luizsilveira

I've been playing a bunch of Squad and War Thunder, and a little bit of Far Cry 3 when I don't want to deal with multiplayer (FC3 was on sale for next-to-nothing one of these days). It's ironic I bought a rig to have a better KSP experience, yet such rig gave me a worse KSP experience while allowing me to play other games. So I ended up with the latter option.

RCS Build Aid has a great parachute calculator.

I hope I'm not breaking any forum rules but I'm afraid this specific issue might have gotten buried in the other thread. Basically my max physics delta is at 0.02 (minimum) at all times. When I try changing it under settings, I feel absolutely no difference in-game, and every time I'm back at the settings menu it's again at 0.02. It doesn't matter which value I set it to. I've also tried manually changing it on settings.cfg. Same behaviour. player.log ksp.log Many thanks for any insights.

For the record: RAM has arrived and the difference of using dual channel RAM on the Ryzen 3 2200g is indeed absurd. As expected, KSP didn't change as much but it did improve. Other, more GPU dependent games though... impressive. I was loading Squad with 900p, everything on low settings, and 30fps with a lot of hiccups. After the new RAM, I'm running it on 1080p, all settings on medium, and high 30s fps on most maps. Not ideal but certainly good enough. KSP is still giving me headaches, though, as reported here. ps: I didn't say anything not to double post or hog the thread so much. But thanks, @Harry Rhodan: my RAM was indeed running at 1333Mhz by default, and the XMP setting (apparently unleashing the RAM) had already given me a ~10% increase in fps across the board.

Well, the RAM has arrived and the difference is noticeable in this specific problem (physics lag). I got more fps too, but the clock is still yellow and the physics lag behind quite significantly in some situations (though not all like before). So like I said above, my fps would drop to 17 on large vessels when looking at a planet. Now it only drops to 30ish, and that is considering I increased the terrain settings. That´s looking into a 140 parts station too, so not bad at all. However. When I look at Kerbin through this station, I get 30fps yet 10 real-life seconds equal 6 in-game seconds. Almost a 1/2 time warp! The most used CPU core is at 60% at this point, while the other three are oscillating at 30~40%. If I look away from Kerbin and into space through the same station, fps goes up to 45+ and 10 real-life seconds equal 9 in-game seconds (clock still yellow). That's rather tolerable. One weird thing I noticed though: my max physics delta setting is not saving. I've tested it with min (0.02) and max (0.12 I think) setting and the difference was precisely nil. Same behaviour and performance. Yet every time when I come back to the main and then settings menu, it is set back at 0.02. Looking it up I noticed some people had trouble with settings not saving on 1.8. I'm running latest 1.9, and all the other settings do save. Only this one seems to reset back to 0.02 and has no effect in-game. Thanks for any insights. Edit: tried editing settings.cfg itself to try and use the max physics delta setting. No joy. No matter what I set it to, game is the same and the information on the file actually gets reverted back to 0.02.

That difference did cross my mind. I don't know how precise Afterburner is but it's what I was using to check. 50-60% seems to be the most used CPU core; the others are 30~40% each. Edit: I'll try to get a screen shot.

Yeah. I, too, disagree on the overpriced bit. The game is actually pretty cheap on sales. Heck, it's cheaper than its DLC (now the DLC, yes, I think is overpriced). Anyway. No, they won't delete it from Steam; they won't make it free either. It could go on (even cheaper) sales, but I doubt that'd happen too soon (not until people have bought KSP2, that is). I, myself, won't make the switch any time soon. I do find most games too expensive on release and can only buy them on sales, often years after release. Plus, I do prefer a game that is fully developed, vastly modded (the mods improve this game so much), with a strong community. So I'd only switch from KSP 1 to 2 once the second is at a similar stage, if ever. It's a risky thing, development-wise. I like racing simulators and this reminds of rFactor. I never made the switch from rFactor 1 to rFactor2; a lot of people didn't. Eventually we just moved on to other titles, as it was never the same.

