安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文(繁体中文)
日本語(日语)
한국어(韩语)
ไทย(泰语)
български(保加利亚语)
Čeština(捷克语)
Dansk(丹麦语)
Deutsch(德语)
English(英语)
Español-España(西班牙语 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希腊语)
Français(法语)
Italiano(意大利语)
Bahasa Indonesia(印度尼西亚语)
Magyar(匈牙利语)
Nederlands(荷兰语)
Norsk(挪威语)
Polski(波兰语)
Português(葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙)
Português-Brasil(葡萄牙语 - 巴西)
Română(罗马尼亚语)
Русский(俄语)
Suomi(芬兰语)
Svenska(瑞典语)
Türkçe(土耳其语)
Tiếng Việt(越南语)
Українська(乌克兰语)
报告翻译问题









I look forward to the new module! Keyframe animation is far easier than math based - it's why computer animators switched to that system decades ago!
It gets VERY complicated, VERY fast, even for someone with a math background like me.
The OP's graphs are an attempt to do some of this work; they show the displacement of x vs. t and y vs. t for a number of paths and velocities. It doesn't do much good to show the actual motion, though.
I mostly use it to move items in simple curves, or move two items at once on an object.
Say you want to direct a locomotive around a fixed radius curve of 10 meter radius. You will need two of these modules:
One for the x-direction (forward and back), and rotation.
One for the y-direction (up and down), no rotation required.
1-A becomes the start point of the locomotive. 1-B is the end point in the X direction and rotation of 90 degrees.
2-A is the start point of the locomotive.
2-B is the end point in the Y direction.
Delays and times to transit should be the same in both modules, or you'll get a parabola, not a circular curve.
This should allow the engine to transit the curve.