Jump to content

kerbmario

Members
  • Posts

    80
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by kerbmario

  1. 7 minutes ago, t_v said:

    Wow, I learned a lot about engines just from this! Thanks for making parts that have components reflecting their function. 

    (Now that we know asteroids are a part... is everything a part? Am I just a part?)

    a part of the KSP community to say the least 

  2. On 6/2/2022 at 5:02 PM, Vl3d said:

    I've been thinking about some bugs that are actually useful for players building exotics. The thing is.. I really don't like this type of exploit-based way of playing the game. I feel like the game should aim for rather grounded engineering principles and physics that (if possible) are closer to the realistic baseline (while keeping the fun in the game). Of course, some people love them and want them in the game. I will focus on the negatives while keeping a positive attitude first. :rolleyes:

    I have a few examples we can discuss - things that are in KSP 1 - but that I wish were not or will not be present in KSP 2:

    • Part clipping that does not realistically calculate combined walls mass / area or combined internal volume. I hate parts clipping one inside another but keeping the functionality of both. I feel like this is not possible in real life - we can only clip by cutting / combining walls to make a bigger container with a certain internal volume, but we cannot duplicate that volume.
    • So this means I don't like vessels that look small but have N fuel tanks or batteries or wings or solid rocket boosters inside.
    • I don't like how we can move parts away from the root so they look like they're floating in the air. There should be visible struts / supports for any floating part.
    • I don't like the high lift - low drag exploit using the heat shields. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOlMlRf9qvo
    • I don't like the decouplers exploit and other kraken drives that unrealistically allow for compounding force.
    • Parts clipping in the ground when vessels reload.
    • Being able to visibly pull apart parts (like docking ports) that are actually still stuck together.
    • Unrealistically limp rubber rockets or extra flexible joints and the connected Ant engines rope exploit (wobbly should have its limits).
    • Floppy robotic parts if we don't lock the joints every time (I made some bay doors that were flopping all over the place).
    • Spinning ladders bug.
    • Parts supporting incredible weight just because they are 200+ meters away and the physics does not load for them.

    And other stuff we can find on the amazing channels of

    Yeah, it's fun to see one time - like a SpeedRun, but in the end these are bugs. Mr. Tom Vinita said the team will defeat the Kraken. I feel like all this stuff should be removed especially if there's going to be multiplayer. It would be fair that we should all be able to build incredible things through hard work and smart engineering, not using game bugs and exploits.

    Physics vessel range can be more than 200m, just install PhysicsRangeExtender (PRE)

    On 6/2/2022 at 5:45 PM, Pthigrivi said:

    For the most part Im fine with losing unrealistic physics and kracken drives, but Id be a little annoyed if they eliminated part clipping. I do it for aesthetic reasons and I think players can draw their own fuzzy line over whats realistic. There are a lot of times when you’re clipping into something that’s obviously a bulkhead or space between truss elements, or just pushing a light in a bit so it looks married to the surface. I also sometimes float parts, usually temporarily while Im working but occasionally floated off one part for node/alignment reasons but visibly touching another so it doesn’t look magic. If players feel like abusing that thats just up to them. 
     

    Ditto on a few unrealistic things like infinite engine restarts, saturable reaction wheels, and  RTG decay. Its just a simplified convenience that makes the game more playable. The one classic exploit Id be fine with losing is tapping time-warp to halt rotation. Im actually pretty happy to see things continue to rotate under warp. 

    How about EngineIgnitor (or EngineIgnitorReIgnited), would that satisfy what u want in things engine restarts???

  3. i have been trying to do a pylon config for a turbofan jet engine, but i have a few questions!

