Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


431 Excellent

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Location
    Maryland, USA

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Well, all of the features are in progress already. Multiplayer, for example, is the last item in the "roadmap", but IIRC they've talked about how they're already testing with it internally. I expect that the foundations for all this stuff is already in place, and the steps in the roadmap are just getting each feature finished and "polished" enough to enable for users — not starting on each feature from the beginning. Also, remember that KSP1 was in Steam early access for about two years, and early versions could be bought directly from Squad for nearly two years before it even became available (as EA) on Steam. This doesn't seem drastically different.
  2. SystemHeat aside, the CryoTanks mod makes normal tanks support cooling, but the special cryogenic tanks are more efficient at it (less EC usage). The SystemHeatBoiloff patch overrides that and makes them all the same, but I suspect that's a bug, and I just submitted a pull request to make the special tanks better again, in the same proportion as before.
  3. More specifically: CryoTanks has built-in boiloff support where, if cooling is enabled, the tank consumes EC to refrigerate itself and prevent boiloff. Radiator parts aren't relevant for this; the tank has its own invisible implied radiators or something. The optional SystemHeatBoiloff patch replaces that with a different implementation, where the tank doesn't directly use EC, but it emits heat to SystemHeat, which routes it to actual radiator parts. (And those radiators consume EC instead.) In either case, tanks that hold cryo fuels have an "enable cooling" button in the tank's right-click menu. (@JohnyCraft, it sounds like this is the part you'd overlooked.) It's enabled by default for the special insulated tanks added by the CryoTanks mod, but disabled by default for "regular" tanks.
  4. I think it's implied that the tank has a heat pump to actively push energy up the temperature gradient, from the cold side to the hot side. But if you're using cryo tanks together with other things that need cooling, you'll probably want to use separate loops anyway, because different parts have different ideal loop temperatures. (Cryo tanks want to be 300K; electrostatic engines want to be 350K; mining drills want to be 400K; the Convert-O-Tron and the plasma engines want to be 500K; nukes want to be upwards of 750K.)
  5. People using Steam will already have the option to buy KSP2, from Steam. It's pretty weird for a game bought from Steam to act as a storefront for non-Steam purchases of a different game, especially when that game is also sold through Steam. And the KSP1 in-game main menu already has a link to the merch store; that's not something that needs a separate launcher program. Fortunately, the launcher seems to be Windows-only. Doesn't show up on Linux or Mac.
  6. The OP says: "The 1.0 version of KSP 2 will include significantly more features than the Early Access version, such as what you see on the roadmap plus other items added along the way."
  7. I like this! Cryo tanks needing actual radiators is exactly how it ought to work, and it makes the low-temp radiator parts more broadly useful. (That plus I've been making a point of using more NF ion engines in my current playthrough; I like that those need cooling too.)
  8. I'm surprised to see so many people saying things like "they want $50 just to test an unfinished game" — like, no, it's $50 for the complete, finished game, to be delivered later, basically a preorder with a $10 (edit: $60 was speculation, not an official number) discount. And in the meantime, you can play unfinished versions if you want to. And it's not just KSP1 with nicer graphics; it's clear they've made a lot of architectural improvements under the hood. KSP1 is fun, but it's always been kinda rickety, especially with mods; KSP2 should be a more solid and stable foundation since it was designed from the start with a clear idea of what features it needs to support, plus lessons learned from KSP1's limitations. I'm disappointed, though not really surprised, that the EA won't support Linux (yet); I'm unlikely to actually play it much at first, unless it runs well in Steam's Proton or my (much older) Windows computer can handle it. I plan to buy the EA regardless, though, since I think it's worth it. Steam tells me I've played KSP1 for about 3500 hours; at $70 for the game plus expansions, that's about 2 cents per hour, which makes it one of the most economical games I've ever bought. I expect KSP2 will be similar, even if I have to wait a while.
  9. You created an account just to complain about gimbals and couldn't be bothered to provide any details whatsoever about what you think is wrong? Bruh, don't be a jerk.
  10. I haven't noticed any problems, and minor patch updates generally don't break most mods.
  11. Yeah, I don't actually need those, nor even have any specific use in mind for them — just wanted something to fill the otherwise-empty space there, and figured it might be handy at some point to have an 0.625m docking option.
  12. My first small station in my current save, built for a "space camp" contract. And it fits perfectly in a KW 2.5m expanded fairing! (Doesn't have enough hab space for all the kerbals that'll be staying there for 40 days, but I figure that's OK since it's a space camp: the campers will take turns living in the hab ring, the core station parts, and their own docked crew capsules, to get a breadth of different experiences.)
  13. Designing a station just now, I noticed that the PPF-B "Blimp" 2.5m inflatable hab has an entry cost of 9500, but the PPF-A "Dirigible" has an entry cost of 103500, about ten times as much for just twice the size. I'm guessing one of those is a typo, but I'm not sure which — the Blimp costs less to unlock than the 1.25m Winston and Volleyball inflatable habs, but the Dirigible costs much more to unlock than the 3.75m habs. The Blimp's per-part cost (after unlocking) is 10350, exactly one-tenth the Dirigible's entry cost, which is less than the Blimp's own entry cost (most/all of the other habs have an entry cost that's more than the per-part cost). I can patch the parts locally to have a different price ratio, but I just wanted to report the possible bug in case there's another bugfix release. (For my local patch, I think I'll make the Blimp cost 50% more than the Eclair for both entry and per-part since it's the same length and holds 50% more kerbals, and then I'll make the Dirigible double that. But if the official numbers change in a later release, I'll adjust funds in my save accordingly.)
  14. The fairing attaches to the bottom of the core and other parts attach to the bottom of the fairing. So if you're building downward, place core first and then fairing; if you're building upward, place fairing first and then core.
  15. It's a reference to the phrase "the world is your oyster", which is an idiom that means "you can do anything you want". In this context, the sentence is saying that by placing the thrusters carefully in different locations on different axes, your spacecraft can have freedom of movement and rotation in all directions. (This sounds to me like a hint that you shouldn't just place them in symmetry around a cylinder like you'd do with many other RCS thruster parts.)
  • Create New...