Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

11 Good

About Hoozemans

  • Rank
    Bottle Rocketeer

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Phew. For this kind of delay I want to see the physics - and the physics engine - completely redone. Multithreaded, with real gravity - for the orbits of all the celestial bodies too. That's no guarantee. Big software projects have this tendency to implode if you allow them to continue, grow, redefine scope for long enough. And in a market as volatile as the gaming industry...
  2. I took the latest releases of https://github.com/net-lisias-ksp/KSPAPIExtensions, https://github.com/net-lisias-ksp/UbioWeldContinuum, and https://github.com/net-lisias-ksp/ModuleManager, installed them as per instructions, and then it worked. Before I was trying to make it work with the main repo of the MM, because I am worried about compatibility with new releases - but I figured we'll solve that problem when it becomes one.
  3. Hi! I'm coming up against the limits of what my hardware can support in terms of part count, and welding currently seems like the best solution. I wouldn't have to weld much; just a few assemblies of structural parts and cabins for my bigger stations and vessels. I've been trying for some time now to get UbioZur to work with 1.9.1, but no luck so far. I'm obviously doing something wrong. Query: does the UbioZur welding mod currently work for KSP 1.9.1, and if so, where can I find the proper releases, installation and troubleshooting guides? -- EDIT -- I got it to work
  4. Put a rotor on top of an engine mount plate. The engine mount allows you to have the top and bottom part of the ship non-rotating while the parts attached to the rotor spin (you need a fair number of SAS modules to keep the rest of the ship from spinning - either that, or build two counter-rotating rings). Attach spokes with three way symmetry, then attach Mk2 cabins to the spokes, rotating each of them until they form a ring (takes a bit of doing). The spokes are attached to the rotor by two Jr. docking ports per spoke, so that you can't get the angle wrong when you connect them up. Ther
  5. Yeah, I'm keeping that in mind as well: it's likely that new kit will help a bit, but that we really need a software breakthrough to make it work. I wonder how the KSP2 dev team are hoping to tackle the issue. I have some vague ideas for using GPU's for physics calculation based on how libraries like Tensorflow do their thing, but I'm likely to be miles off Anyway, it's still not a bad idea to have a dedicated machine, optimized for playing KSP.
  6. I tried that shortly after I chucked the craft files, but I can't load the results. My game was stock plus both DLC's, and a single mod that allows you to reconfigure tanks (Configurable Containers). I haven't tried to debug the code yet, but I'm guessing that mod is what kills the export. Soit. Since I'm a couple of hundred bucks away from my savings target for the new machine, I can think about whether I want a desktop or flaptop a bit longer. And perhaps find other ways to optimize the game as well. I've always wanted a bit more realistic gameplay (ie. limited life support etc.) but at
  7. I would love to, but I'll have to dig for the actual launch files of the bugger. It's a 555 part exploration vessel, and assembling it from its constituent parts in orbit was such a hellish experience that I chucked the craft files, so it only exists fully assembled in a savefile right now. Thanks for the advice, though! (EDIT: I did find some of the staging files, though - they're older versions than the ones I eventually launched, though.)
  8. Assemble this in orbit: At 2 frames per second. (That rotating ring affects the trajectory, by the way. Almost ended this little venture by smashing straight into Duna...)
  9. Hi. I'm running KSP on an old office notebook, a MacBook Pro 15, with an i9-8950HK, 32G of RAM at 2400Mhz and a Radeon Pro 560X with 4 GB. It's a pretty good piece of hardware for the work that I'm doing, especially since most development is being done in clouds anyway, but now that my KSP vessels have grown beyond 500 parts (after launch), I'm starting to feel the pain: FPS is down to single digits most of the time; the mission clock doesn't ever show green anymore. I'm not sure what KSP does to my CPU, but it sure as hell gobbles up all the memory, to the point where I'm having trouble
  10. Commenting on one out of a thousand similar questions is probably a waste of time, but I often run multiple instances of KSP so that I can sandbox new designs while editing them at the same time. This is a bit harsh on my not-game-optimized old laptop, though. And my desk is a bit small for having two KSP-dedicated machines on it... Having a standalone VAB/SPH editor would seem a nifty thing to have. The best argument against is is that ' nifty thing to have ' probably does not make it worth the effort of developing and maintaining it. I, for one, couldn't be bothered - I'll just have
  11. Unfortunately, the manoeuvre occurs at the very end of the burn to maximize apoapsis, after the vehicle has already left the atmosphere. I probably will, though I suspect that all automated ascent routines will seek to make tiny corrections when the trajectory deviates from the ideal.
  12. Thanks for the carbs. I'm getting an FPS of less than 2 with some of my 1000+ part launches, on a pretty decent i7. I'm guessing we're just scr*wed unless someone comes up with an entirely new physics model.
  13. So, I've been messing around with a huge launch vehicle, trying to get my latest versatile asteroid hunter into orbit in one piece, rather than having to break it up. There's a problem with the design, in that there's a lot of stress on some of the key components of the structure. I got the design to work, as long as there aren't any huge lateral forces applied to the structure. And there's a problem with that. Because each launch attempt takes almost an hour to run, at about thirty frames per minute, and it's nearly impossible to manually control the rocket under those circumstances, I'
  14. Another tip that's been of much use when I first started: Build your rockets top-down, starting at the last stage, and adding each prior stage to the bottom, keeping an eye on the total dV. - For a simple 90km-orbit-and-return mission, start with the part that actually gets to orbit: give it just enough dV to return from orbit, say about 100 m/s. TWR doesn't matter at this stage, just dV. - Then start building the stage below that: give it just enough oomph for a final kick into orbit, assuming you've gotten your apoapsis up to 90 km with a surface speed of some 2200m/s: the circu
  15. I have considered the possibility of hooking a couple of dozens of her up to a water reservoir, so creating a steam powered lift vehicle. I'll start working on the Girlfriend Fury Steam Engine Mod as soon as I've taught myself to program.
  • Create New...