Just in case, I've deleted \DMagicutilities folder from gamedata. It was seemingly just a leftover from Contracts Window I had tried out at some point. I've increased Max physics delta-time per frame to no result whatsoever. I suppose my fps is now a bit lower on map view (mid 30s), but the clock is still yellow most of the time with any vessel, and all the time with any vessel larger than a couple dozen parts. On small vessels and looking at space I get 60+ fps, on larger vessels I get more like 30ish. But in either case the clock is yellow. I'm finding it rather bizarre that I'm having a problem now with a Ryzen 3 2200g that I didn't have a Celeron N4100 (both cases with onboard graphics). Sure, I had (much) lower fps and worse-looking graphics, but I didn't have this slow-mo feeling all the time. To complete my bafflement, both CPU and GPU are just chilling at 50~60% and 40% respectively.

Interesting find, thanks. I do not have dmagic's science mods and never had. I did have contracts window at some point. The mentions on the log seem to be related to orbital science, which I never had installed. My science mods are [x] Science! and AutomatedScienceSampler. I see the latter is referencing dmagic stuff so it's probably something to integrate those mods, in case I did run both?

Duh. Sorry. KSP.log Player.log I've noticed that my settings got messed up. I moved only the gamedata folder from old to new computer. So Max physics delta-time per frame was at 0.02, all the way to the left, which is probably not ideal and could help explain part of the problems.

Fantastic hear, thanks! Quick question: what happens if I ever remove this mod for whatever reason after having a few vessels with decals on my save? Great work!

So I've recently upgraded from a celeron with Intel HD graphics to a Ryzen 3 2200g with Vega 8. Huge improvement, as you can imagine. But mainly two things are really bothering me. Sytem has 8Gb RAM, out of which I allocated 1Gb to VRAM. 1) A few words, both in the game and in some mods, are in my native (windows 10) language. Which is weird. Everything else is in English just fine, it's just a few random words here and there. Slightly annoying but not unplayable. 2) With current 1080p and medium settings I get 60+ fps on the main menu and with small vessels in space. With large (100+ parts) vessels and stations, I still get 40+, which is pretty good on my book. But. If I look at a planet with atmosphere (tested on Eve and Kerbin), my fps drops to 17. Same thing happens on KSC, I have 17fps. If, in the very same scene, I move around to have the space on the background, fps goes straight back up to 40+. What is going on? Is there some specific setting I'm messing up? I've tried several, none made a difference. Eva around a station orbiting Kerbin was a chore; I think due to the physics slowdown to compensate, everything was in super slo-mo. Playing on my celeron the looks were very ugly but I didn't have such problems with everything slowing down as much. 3) My clock on the top left is yellow some 95% of the time. I've heard this happens when physics has slowed down because of poor performance. Well, why would it slow down when I have 40+ fps? I went to check CPU and it's 50 to 60% in use, 70% at max with huge vessels. And yet physics is slowing down pretty much all the time? Disclaimer: I have quite a few mods, but none of them are visual or do anything to graphics. I think the only parts mods are Hullcam, Surface Lights, and KIS/KAS.

Question: is it possible to just write on the parts/crafts? It's be pretty cool if one could have (for example) the name of the craft or mission stamped onto it. Congrats and thanks for the release!

I bought an electric popcorn machine. I always have lots of butter at home. I haven't been to the movies in years. And I don't know what I'm doing because I don't think I might changed your mind.

I'm now wondering if we will have the option to only change suits back in Kerbin. "Hey, I totally need to take the 3 year journey back home to change my suit!". Or... (one day) have the ability to carry suits around with KIS.

Thanks for the warning. It turns out they only had a single Geil of those specs in stock. It had a black heatspreader though - neither white nor red. In any case, for 2 espressos more I bought 2x of these: Adata XPG Spectrix D41 TUF, RGB, 8GB, 3000MHz, DDR4, CL16 - AX4U300038G16-SB41 They should arrive in a week or so. They're ugly af to my taste and I have a clear acrylic case but oh well: Also, I found out that my mobo is the A320MH, so those settings you told me about are indeed relevant (or so I found on some videos and reviews), I just didn't find those options when I tried fiddling with the BIOS myself the other night. So I already have homework to do tonight. SSD also ordered, but this one should arrive in up to 2 months. That can wait I suppose, as it's mainly for comfort and not direct performance.

