Jump to content

skoy21

Members
  • Content Count

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

9 Neutral

About skoy21

  • Rank
    Bottle Rocketeer

Profile Information

  • Location
    Milkyway Galaxy

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I have the same exact issue. I confirm it happens after installing RSS. I clean-installed KSP 1.73 with only RSS 16.4.0 along with its dependencies from ckan. I had the same issue in KSP 1.3.1 as well. EDIT!: I was wrong. It happens on stock KSP also (v1.7.3.2594).
  2. It means it is not supported by RO. If that part has fuel tanks/engines, it probably won't work, for instance, liquid fuel won't be converted into KEROLOX. If it is a "passive" component like a structural part, the difference will be the weight, the sizes, probably its drag values etc.
  3. You are awesome!!!! Thanks for this great mod, thanks for your effort and time, and thanks for the update!
  4. They just look amazing!!! Very nice work! I hope you update it to 1.2.2 ti try it!
  5. I only ever played RSS and RO. I switched version from 1.1.2 to 1.2.2 because performance was unbearable, even on my new PC, and wanted to just test fps etc on stock 1.2.2 and compare it with 1.1.2 stock. I built a 5 minute rocket and I found myself "dancing" that rocket on the surface of the Mun 15 minutes later, before landing on various locations on it. It was that easy. I didn't design the first rocket to land to mun since I wanted only to test performance of the game, so with no fuel left for coming back, I felt pity for my Kerbals and sent a rescue mission... The "boring" performan
  6. Thank you ALL for your great work!!! Good time to update to ksp 1.2.2 now!
  7. I ran v 1.2.2 with two cores enabled (I can only disable pairs of cores with RyzenMaster, didn't try through BIOS) and didn't see much of a drop in FPS with low part vessels, I was always above 56 FPS, but didn't test higher part vessels to stress the CPU a bit more. I tried changing number of cores assigned to KSP through affinity. It was better with 2 processing units working on KSP rather than with any other combination. But the best results were with all six cores enabled by default (12 processing units enabled) But it was a great improvement just by switching versions, even with
  8. I made a test with a 410 part /98 engines rocket, in 1.1.2 RSS + Ro and had 5 FPS on launchpad and 1 to 4 after launch. I also built the same simple two stage, 28 parts rocket in both 1.1.2 and 1.2.2 stock. The results were constant 30 FPS on 1.1.2 and constant 60 FPS on 1.2.2. 30 FPS for just changing KSP version. As Pena, LoSBoL and lancefoxcia said, there is huge difference between the two versions in terms of performance. I never thought it would be double the FPS. I did expect some improvement, but not that much. PT, I will build a 255 stock parts rocket in 1.2.2, post FPS
  9. My memory is Corsair 3200 Vengeance, currently running stable at 2400. I am updating to 1.2.2, and up to this point I have installed all the dependencies of Realism Overhaul and RSS and a few that are absolutely minimum for me, and already have 1.75 Gb of Game Data. I will try it tomorrow and see how it goes.
  10. Hi PT, thanks for the input! I would't dare play without Kerbal Joint reinforcement. Once, it broke, and all my rockets/ships broke with it... Part welding is a tool that is probably going to help me a lot, since I do use a lot of parts. I will definitely try this one. HWinfo always runs behind my games to ckeck things, that's why I said that it is like not utilizing the GPU at all, and the CPU is not to busy either. As for my memory, it's 2x8G Vengence DDR4, it shouldn't be the problem. LoSBol, probably i am going to update my install, i don't see how I can avoid it anymor
  11. Starman4308 Thanks for the suggestions and info as well. I will try MemGraph and keep it in mind for next installs, i hadn't heard of it before. As for the part count, I have spent hours deleting unused parts from my mods, and stripped them down to my necessaries. As you said, with lower part rockets, things are ok, but with the bigger ones, i drop to 2 -10 fps
  12. Thanks for the suggestion... Deep down, I know that this will definitely have an improvement impact. I hoped to avoid it, but I don't think I can avoid it forever... I will give it a try though, and check my mod lists
  13. It was time to upgrade my PC, so I went for a Ryzen 5 1600 + Sapphire rx580 Nitro+ Limited Edidtion, and kept my Samsung 850 EVO I was and am playing 1.1.2, Modded with RSS+RO + essential mods + a few more. KSP on the new PC is just a folder copy from the old PC (same install). Game loading improved greatly, with about 9 minutes on the old PC vs 2:30 to 3 minutes on the new, but everything else feels almost the same... Same launchpad loading times, same frame drop on flying bigish rockets, etc. VAB is a bit more responsive, but everything else feels kind of same. I did
  14. Thank you, thank you, thank you!!! I am playing RSS+RO etc, and I've built a lot of shuttles. Some didn't even launch, some failed to orbit, and some did go to a good orbit, but none of them could reenter. It was this mod that got me through reentry and to a successful landing!!! Well, the wheels did brake when I touched the ground (-2m Vertical speed, 240 horizontal), but eventually I was able to land the orbiter on it's belly! Big Smiles for me and my Fearless Kerbals, but the poor engineers had to replace the tiles! My only problem is that the exhaust fumes cover the
  15. Sorry for not answering your question, but I'd love to see this fly! I tried to built it too but my CPU cannot handle the engines as well. Frame rate goes to unplayable before the game crashes... Anyway, interesting project to discuss
×
×
  • Create New...