Jump to content

Fraktal

Members
  • Posts

    551
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Fraktal

  1. ...I just discovered that you can stow non-retractable solar panels in EVA construction mode. This is BIG. I finally have a use for non-retractable panels on space stations meant to be upgraded later on!
  2. You don't have to launch a separate craft for every piece. Their orbital inclinations and eccentricities are close enough to each other that fuel usage should be comparatively minimal, even if you factor in changing your orbit after each piece to catch up with the next without waiting for weeks/months.
  3. Actually, you can probably do the job like this. Bring an engineer and plenty of fuel. Intercept trash. Have the engineer exit and hang off of a ladder. You won't be able to warp like this, so do this only at the very end of each interception. Once close enough, kill relative velocity. Turn/translate until the engineer can reach the trash in EVA construction mode without letting go of the ladder. If it's a small component, stuff it into a storage unit; if big, surface-attach it somewhere on the craft where it'll harmlessly burn off during reentry. If you have spare fuel left, go after the next piece.
  4. Save the subassembly again with the same name. Game will ask if you want to overwrite, click yes. I found a few years ago that the game has trouble recognizing whether the root part is surface-attachable. Effects range from refusing to save if all of the root part's attachment points are in use, to saving the subassembly just fine but throwing nullref errors when you pick up the subassembly and try to put it back down, forcing you to kill the game executable.
  5. Was trying to launch a rover to Gilly, but the left-side wheels kept breaking when I popped the fairing in LKO, even if the rocket hadn't even left the ground yet. Widened the fairing a bit eventually, that seemed to do the trick.
  6. Oh, right. Now that you mentioned it, I remembered using that design choice too. Was wondering because to this very day, I still don't understand why Squad made the choice of not allowing crossfeed through KV pods even though every single other command pod in the game allows it.
  7. Food for thought: do SRBs allow liquid fuel to crossfeed through them...?
  8. Stratzenblitz75 already beat you guys to it two and a half years ago. Albeit his take was an aerial spinlaunch.
  9. Then here's a counter-argument: Don't use the MPL. Set science reward multiplier to 0.1. THAT is how you grind. The issue with stock career is that it's too easy to get your hands on money? This is sure to make money way tighter in the early game due to the large number of missions you need to launch just to get ahead in the tech tree.
  10. Forgot to mention. When I was flying the aforementioned plane, at one point I wasn't paying attention to my altitude and the landing gear ended up making ground contact for a split second. Vertical contact at 5 m/s destroyed the landing gear. Horizontal contact at slightly over 250 m/s didn't - but when I was previously taking off at around 100 m/s, the landing gear exploded at the end of the runway when I nosed up. I'm curious. Are landing gear coded to automatically self-destruct if the wheel gets fully depressed, regardless of actual impact velocity?
  11. I didn't make anything rigid and it's not a big plane. Only about 30 parts or so, all Mk1.
  12. More flying today, more failing. This time, a plane descending on parachutes at 6 m/s completely disintegrated on contact with water. Plane touches water, game freezes for 0.2 seconds and both wings, both tailfins, all engines, all fuel tanks and all landing gear detonate with such force that the cockpit was sent flying for several dozen meters. Does having an insufficiently strong CPU cause krakens or something?
  13. Did some flying around in planes. Descending on parachutes at 5.5 m/s. Landing gear STILL explodes on touchdown. WHY.
  14. I think it's intended, as the orbital parameter readouts added to the UI a few major versions back don't show apoapsis height either until the Tracking Station is upgraded. Also note that it's not specific to the career mode itself. If you start a science game and edit the save file to downgrade the Tracking Station to level 1, it still happens.
  15. Found my first ever Mun Stone by complete accident. Happened to land in visual range of it (few hundred meters away) inside the Southwest Crater, noticed that it looked different when I looked around to check if there were any anomalies nearby (haven't found any so far) so I jetpack'd over and when it turned out to be solid, I knew it wasn't terrain scatter, so I had Bob bag it. +12 science.
  16. I seem to remember Scott Manley once having made a KSP video to demonstrate just how hard it is to collide with another craft in orbit.
  17. Relay strength is irrelevant to science transmissions. All the game cares about is the 4%, regardless of whether it's 4% via Communotron or 4% via RA-15.
  18. Starting up the game just now when I noticed Steam displaying You have played for 1337 hours. I'm officially leet now .
  19. Oh yeah, now that's more like what I had in mind.
