Winter Man
-
Posts
568 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Winter Man
-
-
This probably isn't a very widespread problem at the moment, but I imagine by the time the game is released fully it might be a little more significant. We could do with a UI scale slider in the graphics options to increase the size of everything non-world. At present, the UI is readable at 2560x1440, but at 4k it's quite a strain to see anything useful except the rocket itself.
edit: there is UI scaling, but it's severely limited
-
It would also come in handy for docking and landings.
Not really the kind of part I'm on about, I was thinking purely as an external part that would allow probes to perform observation experiments. If you could look through it though, I'd expect a little more by way of actually having to point it at what you want to observe, rather than just flying roughly over it as we do now.
-
Yeah, you'd have to rename it just 'observation' or something.
-
With the new contracts, specifically the 'observe' missions, I feel we could do with a camera module for our ships. Just something to allow a probe to fulfil the 'crew observation' role so you can send a lightweight ship to Eeloo or somewhere and not have to worry about returning it.
-
will they call the immortal rodent Mr Jingle ?
If they don't call the first one that I'll be horribly disappointed, more so than if immortality wasn't discovered at all.
-
I don't think the attitude of older people will revert to the juvenile, purely because they would then have a changed perspective on quite how much life they could live if they're careful.
-
The main problem now is that this type of high quality 3D printing has been developed for Earth environments, so we will either need to build gravity ships (which kind of defeats the point of building in space) or develop the technology further.
There was something a while back about using laser additive (this kind:
) with an opposing stream of gas so the workpiece stayed still in free space. Also, I live right next to Renishaw who did that bottle opener, they did a bike that was pretty awesome too. -
I understand what you think the problem is, but it's not there. The additive part would only be used to get the rough shape correct without needing a massive mold that would either need to be separately manufactured or lifted up in one piece, defeating the point. It would still be in the liquid phase for quite some time, allowing a homogeneous crystal to form.
-
I made a hopeful post below the one you quoted.
It's like I'd be saying that if I build my own laser at home - I'm able to build a laser cannon for the army.
Carefully.
And then you find that something else is needed.
Carefully.
You say that like your word is some kind of divine truth. Besides, I already know what your post says, and I agree that yes, that is how they are currently made. That's not up for dispute. I'm just saying they could be done with additive layer and milling, if you happened to be trying to build a mirror in space. It wouldn't be the best method on Earth by a long way, but different environments enable different techniques. Also, K2's point about the optical fibres would actually be way better.
-
That's actually a damn good point. That generally happens when people getting caught up trying to make something work, it gets completely forgotten that it may not even be needed at all!
-
Clueless post is clueless.
Helpful post is helpful. I actually do know how telescope mirrors are made (made a couple myself), and you could do it like that, provided you could keep the glass hot enough to set all at once (which being in a vacuum, it would) and had enough precision in the mill head.
But y'know, thanks for your insight and all.
-
3D printer with a mill head. Tolerance problem solved and bam, you've got telescopes.
-
If you're adding Mk.3 parts, I'd say a fourth would be a Mk.3 fuselage-sized docking port.
-
I think terraforming's beyond the scope of the game, but I would like to see large (rover-sized) permanent experiments like small greenhouses. Actually requiring a Kerbal to get out and collect samples from permanent experiments would even it out real nice, and having something that changes visually over time would look really good.
-
I think once contracts arrive the generic "science" will make a bit more sense. The Kerbals behind the scenes, be they physicists, chemists, biologists, or aromatherapists, decide they want X experiment from Y location. As in real life, you're just an engineer/pilot/mission controller, you do your job of getting the payload to where it needs to go, and doing what the scientists want it to, you don't really worry about the reasoning behind it.
That could be done with a generic 'contract payload' part though rather than experiments. If NASA launches a satellite for someone, NASA doesn't get the science from it, the company does. NASA gets the money for a launch, which is what KSP should do really. Contracts for money, science for parts.
-
I don't think this would be a good idea. Science is sketchy enough on how it works and the like of it and you want to make it harder to figure out? It's better to just embrace the KiSS concept instead of introducing fake balance because of people that know how to exploit the current science system.
Science is easy, that's the problem. It's not fake balance, it's just regular old balance. It makes research specific to future missions you want to carry out, rather than "just slap 40 goo containers on it and hope for the best".
-
At $1,000/kg and $1 million/launch, with the rated 1000 kg/launch payload capacity, you could launch more than thirty 1000-kg payloads to LEO on an Aquarius (with an average of 20 payloads reaching LEO) for less than HALF the $61.2 million cost of a Falcon 9 v1.1 launch, which can lift 13,150 kg to LEO in each launch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_9_v1.1)
Doesn't stack too well against the 9-R though, does it. $7m a launch for a 13 tonne payload blows Aquarius out the water.
-
I can't actually remember an instance where a KSP dev added a feature from here.
I can, back on the old forum around 2011ish when there were only a few hundred people signed up.
-
Best way to do it is with a several km-sized wire cage. Charge it up positive, positrons (and protons) will slow down but not enough to be deflected. Once they're in, they're in (kind of like the direct conversion system in a polywell, in illustration). It's just a matter of getting the voltage right. It may not be very energy efficient, but it's certainly a lot better than producing it via collisions or lasers.
-
I'd increase the ISP, but no vectoring. I can't remember exactly why, but I think it's to do with the free air stream messing with the aerospike effect. That said, it could just be locked out when in-atmosphere.
-
There's no way to research the mass of a part lower, or the efficiency of an engine better, etc.
Wait, what? You're talking about currently, in game, right? Because in real life that's exactly what rocket scientists are paid to do. I think it's a good idea, kind of fits in with economies of scale.
-
I think they're pretty pointless, they don't work as-is anyway.
-
Quick thought I just had, we have 'science' points at the moment, but nothing specific. Something I'd like to see is a couple of different sciences, so parts can require differing amounts of each to unlock. 3 of them for example, physics, chemistry and biology. Chemistry would be more useful for fuel storage, physics for engines, biology for hab modules, etc. and they would each be gathered in differing ways. Physics through physical data readings (temp, pressure, gravity, etc), chemistry through materials science (mat. bay, mystery goo) and biology by subjecting Kerbals to various environments and bringing them back alive.
-
Doing this would be a little like building a luxury resort in the mouth of an active volcano
Maybe if your resort were explosion proof, yeah. Sulphuric acid isn't *that* evil.
Increase the Scope of UI Scaling
in KSP1 Suggestions & Development Discussion
Posted
Oh yeah, just not under graphics. Still, it only works on the navball, staging and altimeter, but all other aspects (the contracts UI in the corner, every dialog box, all writing in and around the space centre) still aren't scaled. Edited the title to reflect that.