PunkyFickle

Members
  • Content Count

    100
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by PunkyFickle

  1. Salut et bienvenue sur les forums, Alors, effectivement, il n'y a pas de configuration automatique dans KSP, il faut les rentrer toi-même dans les paramètres du jeu. Dans contrôles, dans la colonne de droite (Analogue input sur l'image), y a ces boutons avec le signe "<". Après avoir correctement connecté ton joystick, tu clique sur un de ces boutons et le fais bouger dans la direction qui t'intéresse, ce qui devrait assigner la commande (comme pour une touche de clavier, en fait). Fais des tests en jeu pour voir si il ne faut pas inverser le sens et s'il faut bidouiller la sensibilité et la dead zone (zone morte?). Si ça ne marche pas (aha...), vérifie qu'il n'y a pas de souci au niveau de ton matériel. Est-ce que tes axes marchent sur d'autres jeux? Est-ce qu'il y a un driver particulier pour ton joystick si c'est un truc un peu avancé? Si oui, est-ce qu'il est à jour? Sinon (?), tu ne perds rien à aller faire une petite calibration dans ton Panneau de configuration/Matériel et son/Appareils et imprimantes (bêtement traduit de l'anglais, je me goure peut-être, mais tu trouveras bien), tu trouves ton joystick (icône de manette), clique droit, Propriétés, Paramètres de la manette, Propriétés, Paramètres et calibration. Et tu fais la petite gymnastique comme on te le demande. Essaye déjà tout ça, si ça ne marche pas, reviens ici, on essaiera de creuser un peu.
  2. Don't know if it already is the case, but you should lower the thrust to close to the minimum. Btw it would indeed help @Triop sticking to the ground and avoid flipping...
  3. Absolument. En termes de trajectoires orbitales, tu rencontres les mêmes problèmes dans la réalité que dans le jeu (avec quelques bonus), et les solutions sont les mêmes. Comme le transfert d'Hohmann est la façon de faire la plus économique, c'est celle que l'on rencontre le plus souvent. Mais si tu veux aller plus vite, comme ça a été le cas pour Pathfinder ou plus lentement, comme Mars Global Surveyor, il te faudra plus de carburant (tu t'éloigne de la zone bleue sur l'axe vertical dans le graphe du calculateur; voir mon post au dessus). Si tu veux un peu plus de détail sur la théorie de ce qui est fait dans la réalité, je te conseille cette page assez facile à lire d'un chercheur de l'IPGP (en français). Et si tu ne me crois qu'à moitié, voici un calculateur de la NASA pour Mars sur le modèle duquel celui que je t'ai donné plus tôt a été fait.
  4. I don't have much credit; the picture is on the wikipedia page of Curiosity. I don't really see races being that exiting due to the difference in top speed, endurance contests, however...
  5. Yes, if your controller works through Directinput, which is likely the case if you can play other games, KSP will work. You just have to map your controls. Check if it shows as a game controller in Control Panel\Hardware and sound\Devices and Printers. (While you are here, you might want to calibrate it : right click and Properties, Game controller settings, Properties, Settings and Calibrate.) Then just launch KSP and set your controls in the settings. About Linux, Taniwha just released an apparently (didn't test, don't run linux) rather decent input API.
  6. The Easter egg definitely belongs to Curiosity (the distinctly shaped "ChemCam", see below) and I didn't know that "late" could refer to someone no longer alive and thus interpreted it as "the latest rover" or something like that. So my bad on this end. Regarding a precisely recreated model mod, I am afraid I don't have anything up my sleeve for you, but there are a couple of what looks like a really decent stock recreations on KerbalX : https://kerbalx.com/CoyoteFoxtrot/SpiritOpportunity-Rover-+-Delta-II.
  7. If we ever engineer a new vehicle for that trip again, we should remember when setting the center of mass etc to consider that most of the distance covered would be with about half of the parts left.
  8. The easter egg is Curiosity's ChemCam instrument. If that is the rover you are referring to ("late Oppy"), there is this one that you find quite easily on google : If you seek a bit of fun beyond accurate recreation, there is a really well made and fun to play ChemCam within in Tarsier Space Technology. It adds experiment and you get to actually aim the cam. (And there also are decently awesome telescopes, btw)
  9. Well, according to the wiki (the biology section is particularly hilarious, btw), a Kerbal is 0,75 m tall and Curiosity is around the size of a car : Wikipedia : So that's actually rather close to reality : Standard height for the other stuff measured in the picture.
