Jump to content

drhay53

Members
  • Content Count

    426
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by drhay53

  1. Using OPM in 1.11.1 and seeing the same list-reversal type issue in the VAB. It was not present in 1.0.7.2. I moved to the beta because I noticed that Antenna Helper was using the comms of my probe core for it's "Total Power" in-flight, instead of the power of the external antenna. This behavior persists in both 1.0.7.2 and 1.0.7.3-beta Logs: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1owefb-UYPJsqvo02zkFfDOgu9qXWDQu5/view?usp=sharing screenshot: notice the incorrect "Total Power" in the Antenna Helper window, it is 5000 and should be 500,000. Also notice the discrepancy between
  2. looking at the guides that are popping up on the wiki and the sheer number of WOLF parts that are likely to be needed, it does seem to me like the most convenient progression will be to start on kerbin, then construct the next wolf modules and their transport vehicles in space. Just sort of leap-frog your way out from kerbin to reduce the sheer number of launches that would likely be needed. That's looking to be my plan, anyway.
  3. I haven't yet decided exactly which version of KSP I will be playing on. Concerned that 1.11 will be missing some stuff that I consider required, but still looking into that at the moment. Does the pre-release still support KSP going back to 1.8? Also just not sure if starting a save with a pre-release is the best idea for me.
  4. planning on starting my first USI-based save in a looooooonng time. Seems I've come back during a period of flux regarding in-situ construction. GC was recently unbundled and something else is possibly coming? If I'm wanting to start a save now, what should I do?
  5. @Michel Bartolone I was seeing the delta v issue in the VAB and then I realized that the altitude slider had defaulted to a very high altitude, making the delta v calculation basically a vacuum delta v. That looks to me like what you're seeing.
  6. I installed procedural fairings and noticed that only one part from the mod is showing up in the custom filter. All of the other parts are visible from the manufacturer tab, and from the aerodynamics default filter. So at this point I have no idea how to trust that parts are actually showing up and I'm seeing everything I'm supposed to. Kerbalism parts don't show up in the manufacturer or any of the default filter extension categories, but they do show up in simple mode. Here's the player.log after installing procedural fairings. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kl0SNg42txIbVDg
  7. I'm trying to get the parts added in the KerbalismConfig addon to show up in a custom filter, but I can't get them to show up for some reason. My config looks like this: CATEGORY:NEEDS[KerbalismConfig] { name = Kerbalism icon = Kerbal colour = #FFF0F0F0 all = true FILTER { CHECK { type = folder value = KerbalismConfig } } SUBCATEGORIES { list = 0,Pods list = 1,Fuel Tanks list = 2,Engines list = 3,Command and Control list = 4,Structural list = 5,Robotics list = 6,Coupling list = 7,Payload list = 8,Aerodynamics list = 9,Ground list = 10,The
  8. I pretty much always come back and try to start a new save every few months, but I can never find any goal anymore that keeps me playing past the first 5-10 hours. I really want to find some combination of mods that's just right but I never can hit the sweet spot. I always end up frustrated with bugs or performance or lack of documentation. I will say that 1.9.1 seems to have much better performance than I was used to. But then after a while I got dismayed that a lot of good mods weren't updated from 1.8. So then I went back to 1.8 for a bit. But then I was upset that I was playin
  9. I still love the concept of this mod and I've got this nagging feeling in the back of my brain to come back to KSP for a while and try it out.....
  10. I work somewhere that does a lot of software development, and I have a slightly different view on the DLC paradigm. I think that DLC is mostly a side effect of the shift in software development practices over the last 20 years, and the flexibility provided by (mostly) everyone being connected to the internet. With the shift to agile software development trickling down to everyone, the idea is that you prioritize features that offer the most value to your customers, and you release early and often to receive feedback and constantly re-prioritize the next features. In the long run, this pr
  11. I had some time and found it directly in the earnings report released today. https://ir.take2games.com/news-releases/news-release-details/take-two-interactive-software-inc-reports-strong-results-13?field_nir_news_date_value[min]=2019 Announced that Kerbal Space Program 2, the sequel to the beloved original space sim, is in development and is now planned for launch on PC, PlayStation 4 and Xbox One during our fiscal year 2021. The original Kerbal Space Program has sold-in over 3.5 million units worldwide, and earned a Metacritic rating of 88 and a Steam user score of 91%.
  12. According to a "call with investors", KSP2 has been delayed until FY2021. https://www.pcgamer.com/kerbal-space-program-2-is-delayed/ I couldn't find a deeper source than the article itself that is making the claim, but I find PC Gamer to be reputable. I didn't spend too much time trying to track down the call or a transcript. EDIT: here is the earnings report and quote. https://ir.take2games.com/news-releases/news-release-details/take-two-interactive-software-inc-reports-strong-results-13?field_nir_news_date_value[min]=2019 Announced that Kerbal Space Program 2, the s
  13. I am utterly flabbergasted that this question has been asked so many times.
  14. Interestingly I just watched the gameplay video again on a different YouTube channel and didn't notice the issues I had seen before.
  15. What basis do you have for saying this?
  16. You have to be watching certain areas of each scene to see it, but I would estimate that I was watching something running between 15-25 FPS
  17. You can clearly see the frame rate variability in every scene in the video
  18. I don't know where you're getting your numbers from and I have no real baseline to evaluate them. My secondary concern is about garbage collection. After 2000 hours in ksp, when I try to fire it up these days I end up stopping due to these issues: 1) garbage collection frustration 2) frame rate issues 3) problems with the surface of bodies (wheels suck, craft bounce around, bases blow up) Since colony building is a core part of the game, I'm stoked that number 3) should be very solid in ksp2. I fear that we'll still end up with GC issues and frame rate issues and the
  19. I'm not particularly encouraged by the consistency of the frame rate. People will say "but it's just alpha footage" to which I will say, I will probably want to install as many mods as I have memory for, and if performance is even remotely iffy at this point in the stock only game, modded performance in ksp2 is likely to drive me away just as it has in ksp.
  20. I certainly hope there's some kind of public servers because frankly I have no gaming friends. They will have to deal with griefing and I'm not sure how prepared for it they will be. People will intentionally blow up large projects representing hundreds of hours of work spread across many people if they're allowed to, just because they can. Frankly I'm not sure how you allow people to screw up while also not allowing people to intentionally wreck someone's work. I personally don't care that much about MP in KSP, though I'm not opposed to online games in any sense. I've done m
  21. I'm not trying to be mean. I understand the situation you're in. It's just, this is not the way it works for pretty much any game.
  22. I pretty much only have two wishes. That I can install many mods without frequent and noticeable garbage collection. That landing and driving on the surface of bodies feels more natural.
  23. Just wanted to chime in and say that I still haven't really played with the mod much, but it will be one of the core mods if I ever start up another save. I tend to play KSP in spurts and I haven't had one in a while. And to be honest, the last couple of times I've started a save, I didn't play for very long. A couple thousand hours of playing, every time I start something up I'm reminded of the limitations of Unity for what I'd like the game to be. There's a lot of things I always "plan" on doing in KSP, setting up bases and stations all over the solar system, but I never seem to get past Mun
  24. I'm not sure I have the time to do this, but with module manager you (or someone) could: - take one of the small 1.25m stock tanks. Make it into a new part in your mod's GameData folder (like I think you already have with some other parts). - add the B9 module to it (I think you can do this?) - patch it to include your resources like you already do then you'll have a 1.25m tank available for snacks early in the tech tree.
×
×
  • Create New...