Rocket Farmer

I’ve noticed the same. For me my 4090 goes to 100% and my FPS is 77 while looking at Kerbin 4k Ultra. GPU dials back to 63% and FPS goes to 151 when not looking at Kerbin.

4090, 13900 Water cooled, 64GB DDR5, Firecuda drive. Launching a 40 part ship. Ultra 4K. 85-90 FPS launch and first 30 seconds after. 60-65 FPS going through cloud layer. But here is the interesting part. While in space if I face Kerbin it’s 77 FPS while my GPU is 100%. If I face space it’s 150 FPS while my GPU drops back to 63%.

What other game do you have that will pump out 4k at 30fps on all high settings on less than a 3070?

I’ll try and let you know. But all you need to do is burn retrograde to your current trajectory to achieve orbit.

You forgot about the AMD systems as by a quick count I see 35% of users are on Nvidia systems that meet or exceed that limit. Add in AMD and it goes up around another 10%+. Also that’s all steam users of which there are a bunch with potato’s playing Tetris. The people playing games like Kerbals would, on average, have better systems. A not insignificant percentage of the systems in there wouldn’t even play KSP 1 so they aren’t KSP players to begin with. So you said 20%. It’s somewhere around 45% by the survey and in reality probably tops well over 50%. So no, not “close” at all.

Seriously? So a movie is worth 500X more value because you just sit and passively watch? You do understand active engaged people actually get more value out of creating and exploring than passively watching right? Yahtzee dice. Good comparison. I googled and a set costs $8. Given on KSP I spent $0.02/ hour I hope you can get 400 play hours out of those dice to match KSP. ”Absurd price?” Did you miss the “entire Kerbal system”, “new parts” etc? Even if you are good that’s still a couple of hundred hours to explore everything. So $0.25/hour ($50/200 hours) is an “absurd price.” That doesn’t count all the extras and mods that will end up in the game. “No promise to deliver more?” Except for the roadmap promising to deliver more and giving the order it is coming in? From the same guys that promised a release date and will seemingly hit it? Basically you want a game that costs 10s if millions to develop and yet for youv”meh $50, it’s not worth more than $45.” Lol.

Lol. Except you miss the part where they built the entire sandbox without which your “effort at entertainment” wouldn’t be possible. You spend $10/hour to go to a movie. By comparison if you get at least 5 hours out of a new Kerbal sandbox then you get at least that much utility. In fact it’s almost impossible that you could possibly find cheaper entertainment. We both know with the existing sandbox you can easily spend 100-200 hours plus with all the mods that will be released you could stay entertained for a very long time. All for $50 plus their promise to deliver more. It boggles the mind at how cheap people get.

13900, 4090 OC, 64GB DDR5 and a quick hard drive as well. It’s going to be a fun ride.

Let me get this straight. As a fellow 10+ year Kerbal player I’ve logged somewhere around 1,500 hours. I originally paid $30. You probably have as many hours as I do so it’s cost you $0.02/hour for entertainment. Yet Somehow you don’t think its sequel is worth $50 because it isn’t finished? How exactly do you value things?

I’m sorry I really don’t understand the community’s response to the GPU requirement. They literally pegged it to need a 4 year old GPU that was the 6th best of its Nvidia generation (2 newer generations have since been released). It currently sells for $350 and over 50% of people on steam use better.

Per the steam GPU survey it’s somewhere around 50%. so nowhere near 80%.

The 2060 limit is interesting. I’m guessing either they have ray tracing (which means 2060 and up) or those volumetric clouds really eat the GPU power.

? He said 80% won’t make minimum and I indicate that the number is a lot higher than that. You then prove me right by calculating it’s at least 35% then say I’m wrong? Also your count of Steam units was too low as you forgot the AMD units so the actual count is closer to 43%. So thank-you for proving me right.

I doubt 80% of gamers have less than the minimum here. On the GPU side (which is the pricier item) we are talking a 7th tier GPU that was released 5 years ago and can be bought for around $350.

Let me get this straight. You are surprised that the minimum specs on a brand new game are a 7th tier card that is 5 years old? You base this on your previous experience of a 9th tier card being able to run a 4 year old game?

