear on the exchange! ;)
    • CommentAuthorSohcahtoa
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2014
     
    Yeah, I don't think that "undersupported" section looks undersupported at all. If it's a zero-g hill, then the track doesn't need to support the weight of the train, only the weight of itself. Besides, in a arch like that, the track itself can handle its own weight pretty well, similar to the St. Louis Gateway Arch, which is 600 feet wide and 600 feet tall, but has no extra supports.
    •  
      CommentAuthorKingRCT3
    • CommentTimeApr 28th 2014
     
    Of course, once again, all these points are just mentioned because it looks weird at first glance and are usually reported on NL tracks, but those are fully justified. :)
    •  
      CommentAuthorHZGarfield
    • CommentTimeMay 2nd 2014
     
    Here is the former version of that odd shaped Sidewinder
    •  
      CommentAuthorbaadrix
    • CommentTimeMay 3rd 2014
     
    Can't believe I rode this one (offride video here) yesterday and today. If you think Vekoma is rough then you should try this one. It's far more enjoyable in the back row since you aren't pushed through the inversion, the final turn is headbanging at its finest, though - my ears hurt over more than one hour.
    • CommentAuthorSohcahtoa
    • CommentTimeMay 5th 2014
     
    Posted By: KingRCT3Of course, once again, all these points are just mentioned because it looks weird at first glance and are usually reported on NL tracks, but those are fully justified. :)


    Ah, I see your point now. You're not saying "I think ____ is wrong with this ride", but rather, if such a ride were to be uploaded to the Exchange, people would take points off for those "issues", despite them not really being issues.

    For example, I imagine if someone were to upload a coaster similar to Mystery Mine at Dollywood, people would give low Technical scores with claims that the transitions would break your neck.

    The first time I ever saw the Smiler @ Alton Towers, I actually thought to myself, "If this were to get uploaded to NLEX, people would give it a 5 on Technical and complain about the bizarre shaping of the elements, especially the rolls at the end."

    Or if someone made a B&M Inverted with an overbank before Silver Bullet @ Knott's Berry Farm was created, people would be like "I took off points because B&M doesn't do overbanks on inverted coasters." Hell, I could STILL see some people doing that.

    Sometimes, I feel like innovation on new elements is actively discouraged. I had an idea for a pair of inversions similar to a cobra roll, but I can't help but think that if I used it in one of my creations, I'd get low scores with people saying "Learn how to make a cobra roll! Your shaping is WAY off!" despite the fact that I wasn't trying to make a cobra roll, I was going for something completely different!

    Maybe I'm just still sore about a rating on one of my coasters, where someone told me I designed my coaster wrong simply because I didn't emulate the Intamin style.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAJClarke0912
    • CommentTimeMay 5th 2014 edited
     
    Posted By: SohcahtoaThe first time I ever saw the Smiler @ Alton Towers, I actually thought to myself, "If this were to get uploaded to NLEX, people would give it a 5 on Technical and complain about the bizarre shaping of the elements, especially the rolls at the end."

    Or if someone made a B&M Inverted with an overbank before Silver Bullet @ Knott's Berry Farm was created, people would be like "I took off points because B&M doesn't do overbanks on inverted coasters." Hell, I could STILL see some people doing that.

    There are people that rate like this, and for that, I'd ignore them. Nobody can tell you what elements should and shouldn't be in a B&M inverted coaster. I could very much see them doing that in a future ride.

    The difference for most people is how well it is executed. A lot of the more critical raters like basing their designs off of "alternate reality". Some of those people make rides that bridge design types in a unique form (DC sometimes does this) into something believable for the year they give it. But it doesn't always have to be a merging of styles - it can just be a logically executed element.

    Also, let me know when you make a really good recreation of Mystery Mine's roll. There's cool stuff happening in it that would make it a complicated element to create!

    For a perfect technical score, though, it has to go above that. It must be detailed, pristinely-crafted, ornate. So now as you're reading this, you're probably saying "wow you have high expectations dude" and that's not the case. Everyone seems to get upset when they don't get that 9+ technical rating. The fact of the matter is that, statistically speaking, hardly anyone should get that high of a rating. Otherwise, a 9.0 would actually mean "average".

