• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

138 Excellent

About Mako

  • Rank
    Bottle Rocketeer
  1. @AlamoVampire There is no vessel part in the game that is procedural. Whether Procedural Fairings could have been used in whole, in part, or not at all is completely irrelevent: it was never going to happen. I believe HarvesteR said they specifically wanted vessels in KSP to be built from fixed-size, prefabricated parts. Therefore, procedural parts, such as fairings, were not a possibility no matter how much anyone wanted them. I'm actually surprised stock fairings have as much flexibility as they do because of this. So, if my memory serves me, the dev team wanted it this way. It was a conscious decision. They understood the arguement for procedural parts, but felt that functionality didn't fit with everything else so they made their own version that fit what they wanted. That's also why we don't have stock modular/procedural fuel tanks. At this point I doubt we'd see this design change significantly. Perhaps a new product with a different design philosophy would have a better chance of implementing procedural parts in stock. I'm just glad options exist, even if it's in the form of mods, so that players (at least those on PC) can tailor their experiences to their preferences.
  2. I was voted "Most Likely to Kill a Buzz" by my class many years ago. The magic isn't gone! It was inside those unbreakable joints all along... all we had to do was believe.
  3. Assuming you did not detach the pod from the rest of the launcher before firing and you had unbreakable joints turned on, I suspect what you're looking at is the rubber-banding of the joint between the parts as the force of the explosion is great enough to propel the pod away from the base while the joint remains intact to pull the pod back into position. Joints can do funny things when they're set to unbreakable. That would be my suspicion based on what you've mentioned.
  4. @Gaarst What about them, besides the bug that prompted this thread (which was reported earlier in this thread to have been acknowledged and addressed by the devs) is so wrong in your opinion? They've been improved since they were first implemented and I don't recall them ever being unusable for me. Admittedly I don't have the most inventive play style, so I doubt I've pushed them to their limits, but I've not had difficulty using them. I totally understand and respect other players' preferences, and I'm glad we have multiple options. More options are usually better, in my opinion. In this case we have a stock option that is functional and fits the no-procedural-parts plan that the devs had (whether or not there should be procedural parts is a completely different discussion that goes well beyond fairings), and a mod option that people seem to be very fond of. (I can't say I'm concerned for the console players on the topic of fairings because as of right now barely anything works for them; fairings are probably the least of their struggles.) Although, everyone should probably completely disregard everything I say on the topic of fairings: I was one of those crazy people who recognized the confetti fairing separation was not realistic or ideal but wasn't bothered by it at all. Though I am glad clamshell separation is a thing, because, as I said earlier, I like options.
  5. @AlamoVampire I don't want to play "What If..." all day, but it's likely that procedural fairings were not appealing to the development team as there are no procedural parts in the game at all. They had a specific lego-style design in mind for vessel creation, and I'm guessing they wanted to stick with it. But we'll never know what they were thinking. For all we will ever know they could have asked for permission to use/offered to buy procedural fairings and been denied. Either way, it's extremely unlikely to change. Thank goodness for mods, right? Hopefully they'll give modders even more freedom and control before they wind down development, but at least before then it sounds like they're still working on pesky bugs like the one in this thread.
  6. Unless a mod has a license that allows the work to be used in a commercial product without permission, they would be setting themselves up for a lawsuit if they just picked mods they liked and put it in their game. I don't know what the license allows regarding the procedural fairings mod, but I doubt Squad can just take it and insert it in their game without opening themselves up to legal trouble. And if I'm wrong about the procedural fairings license, the point still stands for any mod you might want added to stock that has a commercial-use restriction in its license. For the record, I have no issues with stock fairings. Barring any bugs I prefer not having to install a mod to have fairings that get the job done. I think they have improved upon their initial implementation in a satisfactory manner, and I don't need to update anything when a new version of KSP releases. I understand why you would want them to be stock, but I bet you can find a significant number of players who don't care and/or prefer the stock implementation to have them remain in mod territory. Options are good, and thankfully mods were considered important enough to support. Instead of lobbying for this mod, or that mod, or my pet mod to be included in stock (which is likely impossible for many mods), we should all be lobbying for more access for mods so that modders can create more freely with more possibility and less limitations.
  7. @Omnifarious This can occur if you have some parts that are clipped through other parts on your ship. Sometimes the clipped parts can induce unexpected phantom forces between parts which can cause rapidly accelerating rotation of the ship to occur. If you don't clip parts but still experience the rotation, I would start to suspect a mod might be causing your trouble.
  8. So maybe I should say it's the auto-reboot to apply an update that was the issue rather than the auto-update. I'm quite used to auto-update as well, but I've never had a system reboot to apply the update without permission until Windows 10. Perhaps this was an edge case, but it nearly caused me some trouble. I do live production for events, and my Windows 10 laptop must have downloaded an update when it connected to the venue's wifi (auto-connected since it was a venue we frequent), and when it was idle it rebooted without warning to apply the update. I'm used to the nag screens of previous Windows versions, but there was nothing this time. I suspect it was a security update that was deemed a priority and/or that the system hadn't been updated in a while. Whatever the reason, it rebooted to apply the update without asking if it could, and I almost missed my cue because of it. I now check for updates before taking the systems out into the field, and I've set them to ignore updates during our busy hours. It's limited to a 12-hour window of the day, but it covers most of the time we operate and it's better than nothing. Perhaps there is something I've overlooked, but at the time it happened the only way I could find to avoid it happening again was to set those limits or make sure the system doesn't connect to the internet (not always an option depending on the event). I also use Windows 7 systems at work, and I've never had to defeat auto-updates to be in control of what is going on.