Thanks, I'll be sure to have a look after working hours. I have checked BIOS and didn't find too many options; certainly nothing related to overclocking etc., so I'm assuming my mobo is very basic and doesn't even allow it. I had seen some videos of the Vega 8 recommending users to allocate more RAM to the GPU in BIOS, by my BIOS doesn't have that option or control either. Meanwhile, g.skill ripjaws 2800, which is my RAM, seems to be pretty much out of stock or overpriced. I even considered matching different brands, but eventually I found a kit of Geil Evo Potenza 3000Mhz for a decent price (even if still a bit above my budget, the 3000 new is still cheaper than the g.skill 2800 used!). I think the plan will be to buy the kit and then try selling the overpriced g.skill.

After watching this video I'm sold on getting a second RAM stick. If I get that kind of improvement, I'm pretty much set. Still have to confirm my Mobo model and brand. When I looked into the case, it did say "Dual channel RAM" or similar in bold, big letters printed next to the RAM slots. But it only had 2 slots (instead of what I thought were the usual, 4). I'm supposing these two are the two channels but, as is easily noticeable, my knowledge about these things is somewhat basic.

I wish! If I could pay the equivalent of 59 Euro for that kit, I'd drop it right now. The best I found here was a single stick of used 2800 G.Skill for that price. And bear in mind our minimum wage is < 200 Euro. Right now I'm actually in doubt whether I should snatch that very used stick (it is exactly the one I have after all, so it could be a decent opportunity), because for three fiddy more I could order a rx 560d 4gb from China. I suppose the latter would yield a much better improvement overall? I just feels like a bit of a waste of the 2200g though, because the Vega did seem decent enough for an onboard graphics option. Or, I mean, there's also the option of leaving as is and enjoying it for a while. A newer game like Squad ran like s***, but for a KSP machine it's pretty decent. Especially compared to what I used to run it on for a loooong time, haha. No I didn't! I just let w10 do its thing and, after a few restarts, voilá, Radeon software appeared on my system tray and KSP started working "as it should". If the software is installed and running, I supposed it would do a good job at auto updating the drivers? Still, I'll give it a go, thanks. I'm trying to find driver version within the menus, but no joy. I could only find the "Radeon Settings" software version, and it seems to be from 2019, so there's that. Thanks for all the tips and help, guys! Much appreciated.

Thanks. I'm looking at it but a good 8Gb 3000-3200 RAM stick doesn't seem to be that much cheaper itself than a standalone GPU? The one I got is 2800Mhz, but it's feeling lonely lol.

[Edit3] Never mind! I was just about to post on the tech support forums, but tried to fire it up again to test I don't even remember what and it worked perfectly. 1080p, settings all on very high or max, plenty of mods (yet none visual), and 80~90 fps. I'm a happy camper. Apparently all it needed was a few Windows restarts to update all the drivers and all that. It hiccups a bit on load but maybe it'll one day be fixed by upgrading to an SSD (SSD is life). Sweet! So after all, it's an old and cheap system, but apparently I can be one more to recommend the Ryzen 3 2200g with Vega 8 onboard graphics for a budget yet very decent KSP experience. I've been reading that a second RAM stick on dual channel (alternate slots(1 and 3 or 2 and 4) can vastly improve performance, so that should be the next step. [/Edit3] Oh boy, talk about disappointment. I play KSP on a potato (a laptop with a celeron and onboard graphics so you get the gist). After my save grew too much I was getting tired of playing with 6fps on larger vessels (even though I got 20~30 on small ones, which was good enough). Anyway, so after reading a lot of reviews etc. and even watching benchmark videos, I went out and got a Ryzen 3 2200g (edit and 8Gb RAM /edit). I wasn't expecting stellar performance or anything, and maybe one day I could just stick a dedicated GPU in there for more demanding games. But KSP was my focus and I'm not desperate for heavy/visual mods so I thought it was a good compromise. Load the game up on first launch and... 5fps on the menu screen. After changing resolution from 1080p to 720p, it went up to 7. Changed most if not all settings to a minimum and, alas, 10~12 fps. What? I don't get it. Edit2: and the problem seems to be with KSP. I fired up Portal 2 to test it. I got 60 fps with 720p and no AA; and 30 fps with either 1080p no AA or with 720p and 2x AA. Not stellar but within what I expected as a ballpark.