Hello Its true KSP did humble the best CPUs of the time but time does march on and hardware is improving. Expect that the game will still be CPU (not GPU) bound so that fancy GPU you have will always be idling. Also expect that modern monster CPUs (say a soon to be released 7950x3d) will be able to tear through it. However if you have a below mid level CPU expect performance to suffer a lot.

I really really doubt that. The original KSP spent several years getting to 1.0 and Star Citizen is at about 8 years of alpha access. Ok the absolute tightest schedule it will take 2 weeks for testers to run through the full game. Then it will take KSP a minimum of 1 week to classify the bugs and determine which Dev should even tackle them. Then that Dev will need a couple of weeks (absolute minimum) to make the fixes and probably much much more. Then there needs to be at least a week plus of internal testing of the new code then another week testing all the new fixes together to get to gold code. Most companies can manage a normal full update about once every 3 months (hot fixes for more critical elements of course are much faster) Then the whole process starts over again as the alpha testers try the new build.

Sigh. Let me get this straight. You bought the original KSP about 5 years ago. You have over 1,000 posts on the forum so you probably have at least 500 hours of play time and another 100+ hours of forum posting time (also entertainment). You originally paid somewhere around $40 for KSP so you’ve gotten immense value off purchasing the original game. Now you are upset at the value proposition of spending another $50 upfront before seeing the new sequel? Let’s face it at worst KSP2 is a completely unplayable jumble of code which never gets fixed at which point you’ve paid $90 to the KSP series for an amazing amount of entertainment. That’s the worst case here for you (which is very unlikely). So all of the mock upset and concern is total entitled bunk.

Depends where you live. I’ve been shoveling snow for almost a month now.

Not really VTOL but life like air breaks. I have a decent solution for landing and takeoff on very small spots on Dina. My airplane is primarily powered by 2 Nervs in the traditional spot at the back of the airplane. however I have 2 small rockets (I forget their name right now) with their thrusters mounted beside the cockpit but aimed forward and down (about 30 degrees below the plane of the plane (that’s a pretty plain plane pun). So when I am descending I do an unpowered glide and I lock my wheel break. If I’m coming in too hot I nose up and do quick bursts with my reverse thrusters to slow down. If I’m coming in too fast I nose down and hit the thrusters to give me more lift. After a few practices you can touch down with around 15m/s of speed which with your breaks locked means you don’t go far. On takeoff I Lee the nose down and use both sets. My main engines give me thrust while my lower one pushes the work plane off the ground. Makes for short runway takeoffs.

All time favourite Kerbal thing was last Halloween when I opened the door and was greeted by a 4 foot Kerbal in full costume. When I asked if he was Jeb Kerbal the kid was so excited that somebody had finally recognized him.

I don’t think there is a hard limit. I stacked about 10 on top of each other (column style) and as I turned on more and more units Jeb (sitting on top for science purposes) defiantly turned faster and faster. Eventually the stubby wings I had on started to look like they turned one direction while jeb appeared to spin the other direction (always loved that optical allusion). Anyways eventually (after 5 or 6 rotors are turned on) the whole unit starts blurring and then the column explodes. Before it explodes you get some very weird optical items (mid way down the column it appears to spin off access like it is flying apart but things stay together). Lastly In one iteration I had jeb jump out of his chair and he flew several hundred meters turning like a top but survived.

Found a fun bug. Take a rocket in the VAB, attach the small pistons. Extend them to full length. Connect parts on the other end of them. Retract. The parts stay in their original location when they were hooked on but are still connected. I had a rocket take off with floating attachments.

Problem one possible (truly Kerbal) solution to slow rotation of the rotors/servos. Combine multiple rotors together on top of each other. If one spins at 600rpm then if you attached another in front of it together they would achieve 1,200rpm. Keep adding to desired speed?

I’ve never used it but Mechjeb is fine because it makes the game more accessible to more people. Some kids need training wheels. It’s great they make biking more accessible. Some never outgrow them. Again it’s great they are biking. Some people even prefer training wheels because “pick your reason here.” It’s still great they are biking. So my advice is to not worry about other people on training wheels because it’s what makes them happy.