Jump to content

t_v

Members
  • Posts

    783
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

1,141 Excellent

About t_v

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I think it is both - there was some code that was creating these effects, but the underlying cause is the problems with numerical stability in the way KSP handles all of its coordinates and other vectors. Whether it is a big or a core issue, I agree that it would be good to fix it.
  2. If you are on MacOS, you don't have access to Parallax, and every other graphics mod runs worse than on Windows. I would recommend putting your KSP install on a VM if you have one, but without Parallax, Scatterer, EVE, and Waterfall run pretty well. On the content side, I would highly recommend Nertea's mods as mentioned above (make sure to install Heat Control if you are using near/far future), and Extraplanetary Launchpads. I really like the style that Angel-125 brings to mods, and things like Blueshift and Sandcastle make FTL and construction feel like much more accessible and like they fit into stock. (lastly, I would install these via CKAN, which uses the Terminal UI for MacOS, it really helps to easily manage your mods and dependencies)
  3. Good thing KSP simulates landing gear then. Well then it isn't an analogy. You’re right, so let’s do away with the landing gear scenario, because in that one, it is actually relevant to aviation. The thing is, communication between colonies isn’t a space flight problem, it is a government one. Your ships won’t experience different gravity just because your colony is self-governing. It is akin to the anti-radiation paint that goes on airplanes: an actual, serious problem, that excluding would misinform people about (I bet 99% of people think airplanes just have regular, durable paint), and most importantly is not really relevant to the subject. I mean, you could make a huge gameplay system on the outer layer of your plane in a flight sim, but it would just add grind. Not because some people deem it that way (nice straw man btw) but because it is (1) mandatory, as you have to deal with it or your plane breaks down and your passengers get cancer much faster, and (2) not really relevant to the main gameplay. I am strongly in support of features like SoL delay, as long as they are not mandatory. I’ll say this every time that some wacky idea gets introduced: as long as you can ignore it and be fine, there is no harm in implementing it (which isn’t saying that it should be implemented). SoL delays, if they are put into the core experience, are not ignorable. They create a choice between putting in more work and “cheating” by time warping, and they will harm a lot of players’ experiences. Yes it is “misinformation,” test it is unrealistic, but at the end of the day, I want to fly my probes without worrying about my RTGs decaying and whether I should fly yet another mission to unlock that crucial reactor technology yet again.
  4. Due to the patched conics system, the map would be littered with tiny SOI that your trajectory would run over; you would constantly be slowing down the simulation to allow crafts in the background to interact with these SOI instead of phasing through them at high timewarp. Making the asteroids movable would be a large technical hurdle and would cause more problems than it is worth. Those are only a few problems with hundreds of asteroids in that size range.
  5. It definitely could add a new gameplay loop, and having those decisions to make about how to progress across multiple colonies is the reason I personally want SoL delay in my personal KSP 2 experience. But for the average player, I think it would add too much grind. Sure, you can transmit this tech in four years, but why would you do that if you can unlock it again in two? So you fly a science mission, just to unlock a tech that you have already unlocked several times, which doesn’t feel like you are making meaningful progress. Instead, without delay, you can transfer the tech between colonies provided that you have powerful enough comms, and then the next science mission can be focused on discovering a new technology or building towards one, instead of repeatedly unlocking each essential technology.
  6. I really do want to see vast asteroids, although Brittanica tells me that there are about 250 known asteroids larger than 100 km in our solar system (10 km in KSP) and adding 250 Gilly-like bodies with their own gravity might pose an issue. I just want to see an end-game space station dock to an asteroid that is a hundred times bigger than it.
  7. I would like to say that the last two responses really encapsulated what I was hoping to say; that for many, KSP isn't about managing a disjointed space empire, it is about building and flying rockets to have a good experience and work towards cohesive goals. I personally think that SoL communications is a feature that I would like to see in the game - but as a mod, just like I see power suits as a fun mod mechanic in Minecraft, for example. It just doesn't mesh well with the rest of the game for me.
