Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


2,611 Excellent

Profile Information

  • About me
    Sr. Spacecraft Engineer
  • Location
    Nottingham UK

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I have seen this mentioned elsewhere, but can't find it now, so... The moving ring indicators on the SoI boundary are a great idea, but can be a bit difficult to distiguish. I would suggest changing the Entry to have the rings moving inwards and the Exit moving outwards. Maybe also distinguish them more clearly by changing the colour or shape of one of them or by adding radial lines etc.
  2. This sums up my thoughts on this too. The robotics parts (hinges, pistons and servos etc.) added a lot of useful options (just a shame they were so darned glitchy at times). But, whilst I acknowledge that many really enjoyed using them, the detail and fiddliness of the propellers was just out of scope IMO.
  3. I'm essentially just 'mucking about' for now. Doing simple self contained 'non-infrastructure' type missions. Partly to just learn and familiarise myself with it. And also because I have to assume anything I do may have a limited lifespan due to bugs or changes in future patches and updates.
  4. I'm enjoying it still, and sending probes out to take a peek at the Planets and Moons. Lack of gameplay options isn't a major hurdle, but that and bugs means I know I'll want to start exploring 'properly' once thing improve.
  5. Thanks for your help and advice everyone. I think my best plan is 'new build' before too long, and just plod along with what I have until I do it. The game runs 'ok' in space, but the 'novelty' of 3FPS when launching things or flying around Kerbin is wearing a bit thin now .
  6. Would it be possible to include a Kerbal's name on the Helmet? (The "Kerman" bit could be omitted of course.
  7. Thanks , very much appreciated. My PSU is... Sea Sonic SS-550HT Active PFC F3. As for budget it depends really on what's compatible and available at what prices. Don't want to spend an awful lot if I'm thinking of upgrading the lot in a a year or two, but if a GPU upgrade is viable and keeps me going for longer then I can consider. Probably looking at around £500 absolute max. New PC at recommended specs is around £1700 minimum. RTX 3080 is about half that (is it even compatible), but if I'm spending that much on GPU alone then why risk any compatibility issues anyway? RTX 3050 around £300, which looks interesting. Is my basic system good enough to warrant a reasonable GPU upgrade? Gut feeling is probably, but I'm no expert.
  8. A very minor issue, but confusing all the same. Whenever Time Warp reduces due to approaching the selected point on the orbit or a manoeuvre node the warning always says '. . Due to Proximity to Celestial Body' and not the actual reason (approaching manoeuvre or selected 'warp to' point etc).
  9. Currently the labels in the VAB 'Part Picker' only give a single size/format indicator... XS, SM, MD, LG, XL. This doesn't indicate the 'plane' formats (Mk2 & Mk3), nor does it show the 'other end' for adapter type parts, without looking at the pop-out description. Can we have multiple and other sizes and formats indicated with labels too please?
  10. My current specs are... Quad Xeon W3550 @3.07 GHz 24 GB RAM GTX 1650 1080p (27") 550 watt Power supply It runs KSP2 rather better than I feared it might, but naturally very very sluggish on launches etc. RAM and CPU don't appear to struggle, but (4GB) GPU maxed out as one would expect. I want/plan to upgrade the whole thing to a 'recommended spec' at some point but would rather wait a year or two... Is there a suitable, and worthwhile, GC upgrade that I can simply plug in as a direct replacement now to tide me over for a couple of years.
  11. I'm a little surprised LS is not on the plan. I was hoping for a rudimentary implementation in stock at least. With difficulty settings and/or on off toggles of course. It's certainly something I think should be represented in some way. But still...
  12. Personally I'm not as enthusiastic about this as many of you . I found the robotics, as implemented in KSP1, much too fiddly and glitchy to be practical for a lot of what I wanted to do Craft would dance around and destroy themselves simply because I had a connection through a single piston etc . So I tended to find I couldn't trust it to behave when I needed it to and found it more trouble than it was worth to me. That said, it did (in theory) open up a lot of possibilities and there were many fascinating creations from a lot of other players.
  13. Aha, it turns out this is addressed in Patch 2. Albeit without the menu option, but that's Ok .
  14. Can we have an option to select a target body from a menu or pop up list? As an example, Jool in particular is a bit fiddly. Hovering over Jool in map view often brings up one of the moons, but setting that as a target doesn't enable the intersect display for Jool, and it can be quite fiddly wiggling the view to select what you want. How about clicking on the orbit line opens up a menu listing the bodies in that planet's system, from which we can select the target we want. Also, maybe have a tab for each body that opens up a list of orbiting vessels.
  15. Although the current state doesn't inspire confidence, I do tend to share @twich22's optimism that things will improve a lot.
  • Create New...