  9. @Gargamel and @regex I can't say I've seen any show-stopping problems with Windows 10, though my experience is mostly with laptops from work which came with 10 installed. I believe there were the typical growing pains associated with an OS release/major version upgrade, and the number of issues at launch may have been exacerbated by Microsoft launching 10 as a free upgrade to 7, 8, and 8.1 systems. Lately, however, I haven't really seen people mentioning the inability to move to Windows 10 because it won't work. I believe that for the most part if you can run Windows 7, 8, or 8.1, you can run 10. For me it comes down to some little annoyances at little changes between 7 and 10. Nothing so dramatic as the changes from 7 to 8, but enough that I had no desire to upgrade while it was free. When I build my next system I'll move to 10 because at that point the benefits will outweigh the small annoyances. On a somewhat related note, I will say that 10's auto-update and then auto-reboot with no way cancel the reboot came as an unpleasant surprise on one of the work laptops. It didn't cause a problem, but it was close. I've since set it to not update during peak hours, but I wish there was a way to disable the auto-reboot completely.
  10. I suspect someone else can help you better since I have no experience with KSP on Steam, but I would try completely uninstalling KSP and then downloading version 1.0.5. If you have already tried that, then hopefully someone who has experience with the Steam version can offer a better solution. I do know that the directory where Steam installs KSP can be copied, backed up, and used with or without Steam, so you can keep backups of different versions with different mods and play them whenever you want without fear of Steam auto-updating. Good luck, and welcome to the community.
  11. Windows 7. While Windows 10 is, in my experience, a less annoying OS to interact with than 8.1 (and I don't even want to think about 8) 7 beats both in terms of least obnoxious to use. I suppose I'll eventually need to move to Windows 10, but that can wait for a core hardware upgrade. I use 7 at home and both 7 and 10 at work, and some feature changes that took place after 7 are annoying bordering on frustrating; I've found some workarounds that help but I've never needed to worry about those issues with 7. I'm really glad Linux exists and is a capable and enjoyable alternative to Windows, but I find that I appreciate Windows compatibility and ease of use over Linux's flexibility and price tag.
  12. They are not available. This thread, which I'm guessing you've already seen, provides all of the available early versions up to 0.13.3. Steam and the Squad store page (presumably other store pages as well) usually have the current version and the most recent previous version available. Squad/Take-Two could someday make some of the versions between 0.13.3 to 1.2 available, but I haven't seen any official word of that happening yet.
  13. Well, the listed specs that it sounds like you have found (like those on the Steam KSP page) are the minimum and recommended specs according to Squad. I can't recall if they've been updated at all over the course of development, but the minimum listed should be capable of running the game, but perhaps requiring lower settings and with lower framerate as compared to a more powerful system. KSP's performance is almost entirely tied to the CPU, as opposed to many games where the graphics card becomes the main performance bottleneck. So if you're only planning on playing KSP, the processor is pretty much the most important component to consider. My understanding is that the graphics capabilities of the last few generations of Core i3,5,7 series processors are usually adequate to run KSP without the need of a dedicated graphics card, but it may require reduced graphics settings. For many users, the second most important component to consider is amount of RAM, as this can affect mod use and general performance if the amount is too low. After making sure those two components are adequate, the next thing to consider might be a dedicated graphics card. If you have some desire now, or in the future, to play other games besides KSP, you will probably be wanting a dedicated card at some point. If you're buying a laptop you won't really be able to upgrade/add parts later (aside from RAM), so it's a good idea to buy for what you want now and what you think you'll want between now and when you're ready to upgrade again. If you're buying a desktop, upgrading parts is not terribly difficult so you can always add a graphics card or more RAM -- or possibly even a CPU upgrade -- at a later time. The install process is likely easier than you think and there are a lot of good resources available online to assist part picking and installation. If you have a price point in mind for how much you want to spend and an idea of how you'll be using the computer besides KSP (and any bells and whistles you might want), I'm sure we can get a some ideas together on what to look for.
  14. The port work that was done by Flying Tiger Entertainment was so problematic that Squad was forced to end their contract and (probably nearly) start over from scratch. Several months ago Squad began working with Blitzworks for the new version of the port, and work is ongoing. There is no release date at this time as Squad does not typically announce dates before the work is complete. To elaborate just a bit, the version that is available on the USA store is widely considered buggy/broken to the point of unusable/unenjoyable. There are multiple issues, but the largest one is nearly universal save game corruption requiring a totally new save file after only a few hours of gameplay. If I remember correctly, Flying Tiger Entertainment and Squad did attempt to patch that version, but never seemed able to fix the most major of bugs. In its current state it seems as though everyone is better off not being able to purchase it. Now, with Blitzworks and help from an additional QA team, Squad has been saying work is progressing well and they're very happy with how things are going so far. They're taking their time for this version, and given the mess that they're trying to move away from it seems like the right decision. The KSP Weekly that comes out on Fridays in The Daily Kerbal usually has some news regarding the current state of the console version. There's not much to say because very little of the work is new or noteworthy, but they have been mentioning it each week for a while now.
  15. No problem at all. I won't be purchasing a console KSP as I don't currently own any consoles, but I have a friend or two who might appreciate the game when it finally comes together so I've been keeping an eye out for news. Squad is taking their time this go around, and I think it'll be a while before it's released but most people probably agree with you that it's the right choice. I wanted to add, just in case you prefer the social media scene, that I bet you could check into Squad's presence on twitter and whatever else to be updated that way if it's easier. And welcome to the forums/community.