  10. Is that supposed to be a choreography or is it having a stroke and begging for help?
  11. You have the 1.6.0.9 version (most likely). The VERSION file meant for AVC to do its job was not updated for that version, but it will be in the next one. Source : Paul Kingtiger As for why it didn't show before, that is likely related to your use of either CKAN or AVC, as USii wasn't modified last week as far as I know.
  12. The use of Trajectories is quite limited in my experience. It takes into account the shape of your craft, so the prediction is only accurate after you decouple that last stage, and thus don't have much control to actually modify your trajectory anymore... There is an option to set your incidence factor, by the way, but the trick is to actually maintain it thorough your flight... That said, you can indeed use it to practice and figure out empirical rules.
  13. Landed my tiny early career lander on the Mun running out of fuel exactly 5 meters above the ground! Why is the FAR window open? Just like that, I forgot, nothing to do with a staged landing on Kerbin, trust me. Oh, and by the way, [x]Science "log visual observation from the Mun Highlands" is a lie. Don't bother bringing a telescope up there.
  14. Rather ironical to post that on the day of Opportunity's official end of mission, by the way.
  15. Well, subassemblies are not necessarily payloads. They can be SRBs with decoupler, nosecone, etc and you definitely wouldn't want that to be on top of your staging list. Checking and sorting your staging before launch is something you (should) do systematically before pressing the launch button anyway. And a little mess due to using subassemblies is a good incentive for you to double check your staging.
  16. @Hotel26 Like that? We should check with another projection, but it seems like it adds quite a bit of distance... And there are bridges to be added. As for the scenery improvement, someone should fly there to compare with the planned route.
  17. I do agree about rewarding for planning and no random setbacks, but I don't think that entirely predetermined weather is the answer by itself. The seed idea is good if you really want to reproduce the conditions you had to go through in a precedent game, but the most entertaining way to have the player plan ahead would be to introduce a meteorological and climatological researches facility that gives you weather forecast and that you can upgrade both to give you forecast further ahead in time and for other planets.
  18. Why isn't that a thing in stock, already? I like your ideas, but random events and part failures in stock is very unlikely, like @OHara said. Constant/regular wind or storms seem more realistically implementable, on the other hand. I really like the idea of seasons, would the tilted axis be a thing.
  19. Every time I start a new career, I inevitably end up finding a new awesome mod that-I-can't-play-without-how-don't-I-know-about-that-one-yet, which makes me wonder wether I should restart because it makes no sense to continue with suddenly this feature or act like nothing happened and regret it for the rest of the game. So today is the day I take the bull by the horns and ask forum members to perform their very favourite activity : giving mod recommendations. The aim here is to find mods that add a feeling of progression and challenge by increasing the level of "realism" of a career oriented game. When I say "realism" I don't mean that I want to go full RSS with IVA only and only recreations of real parts. I want to stick with the wacky and lovely Kerbal style as much as possible, but I would like to scale up the difficulty of my careers. My other objective is to to feel a form of progression in my game. In vanilla(ish), everything is kind of granted if you know the ropes, and Jool moons are next door as soon as you reach tier 4 tech. My Kerbals and me need to grind and sweat to get there, and manned interplanetary travel should be an endgame thing, thanks to technological or logistical constraints, for example. A few constraints : I try to keep my number of mods quite low not to hinder my performances too much, so I sometimes ditch mods that fit my requirements, but that I don't judge essential enough (ResearchBodies, for example). I also fear for compatibility bugs. So I would rather stick to mods last edited in 2018 at least and tend to avoid notorious incompatibilities. I try to keep thing modular and avoid big overhauls in case something go wrong on one aspect only (I went for Kerbal Health and TACLS rather than Kerbalism, for example). Lastly, you will notice that I avoided part breaking mods. First because I want failures to be my own fault, second, because I would like not to deal with the frustration of a random malfunction and the effect it might have on my motivation to play the game ("Hah! I want more challenge, he said!"). Mods that help to alleviate the difficulty in a balanced/"realistic" manner (DeepFreeze(Balanced because very high tech), rotating habitat, etc) are welcome too. Again, I try to stick to stockalike parts and not to venture too far from the Kerbal way of life®. Here are some examples of mods I already have installed and that fill those roles : Remotetech FAR Deadly Reentry RealChute SCANSat Kerbal Health TAC Life Support Kerbal Construct Time (with KRASH & ScrapYard) Final Frontier Community Tech Tree Contract packs (the bread and butter of progression) : GAP Exploration Plus Anomaly Surveyor Bases and Station ... Here's the full list of my installed mods, in case I missed anything :
  20. I don't quite know how advanced the work is on fixing the bug where parts with some annoying unresetable modules don't recover (fairings and RealChute, as far as I've noticed), but a I imagine rather simple workaround would be to consider those parts as consumables that cannot be recovered. Just tell the player that the parachute is a single use device and that the fairings literally vanished into thin air upon opening. Don't know how feasible it would be, though, but I image that it is less trouble than finding and implementing a way to reset those modules and doesn't "break the immersion" by asking the player to edit the module himself.