     

    is transform the correct way for mesh switching?

    i have two .mu files, one is pure engine, one is the engine WITH pylon attached.

    should the second mu be with engine or pylon only?

    does transform support paths? if yes, how exactly

     

     

    it would also be nice if anyone could provide some example code for mesh switching or any mods that use it 

  4. this isn't exactly KSP, but the Balsa Section of Spacedock (Which is primarily a KSP mod site) has some weird "Mods",  uploaded by an user called "gotik", all these mods contain a docx document. but "gotik" seems to be some ITS  (Qoute is Profile description of spacedock account gotik

    Quote

    Information Transformation Services (ITS) offers customized and cost-effective online data entry service to help businesses manage all data entry tasks. Because accurate final data is required for time-sensitive applications such as invoices, insurance claims, legal documents, and product catalogs, improving turnaround time for any data entry process is often a high priority. Customer support for functions such as shipping and customer feedback is another important area where expedited data entry performance is critical. To meet these challenges, you can shorten the process by delegating time-consuming data entry tasks to ITS experts. Our team works around the clock and completes data entry assignments online; by outsourcing to ITS, you can meet all of your data management needs.

    i have written an email to spacedock support like 1.5 weeks ago (on 9th of June 2022)

    Quote

    Hello Spacedock support

    i have browsed through the balsa section, and look, it seems like a spam, this mod! please moderate the balsa section of mods more.

    this is the "mod" in questoin https://spacedock.info/mod/3038/Advantage%20of%20Using%20Questionnaire%20Data%20Entry%20Services%20for%20Your%20Business#info

    also the other balsa mods are kinda the same thing, all from the same author.

    sincerely, Kerb

    and they haven't replied! is this email ([email protected]) dead or dont the spacedock people check the support email? has anyone information about why they won't respond?

     

    thx in advance

  5. 20 minutes ago, taniwha said:

    Parts that require mods cannot be imported properly, since those mods can't run in Blender.  Even stock part variants are not supported. This is not likely to ever change. The craft importer was written at a time when such mods were not yet in common use.

    so the importer only is able to import simple rockets?

  6. On 6/12/2022 at 7:18 AM, Lisias said:

    Hi!

    I want to make a suggestion. I noticed that you renamed two parts, 74MTS and 58MTS, to 74MST and 58MST.

    This is usually a bad idea because anyone using a previous release of the add'on will be unable to load their savegames and crafts because of this change.

    So I suggest you add the following patch to the distribution:

    +PART[58MST]
    {
    	@name = 58MTS
    	%category = none
    }
    
    +PART[74MST]
    {
    	@name = 74MTS
    	%category = none
    }

    This will create a hidden copy of the parts using the older names, allowing people with ongoing savegames (not to mention crafts being imported from Kerbal-X) to keep going. New crafts will be created using the new names, so it's a win-win situation.

    Cheers!

    would it be the same case with 31-37AD, which i renamed to 37-50AD?

    +PART[37-50AD]
    {
    	@name = 31-37AD
    	%category = none
    }

     

  7. Just now, Forked Camphor said:

    Oh, that is totally doable, even with procedural parts.

    What I meant was something like this
     

      Hide contents

    l1011-500_tristar_raf_zd948_07.jpg

    The transition from the intake on the top to the exhaust on the bottom-rear is really smooth, no sharp angles. That type of shape are impossible to do in KSP, which limits a lot of creative designs, like those inspired by X-33 body, Rafale intakes, Dream Chaser, flying wings, or streamlined style in general

    i think only cones or fairings are kinda able do this intake-to-exhaust transition, but it would look bad. we would need smooth curved parts for that

  8. 1 minute ago, Forked Camphor said:

    I don't think that is possible. I mean making a curve pipe or "S" shape. Unless LGG can add kinda the same funcionality that mods like procedural parts or procedural fairings have to edit curves.

    a shape like this

     _________
    /                 \

    |                  |

    |                  |

    \________/

  9. are those parts compatible to be imported correctly to blender using the mu plugin?

    also another question i asked in the old thread before being you are now maintaining this cool mod.

     

    When will we get more included Textures, like Turbofan inlets? (I want to create engine 2 of a Klockhead K-1011 with the cool looking  elliptical/tube shape, with CRFP)

  10. If I import crafts that used TweakScale, the scaled parts aren't scaled when imported.

    Kinda same thing for B9 Procedural Wings. Any Procedural (Wing) Part will revert to standard shape of the given part (the shape you get when you want to place that part in VAB!)

     

    someone needs to try and import CFRP CarnationRed Flexible Fuel tanks and see if they have the custom shape or the "normal shape". @CarnationRED @linuxgurugamer(lgg, current maintainer)

×
×
  • Create New...