  8. The problem is that this ignores the problem of gameplay. Players of the game (not all of them, and not me) will not want to deal with the issues posed by speed-of-light delay in the game. The question is: Is SoL delay such an integral part to the KSP 2 experience that it needs to happen by default, like the orbital mechanics and engineering challenges of the game? Or is it something more minor that could help reflect real space travel but ultimately can be hand waved, like the dimming of skyboxes in sunlight? I personally think it is the latter. And, if you want scientific explanations for things being the way they are, it is best to forget it. If there are magic photoreceptors that somehow have 30 stops of dynamic range, then why not magic waves that travel infinitely fast? I think that in your opinion, this feature would fit solidly into the core of KSP 2, and correct me if I am wrong. But other people don't see it as a necessity, and the hinderances it poses to gameplay could outweigh the benefits of "realism." (remember, nothing about the way the KSP universe or the Kerbal civilization works makes sense unless you consider that a player is playing a game)
  9. The alternative, which I like better, is to not have speed of light delays in communications. Your point about desynchronized tech trees being an annoyance has changed my mind about whether it should be in stock, and I’d be happy to see it as an option or mod. I think that trying to explain the FTL comms with a technology like quantum entanglement raises more problems than it fixes. The main issue is that as far as we can tell, the “synchronization” of the two particles doesn’t happen immediately - there is a good chance that the two only match once information has the ability to reach from one to the other, which probably happens at the speed of light. Instead of messing with quantum, which has to be hand-waved in multiple ways to get it to work (the main problem is that you can’t actually tell whether communication has even happened when using these particles), why not hand-wave light and say that it travels infinitely fast? Sure it breaks things, but it is a simpler break than breaking quantum, if you want instant comms.
  10. There was a huge discussion in terms of both the objective and subjective side of this suggestion. I'm linking it below: The gist of it is that stars are very dim compared to the sun or even the light of the sun reflecting off of planets, and very bright compared to objects in the shadow of planets (or in interstellar space, but that was discussed in another thread). Regardless of opinion, if you want realism you shouldn't be able to see stars if anything is reflecting the star that you are orbiting. That being said, I think that lots of people want it both ways, but so far it seems that the developers have not decided to implement it. Worst case scenario, it could be modded in like in KSP 1, which would add maybe a few weeks of wait at most. Overall, I think that it shouldn't matter what the developers decide to do since all players will be accommodated for relatively quickly.
  11. I looked at the wiki, and at 0.1 c it would take 7,570 seconds to go from the outermost edges of Eeloo's orbit to the other outermost edge of Eeloo's orbit in the Kerbol system.
  12. I just want to note on the subject of this image that the skybox looks quite a bit darker than in some of the images of ships in deep space. I can still see the nebulae but not as much. There is also some sort of post-processing going on since the color balance is different from other things we have seen. If this is an image from the game and there is an easy way to add custom post-processing effects, that would be huge.
  13. If you want to synchronize technology across your colonies, I think they should need to communicate. There’s not really any reason why a colony 5 lightyears away should magically know of research on a local planet unless it can receive communications. I think that comms technologies will improve instead, and probes will need to have really big/powerful transceivers or have an interstellar relay chain, or both.
  14. If you don’t have enough delta-v or your engine is good enough, you won’t want to be accelerating the whole time. First, the actual time that you gain from using a baristochrone trajectory decreases as you accelerate closer to the switching point. What is the purpose of increasing your velocity by 100 m/s when you are only benefitting from that for like 5 minutes, which would gain you next to no distance. Early ships that do long accelerations and decelerations will realistically accelerate to a cruising speed, then coast for a third of the journey, then decelerate. Not only is it more economical, but it affords a higher acceleration due to lower starting mass, so for shorter trips it might actually gain time relative to a heavier ship not using its full potential. Second, if you have an engine that can accelerate you to 0.99C before the halfway point, going any faster would be pointless unless you are really short on LS, which probably isn’t a concern at that tech level. Cruising is just better for dV in general, whether you are cruising at 0.2 C or 0.9.
  15. I was going to say the same thing, but people get locked into the Steam ecosystem and get very used to the convenience of having everything in one place, having community content being supported for free, and yes, even having their games kept automatically up-to-date. I don’t use Steam unless absolutely necessary, but it might be very hard to have all of your games on one platform and then not use it for a game.
×
×
  • Create New...