• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,168 Excellent


About fourfa

  • Rank
    Explodium handler

Recent Profile Visitors

7,156 profile views
  1. Looking for feedback from users - anyone tried running the 1.7.x version in 1.8? Any crashing, nullrefs...?
  2. I'd been wondering if they nerfed something in aero & drag in 1.8 to give a boost to prop planes and helicopters. One of mine that made 254m/s max in 1.7.3 now goes 279m/s, with drastically different prop pitch settings than before. Then, realizing that they'd nerfed some of the challenge out of SSTOs, cranked up aero heating to balance the scales a bit. Just speculating. All I know for sure is that Kerbin's newly-thin atmosphere feels more like Laythe's did. Haven't been to Laythe yet in 1.8, perhaps it's like Duna now.
  3. Rebalance decoupler, MK1-3, MK1 lander can, MK2 lander can, separators costs, crash tolerances, weight. Anyone had time to look into this yet? Could be significant, could be negligible. Would it be so hard to be more specific in the patchnotes?
  4. Add do not show again option to re-runnable science experiments. kaloo kalay oh frabjous day!!!!!!!
  5. Good analysis here. I have an alternate take though - the Vectors (despite obviously being modeled on the RS-25) aren't the best choice for STS-style shuttles in stock KSP. Too much power (shuttle/ET TWR was far lower what we get with 3 Vectors in a STS lookalike), FAR too heavy (very difficult to make STS-lookalike CoM/CoL work with 12 tons of dead weight hanging off the tail, unless you add huge ballasts to the nose). Try 3X Skiffs, and you'll find yourself encountering design challenges that feel a lot more realistic. On the downside, they could probably use the large gimbal range from the Vector. You'll still have far too much delta-V in the end with a proportionally-sized external tank, but like all KSP things that too goes away your ~3x stock resize
  6. Do I need to add characters to this post? Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua This is just a bunch of long-time KSP streamers and modders eating tacos and chatting about KSP2 after meeting with the devs
  7. Good reminder to everyone; there are many corners of the internet we all gravitate to, and it's helpful to share here for others in different corners
  8. I guess no one watches the major KSP streamers on Twitch? On Saturday, DasValdez will be live-streaming Q&A with devs from KSP2 (and KSP1?) from PaxWest. Also a panel Friday about realism in scifi games, and a Thursday virtual field trip (sounds like to Seattle's Museum of Flight?) with streamers EJ_SA and Scott Manley.
  9. You know how if you disable the 'deploy when safe' tweakable on your main chutes, and deploy them at 1000m/s, they rip off and give you a warning 'parachute was destroyed by aero forces' or something like that? I want to reduce that safe deploy limit to something like 50m/s, in order to force use of drogue chutes to slow down to main deploy speed. This would go along with a tech tree rebalance that gives you the small drogues before the big mains, making you crash sounding rockets and transmit data before you can safely recover probes and get full science recovery, etc. Along with revamped rocket engine tech sequence, flight first, etc. I mucked about with some stock chute variables but despite changing quite a few things I never seemed to have an effect. Anyone have some pointers?
  10. So weird to for a company to have their own highly organized forum, with ~35 subforums, at their own branded .com domain, and the announcements on that forum just link to external twitter and reddit discussions
  11. For this situation I always just have a probe core hidden somewhere in the correct orientation, and make it the root part. Problem solved
  12. (Inspired by Azimech's posts above) I've been working on and off for a couple years on a stock tech tree rebalance where the starting techs are these: Which Breaking Ground will enable with no mods at all. Surprisingly entertaining to fly!
  13. ^^^^ I wish I could like KerrMü’s post more than once. I agree completely; after years and 3000+ hours playing this game I’ve done everything I can think of many times over. I’ve hung out in the challenges forum just to get ideas that others have thought of. Completed more careers in more modded solar systems than I can easily count. All of it suddenly feels small and highly limited compared to the glorious new complexity in front of me since Breaking Ground. Personally I love having a ton of active controls for flight. It should be hard, even for experienced players. If it’s too complex for new players - guess what, here’s a wonderful opportunity to write simple, easy to follow guides for them. How about go write those guides instead of complaining about the lack of them? Write a mod to auto-manage prop pitch. Share and discuss craft with example control schemes. Heck, create and share a whole line of plug-and-play engine nacelles with detailed instructions. If you see problems, there are lots of ways to make a positive impact.
  14. Here's the setup that seems most logical to me: Motor RPM limit(s) on 'Main Throttle' group (you won't use this often, just for trimming speed for landing basically) Toggle Motor Power, and Toggle Deploy on all props on 'Stage' group Prop Authority Limit on Translate F/B, and manually set Authority Limiter on all props to 0 in SPH. Launch, set throttle to max, space bar to stage. Engines spin to max RPM but props have no bite - they're feathered. Use Translate (H/N by default) to engage props and speed up for takeoff. Optimum blade pitch is variable with speed. Pin out your prop part action window. Taking off from 0m/s, set authority limit to ~100. Once you're flying, try reducing the limit. I've found max speed between ~70-95 depending on the craft (F12 for aero force visualizer, and try to get the longest forward lines). Greater than 100 usually seems slower. One nice aspect of this setup - just hit space again to feather the prop and shut down the motor for minimum drag. Based on how thirsty the new LF motors seem to be, you'll need this feature a lot New props with old electric motors & fuel cells is much less thirsty, and seems just as fast as the Mk1 LF motors (easy 200m/s+ for a Mk1 plane with twin 0.625m electric props). Physics timewarp with new props is just as bad as elevons so far. EDIT: tossed up an example on kerbalx
  15. "blade pitch. via authority limiter.Which is there today, but doesn't work correctly using elevons as blades" I am assuming this refers to how control surfaces often 'flip' deployed state (ie up vs down) when they cross the center of mass centerline. If so this will be a big improvement. Currently at high speed they spend a lot of cycle time slowly moving from state to state. Try rapidly pausing rotating props and you often see it.