    Elite technical scores are typically reserved to those who put loads of time, effort, research, and revisions into their elements. Do you have to do this too? Not if you don't want to. I sure as hell don't, and that's why none of my rides have broken past the 8.00-8.99 range. And that's perfectly okay. Everyone seems to think that rates below and 8.00 means "I didn't like it". Technical is by nature not an "enjoyment" rating, it's a technical one. I try to rate accurately, that's it. The other two ratings are more telling of the fun factor. And even then, non-omgamazing rates does not equal "I didn't like this".

    I encourage everyone to re-read this post. Ratings are simply a means of ranking.
    •  
      CommentAuthorDC High Heat
    • CommentTimeMay 5th 2014 edited
     
    I love it when I don't have to chime in on a discussion because someone already discussed everything I would've said, and quite elegantly too. Thanks AJ.

    But I'll phrase it in another way just to add on lol...

    If you want to do something unique for the time, sweet...your originality score will reflect that.

    Do you want a high technical score to go with it? Make me believe it.
    • CommentAuthorSohcahtoa
    • CommentTimeMay 5th 2014 edited
     
    Certainly. Technical SHOULD be smoothness of the track, adequate supports, passing e-stop testing, properly working transfer table, adequate clearance space, proper blocking, reasonable G-forces, etc. It should NOT be overall enjoyment of the track or whether you adhered to the style used by the track style you chose and stuck with elements typically used by that track manufacturer unless you stated in your description that your ride is intended to be a specific style. IE, just because I use the Intamin track and its over 300 feet doesn't mean I should lose points because the drop is more like a B&M shape, rather than the wide arc seen on Millennium Force or Intimidator 305 unless I specifically said the track is intended to be an Intamin-style Giga coaster.

    If I were to make a coaster over 300 feet and used B&M track, some raters would remove Technical points with the comment "B&M doesn't make giga-coasters." This is bullcrap.

    I want to make an element similar to a cobra roll, except that you exit the turn going at a right-angle to your entry. Like this (Click the image for the full size):



    (Note that this is a rough sketch I did in about 3 minutes, so the shaping could certainly be improved with some more time tweaking it)

    If I were to put that in a track, no matter how perfectly I executed it, I'd get people taking Technical points off for having what in their mind is a horribly shaped cobra roll. This is what I mean when I claim that raters are actively discouraging innovation.
    • CommentAuthorbigjoe97
    • CommentTimeMay 5th 2014
     
    On the other hand, though, there is a limit to that. If I made a perfectly style-accurate B&M hyper, but I used Intamin track with Morgan woody trains, I'd expect to get downrated for it.
    • CommentAuthorBrawly
    • CommentTimeMay 5th 2014 edited
     
    I agree. I get people telling me all the time that my shaping "doesn't look right" for a certain manufacturer. However, it's not impossible that that certain manufacturer will come out and use that shaping on a future ride, so why can't I? For example, if I were to make an RMC with a loop, properly support it to compensate for forces, and make it look presentable, then I should be able to do so without being chewed out. I mean, they went from putting overbanks on "woodies" to a dive loop on Goliath, so why not? Same goes with other companies. If somebody made a Norwegian loop prior to Speed Monster, I'm sure they'd get some sort of retort, same goes with a Hydra-style cobra roll on a B&M prior to Hydra. There's tons of examples.

    Sohcahtoa (Nice name btw), that element is looking nice so far; properly executed and maybe a bit of tweaking and I would have no problem with that on a B&M.

    Edit: Of course all of these elements would have to pass force and clearance tests as well, as well as be 'believable'. My main point is that nothing is impossible, as we've certainly seen in the last few years with B&M making elements we've never seen before (I mean what the hell is a Demonic Knot?), and RMC just totally re-inventing the wheel.
    • CommentAuthorSohcahtoa
    • CommentTimeMay 5th 2014
     
    Hydra's cobra roll for reference: http://rcdb.com/2528.htm#p=12473
  7.  
    Without mentioning any names (so just speaking in general here)...in my opinion, there are a lot of people who *think* they're making something believable and high quality when they're really not. Sometimes people just don't know how to achieve that, and it may come with time/experience. There's nothing at all wrong with that, everyone learns as they go. Nobody starts being the best and most don't end up getting there either. It's not enough to just pull off one element well though, the rest of the track has to be believable too...if I see a whole track that has realistic and interesting details and consistent quality, I'd be way more inclined to believe in their vision of some unusual elements. If I see a track that's either mostly controlled by the medium with which it was constructed or otherwise haphazardly designed, I will certainly not think the shaping of a new element is completely intentional, and no amount of complaining will change my mind lol.
    •  
      CommentAuthorParadox
    • CommentTimeMay 5th 2014
     
    •  
      CommentAuthorAJClarke0912
    • CommentTimeMay 6th 2014 edited
     
    Posted By: DC High Heata track that's either mostly controlled by the medium with which it was constructed or otherwise haphazardly designed

    This is the biggest point to remember.