  20. I wasn't looking for random failures (and consider the idea to be BS). I was thinking more along the lines of parts gradually losing functionality in response to damage sustained. Thoughts I had in mind about how it would work: Every part has a structural integrity stat calculated at part load based on volume and empty weight (since assigning values manually would make it a nightmare to maintain compatibility with other mods). This is a hidden value not normally shown on the UI but whenever a part is currently taking damage, remaining structural integrity is shown on the part itself similarly to the overheating overlay. The exact value might also be shown in the PAW while in EVA construction mode. Structural integrity decreases in response to the following, with the mod's code hooking into where part destruction would normally happen: Impact exceeding the part's maximum tolerance. How much structural integrity is lost depends on both the part's maximum tolerance and how much the impact exceeded said tolerance. Impact tolerance is now "upper threshold for no damage", rather than "lower threshold for instant destruction". Core or skin temperature exceeding the part's maximum tolerance. Similarly to impacts, overheating now causes constant damage over time while the heat is sustained, rather than instant destruction. How fast damage is accumulated depends on both how far above maximum tolerance the part is heated and how long the part is subjected to that temperature (eg. overheating once for five seconds will do more damage to a thermometer than overheating five times for one second each). Ambient pressure exceeding the part's maximum tolerance. Handled the same as overheating. Every time a part's structural integrity drops below an even multiple of 10%, there's a cumulative chance of the part losing partial functionality without physically being destroyed. What can go wrong dynamically depends on what functionality the part has (ie. when you look at it via Module Manager, what modules the part has). Parts containing resources can spring a leak (slowly at first but it can stack), clog up (contents cannot be used or even transferred anymore, turning it into dead weight unless you had the foresight to bring a Drain Valve, but even that won't work if it's a battery that broke) or both. Crossfeed might also malfunction. Solar panels and antennas can stop working without being broken. Same with science parts. Docking ports can become unable to attach, unable to detach once attached, suddenly detach if currently attached, or all of the above. Shielded ports are more resistant to damage, but can additionally jam open/closed. Decouplers and stack separators might end up releasing their contents and fairings can fall off as well. Engines can lose thrust (and can stack for eventual total shutdown), lose gimbal, jam gimbal in a random angle and direction (and has a non-zero chance of ignoring the currently set gimbal limit in the process, even if you locked gimbal ahead of time which does help your chances a bit) or even get stuck burning with no way to shut them off. Probe cores and command modules can lose not just reaction wheels and built-in antennas and batteries, but SAS functionality as well, unless you have a second command module or probe core that isn't damaged yet. Aero surfaces can gradually lose lift or cause drag due to physical deformation. Maneuvering surfaces can either stop articulating or get stuck on a random deflection angle. Very low structural integrity also starts acting as a negative multiplier to how much G-forces a part can take before being snapped off. If structural integrity drops to 0%, the vanilla part destruction code is called. Again, part malfunctions never kick in randomly, only in response to damage. Stock repair kits can restore either functionality plus a small amount of structural integrity, or a larger amount of structural integrity and no functionality, but the amount of structural integrity restored per kit is inversely proportional to the current level of damage and additional diminishing returns are applied for each subsequent kit being used without docking to another vessel.
  21. There's a difficulty option whether all probes should have all SAS modes or not. Without this, HECS cores only have stability assist and prograde/retrograde. So, you probably got this turned off at game start. I'm not sure if it's one of the options that can be changed mid-game, but take a look in the Settings / Difficulty Options menu, just in case. Also, regarding your inability to steer. There's another difficulty option about how probe cores behave without a live radio link to Kerbin. If you have partial control enabled, you can't manually steer without a connection, but SAS controls will still work. Is this what you're experiencing?
  22. Is there any mod out there that models part damage gradually, rather than the "if(current_impact/heat/pressure_tolerance > maximum) violently_detonate_part-immediately();" model used in the stock game? I don't mean breakable solar panels/wheels/antennae, I meant all parts. I thought of an idea in that regard today, but don't know if there would be interest in it or if someone else had already done it.
  23. Not necessarily. Even if no more major updates are coming, what's stopping people from making threads about what they would've liked to see in a 1.13 update?
  24. It's very minimal. Couple months ago I tested it to see if it was the reason why my station had low FPS and the performance impact of 14 open docking ports was something like 2-3 FPS on a low-end PC, way less than merely having a 40+ part station.
×
×
  • Create New...