  21. Good job! I won't be testing it as I'm only running Widows for now, but the number of supported inputs and clever features as well as the integration to the game's framework are encouraging signs. There are a few typos in your post, by the way. You should proofread it (again).
  22. Alors, plusieurs choses : D'abord, la configuration du système planétaire de KSP et du système solaire sont similaires mais assez différents. Tu ne feras en général pas exactement la même chose que dans la réalité (tu peux envoyer une sonde vers Duna, mais tu n'auras pas le même temps de trajet optimal ou le même différentiel de vitesse (deltav) pour ton transfert que de la Terre vers Mars, par exemple). Quoiqu'il en soit, les satellites et autres missions vers Mars utilisent toutes un transfert d'Hohmann (selon un rapide tour des sites internet des agences spatiales, mais j'ai pu rater quelque chose, je ne suis pas super au fait de tout ce qu'il se fait), c'est à dire un transfert qui minimise le coût en deltav, c'est à dire en carburant, c'est à dire en carburant et en fusées qu'il faut pour amener le premier carburant en orbite, et ça, ça monte très très vite. C'est ce transfert d'Hohmann que tu trouve en utilisant le calculateur dont on a parlé. Cela dit, disons que tu prendras le temps que tu veux tant que tu pourras te le permettre, mais que pour réduire ton temps de voyage, il va falloir passer au delà des paramètres optimaux et casser la tirelire. Pour réduire ton temps de transfert, comme tu es déjà à l'optimum au niveau de l'angle de phase au départ, il va falloir aller plus vite pendant le transfert. Et plus tu veux aller vite, plus il faudra accélérer en partant (dépenser du deltav) et plus tu vas devoir décélérer en arrivant pour te mettre en orbite, donc plus tu vas devoir dépenser de carburant des deux cotés et qui dit plus de carburant en orbite... Pour trouver une date où on restera à un coût raisonnable, notre super calculateur de fenêtre de transfert est encore là pour nous aider : Je veux partir pour un voyage de 180 jours; je cherche 180 en ordonnée, je trouve le point où le coût du transfert est minimal, ce qui me donne ma date de départ, mon angle d'éjection, mon inclination, le deltav que ça va me couter, etc. Je te laisse retrouver tout ça par toi-même. Et n'oublie pas que tu gagneras à utiliser correctement Ike en arrivant pour décélérer (en passant devant). En ce qui concerne la Mun et Minmus, tu ne gagneras pas grand chose en termes de deltav (quelques dizaines de m/s, maximum) et tu te compliqueras énormément la vie pour trouver la bonne fenêtre de transfert. Enfin, peut-être que là dessus @Aodhan pourra t'aider; c'est quelque chose que je ne fais jamais. Si tu tiens vraiment à reproduire la réalité, tu peux jouer avec le mod Real Solar System, qui remplace les planètes du jeu avec celle du Système Solaire, mais ça devient beaucoup plus dur, parce que les planètes, la Terre notamment sont nettement plus grande (et donc plus massive) que dans le jeu, donc il faut construire des fusées nettement plus puissantes et grandes pour mettre en orbite la même charge et dépenser plus de deltav un peu partout.
  23. Glad to hear that! Try to check for updates of your drivers and your OS every once in a while as a regular maintenance of your system. On that regard, you can also regularly run a "cleaning" software, such as CCleaner to remove stuff that might indure your PC's performances. Don't forget to mark the thread as solved (or answered or whatever) in case anyone has the same problem in the future.