Mjarf

Members
  • Content Count

    307
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

209 Excellent

1 Follower

About Mjarf

  • Rank
    Norwegian Rocket "Engineer"

Profile Information

  • Location Array
  • Interests Array

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I realise the original post was meant as a joke but here's my reply anyway, this is as good occasion as any to share my thoughts about KSP. I'm actually quite impressed by the effort of the developers, almost no game studios have even supported a game for as long as KSP has been, even fewer have further developed it as much as KSP. There are games costing nearly twice as much that are released basically half done and the publisher will consider it a finished product. That's not how Squad does things apparently, and I'm glad that Take Two has allowed them to continue down this track. Yes, it has taken time to implement things requested by players, but they've actually done it, many other game publishers/studios seem to ignore the wishes of the players and instead focus on maximizing their profits. I've played KSP since the 0.2ish era, and I'll tell you this game has evolved a lot since then, it's grown from a quirky little space rocket game into an impressive space travel simulator. I feel I've gotten extremely good value for what I paid originally, even if I hadn't gotten the DLC's for free since I bought the game before a certain date I would still receive a lot of free extra stuff. Let me put it like this, none of my other Steam games have reached 1000 hours of gameplay, KSP is the only one, not even Skyrim has gotten close to the amount of game time I've spent in KSP.
  2. Hm, I hope KSP 2 will use DX12, my new GPU performs best with DX12.
  3. I have a Sapphire RX 5700, the problem only seems to happen with terrain shaders set to maximum, when I set it to medium it seems to run fine. I also have an AMD Ryzen 5 2600 CPU if that's relevant.
  4. Welp, you fixed the settings being reset bug, but now my game crashes every time I do EVA on The Mun... Seems like this bug has already been reported so I guess I just have to wait for a fix.
  5. If that doesn't work you could "trick" the staging list by moving it up to the top so it won't necessarily be staged at all.
  6. I almost never bring any Science Jr. modules, they're so damn heavy, also definitely replace that nose cone with a top mounted parachute and then ditch the radially mounted parachutes. It's not really necessary to bring the science modules back down on Kerbin, you can retrieve all the data on EVA, unless your Kerbals can't do EVA yet. You should be able to more or less copy this design with your current tech tree: It has close to 8 km/s delta-v and will easily make it to the surface of the mun and back to Kerbin with a soft landing. You can add a Science Jr. to the design and still have decent delta-v margin. I agree with the others, you're clearly learning as you go, you'll fly huge nuclear powered beasts to Jool and back in no time.
  7. I was a bit skeptical about the new "Terrier" and "Poodle" designs at first, but they look pretty slick and I do like the new glow effect on the engine bell.
  8. I guess the engine plates is a start, maybe they could simply add a built-in decoupler to the fairings?
  9. KSP is a very CPU intensive game because of how it runs. In most games most objects are "physics less", you can't really interact with tables and walls other than walking into them and on them. In KSP pretty much every part on the rocket has simulated physics and can be interacted with, and the Unity game engine is probably not the most efficient and this adds up to a huge CPU load with big rockets. That being said, the game runs quite well even on my little AMD Ryzen 3 1200, but I do notice that it's a tad under powered for the game even when OC'ed to 3.9 GHz. It's probably difficult to optimize the physics in the game because of how complex it is and as far as I understand the Unity engine isn't necessarily optimal for the game, but re-writing it from scratch in a different engine would be a huge task. This game is still among my favorites though, despite it's flaws.
  10. It'll run KSP just fine if you don't try to launch an interstellar cruiser or Star Destroyer replica or something else crazy. Your CPU is comparable to my AMD Ryzen 3 1200 which handles KSP very well with moderately sized vessels, so you should be fine.
  11. Good old trial and error works well in KSP. Expect this game to take up A LOT of hours if you're a tinkerer, it can be quite addictive.
  12. Maybe they could either reduce the cost so it could function as a low cost alternative to the MK-1 or perhaps increase the temperature limits so it'll be more useful as an emergency re-entry pod for a station or something?