Today was a sad day. It started well. A couple of days ago I've finally landed my Moho base. It tipped over on landing because I tend to not take into account the compression of landing legs, so the engine sticks out. I'm wondering now how (and if) I will ever set it back straight up; then again, it's a station with mainly just some fuel, a capsule and a lab, so I might let it be there. Forever. Meanwhile, my Moho orbital station is rescued, refueled and back on its way. Some time ago I had forgotten to set a KAC alarm and it just flew by Moho, not having the fuel to ever encounter it again and still capture it. Its orbit came back towards Kerbin so it wasn't too hard to send an emergency refueler, if only a little time consuming. But there are very few things more Kerbal than a rescue mission. Meanwhile, great progress is being made on Eve towards the completion of the most stupid contract yet: extract 2,700 ore from Eve and deliver it to Gilly. So I've been sending test stuff and some probes and rovers to scout the sites and test the best design ideas. The first rover landed upside down (ooops), but I paid better attention to the second one and it landed like a charm. I'd post some pictures but I run KSP in a potato you wouldn't believe capable of running an internet browser so I'm properly intimidated by the beautiful images posted here. My game looks straight from the 90s. Anyway, had a great session today with good progress. Even the contract RNG gods smiled my way and graced me with some interesting Moho contracts. Finally. Then I switched back to an Eve rover that arrived to its destination using Bon Voyage - just to have it exploded by a terrain glitch. Again. Oh my, I had forgotten to save before using Bon Voyage, which is something I once was in the habit of doing but it's been a while since I've used a rover this much. So I forgot. Ok, let's check permanent... and nope, it autosaved just after the rover went boom. Fine. Decided to go back a couple of days of game time to my last quicksave. A bit would be lost but not all that much. But opening the load game list took a loooong time - somehow KAC saves a lot of games when switching vessels, even when I limit the number of saves it should create. So I decide to delete some saves to speed things up. Yup. A misclick and I deleted my quicksave. There went the whole morning session. Tried recuva to recover the file, but no trace of it. RIP. Now I'm trying to think whether I could copy and paste my rover from a previous save file into the permanent one created when I ALT-F4 rage quit.

Hard to say just one. 1. Probably the union of modability + awesome community. That's hard to beat. Lots of games have one or the other. Sure the base game would still be damn great, but it wouldn't be as great for just as long. Not to say the amount of mods that had ideas plucked into the base game, so there's also the fact of continuing development. 2. High up there for me is the fact that it's not "canned", i.e. it allows for immense doses of creativity. There's no "one way" of doing anything. 3. Then the fact that there's at least some realism. That is, one can learn something about the world by playing it. So that should be my "top three". Kind of in order, but those three are kind of a must for my enjoyment. If a game drops one of them I lose interest very quickly.

To quickly elaborate on my previous post, this is a cycle that is well known - especially in the tech industry. I'm sure there's a better name for it, or a more succinct way of explaining it. But basically, you start something small but it's customer-oriented so the customers love it. Your focus is on enjoyment and value for the customer. With this, you make a excrementsload of money. Then you (or someone who buys the product from you) starts to make decisions based on what makes (even more) money - and that kills the product. This was so clear when Netflix, for example, started to make you go through suggestions and "new titles" and other categories before you could reach your own list. But this has happened to countless services, brands, gaming franchises, apps, you name it. It will happen to KSP, be it in KSP 2 or 3 or whenever it is. By the looks of it, it might well be on 2 already.

It's like this for practically every title, really. By and large, the buyer base does not care. They will buy whatever is flashy at that moment, play for a couple to a few hours if that much, and move on.