    Posted By: SohcahtoaIf I were to put that in a track, no matter how perfectly I executed it, I'd get people taking Technical points off for having what in their mind is a horribly shaped cobra roll. This is what I mean when I claim that raters are actively discouraging innovation.

    If you executed it really well, a good rater would likely give you more points.

    I think one unique rating deserves to be mentioned that showcases this well: DC's rate on LeFlo's "Blind Twister". DC had no idea that this was actually based off a current Gerstlauer during his initial impressions - he thought LeFlo just did a really different style from a normal Gerstlauer. However, LeFlo did it extremely well. typical - we need him back :( DC explains that he'd have given even higher Originality marks if that particular ride style wasn't being built, but instead deducted a tad to adjust. Yet despite all the [seemingly] new originality, there was still a brilliant Technical score.

    Also cb0688. That's one guy that put out fresh stuff consistently in NL1 and got both good T and O scores. I slightly envy him.

    Just throwing that out there. I agree with some parts yet challenge other parts of your post. In the end, I've learned over the years that there's more than meets the eye. Good raters and critics must account for this - solely to rank rides. Nothing more, nothing less.



    Oh, and that Chinese SkyLoop doesn't look absolutely horrible. That's new! And it's not bad that you get an extra rollback over the Maurer-Sohne version. :)
    • CommentAuthorsprog
    • CommentTimeMay 6th 2014
     
    That Chinese Skyloop looks like it rides surprisingly well, but I suppose it's pretty hard to screw up a fairly simple track. I did think structurally the roll looked really weak, but checking it alongside an actual skyloop it's pretty much identical - I didn't realise how terrifyingly weak maurer's looked until now!
  8.  
    Posted By: sprogbut I suppose it's pretty hard to screw up a fairly simple track

    I think this is pretty much it right here. lol

    No turns, no problem.
    •  
      CommentAuthorbaadrix
    • CommentTimeMay 6th 2014 edited
     
    Posted By: AJClarke0912And it's not bad that you get an extra rollback over the Maurer-Sohne version.
    Maybe I misunderstand you, but the train on Sky Wheel also rolls back once before it gets caught in the brakes, so ... exact copy minus minor (or major?) shaping issues - the roll on the rip-off doesn't look right. Compare:


    Screenshot from the TPR video


    Screenshot from the Sharp Productions video
    • CommentAuthorJAKool
    • CommentTimeMay 7th 2014
     
    Part of that shaping could be TPR's wider fisheye lens, maybe compare the Chinese one to another TPR video?
  9.  
    Oh, looks like I'm wrong again lol. I think the only SkyLoop POV I actually cared to watch was Abismo, and it didn't roll back again because it had the extended layout.

    Yeah I knew the heartline roll looked pretty nasty in the China version, but hey, it's not a turn! And it's certainly not this mofo. Word of mouth says the China version isn't bad. Which means "fantastic" in Chinese.
    • CommentAuthorsprog
    • CommentTimeMay 7th 2014
     
    ^^ It could also be the position of the GoPro, even moving it up and down a cm or so can wildly vary the distortion of objects in the shot.
    •  
      CommentAuthorHZGarfield
    • CommentTimeMay 7th 2014 edited
     
    There is a obvious bump when travel through the bent twist


    TPR‘s Skyloop(X Coaster at Magic Springs)

    • CommentAuthorAyTrane
    • CommentTimeMay 7th 2014
     
    ^Which occurs at a track joint. I am assuming the fabrication company didn't account for the ~1' of steel that couldn't be rolled by the machine, so the track is effectively flat on both sides of the joint. Miler is pretty notorious for this.
    •  
      CommentAuthorHZGarfield
    • CommentTimeMay 7th 2014
     
    Bird Nest on newly opened Blue Fire Clone at Qihe Happy World(Euro Park Qihe)

  10.  
    Hah. Probably not occupied now =S