Dfthu
-
Posts
703 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Dfthu
-
-
Just now, pandaman said:
I'm running a GTX 1650, and got a bit 'twitchy' on seeing the minimum specs, but I'll give it a whirl and see how it goes. I'll know in a week if it runs or not.
My PC is a few years old now and I was expecting to need to upgrade to get the 'full effect' anyway and planning/waiting hopefully for another year or so. I just wasn't expecting that I would be scraping below minimum specs.
I could upgrade my GC and hope, but that seems a bit pointless given the age of my PC.
I'm in the same boat. I originally got my PC as prebuilt over 4 years ago now. To be fair I was kinda dumb about PCs still and it was on a deep discount. So, it only had a Ryzen 2400G and a GTX 1050. I've already upgraded the RAM (8 to 16GB), GPU (GTX 1050 to a GTX 1660 super), and a whacked out PSU from Best Buy that I'm frankly surprised hasn't blown up yet. Only compounded by the fact I was gifted a new 1080p 144hz monitor. My 1660 super can just barley run Ultra 60 FPS, let alone 144FPS. Being a prebuilt I've done pretty much everything I could to upgrade it. I was hoping to last a little longer with my current system, but this might just push me over the edge. Still I can't wait to buy KSP 2 day 1 and try it out.
-
57 minutes ago, RealKerbal3x said:
Yikes, I wasn't expecting the GPU to be the bottleneck here, here's hoping my 1660super will be able to run it at all
I feel like the 1660 super should just be enough. They both have 6GB of VRAM and I can overclock my 1660 super a fair bit. My rig probably won't handle KSP 2 the best, but it'll run i bet.
-
7 hours ago, mattinoz said:
A smaller size class still might be generally useful the full span of the game, sure yes bogging player down early game should be avoided but that is true of current KSP instead of random strange take temp here, here and contracts so you build a plane and then walk a bit. small probe rockets could be used to teachify landing accuracy.
Late game your colony ship could then use them to set up a network of scanners and relays as you arrive in the new system.
I agree, KSP 1 never got a full line of .625m parts. We just got small engines and tanks for probes. Never got any large tanks or lifter engines in that size class. Maybe include some even smaller probe parts/tanks/engines to make micro probes and you can use .625m parts for a lifter.
-
-
8 minutes ago, Minmus Taster said:
Kerbal Aviation program anyone?
I honestly feel like that would be a DLC rather than a stand alone game
-
"SpaceX Starlink satellites responsible for over half of close encounters in orbit"
https://www.space.com/spacex-starlink-satellite-collision-alerts-on-the-rise
-
On 2/22/2021 at 8:14 PM, Kwebib said:
@blackrack@RyanRisingOkay, I have some logs and some screenshots.
KSP Version 1.10.1
JNSQ 0.9.0
Kopernicus Stable R34
EVE Redux 1.11.2.1
Scatterer 0.0632 and 0.0723
Logs: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1ip76-oC5F8OMPgjO4L-PZxuBlcJOyrdP?usp=sharing
Dusk, Scatterer 0.0632:
Dusk, Scatterer 0.0723:
Mid-day, Scatterer 0.0632:
Mid-day, Scatterer 0.0723:
You can see it's just a color issue, and may just need updated configs.
I actually prefer the mid-day color of 0.0723. But the sunrise and sunset do look much better in 0.0632.
I had the same problem with the same mods, Plus most of Near Future technology mods installed. Tried with all of most recent mods and scatter didn't work, defaulted to intergraded graphics. Changing graphic settings did nothing. Tried a totally new install and it didn't work either. However Reverting to 0.0632 scatterer fixed the problem. This isn't a bug report either, just a observation
-
On 7/18/2021 at 12:48 PM, Dominiquini said:
Found a bug:
* Wrong message on stage recover fail: "Terminal velocity of 80.71) (less than 12 needed)"
Thanks.
I agree with Starwaster, I see nothing wrong here. It seems you just had the SRB and a decoupler. You had no parachutes on it to slow down so it was moving at 80.71 m/s (terminal velocity) when it hit the ground. You need to add parachute(s) so the velocity is below 12
-
Here is the empty sample capsule
And here is the Coring bit with the sample tube
Perseverance Mars rover's first rock sample goes missing (yahoo.com)
-
12 minutes ago, K^2 said:
The problem with this kind of analysis is that most games on PC are GPU-bound. So having a 1660 Super is usually going to be the performance bottleneck on that build, and that's a pretty decent graphics card. So yeah, most games should run fine, and in terms of graphics, there's absolutely no reason I can see why KSP2 should struggle with it. You might have to set vegetation density one tick bellow maximum, if that's a tunable setting, or something like that.
However, KSP was a very CPU-hungry game. KSP2 is expected to be much better optimized, but also has a lot more to do on CPU, so it's still almost certainly going to be limited by CPU performance for most people. And this is where things get complicated.
Like I said earlier, the minimum spec I'm confident in having decent performance is PS5. Because if they can't get it to run well on PS5, they might as well just quit now. On paper, PS5 CPU has more than twice the performance of Ryzen 5 2400G. However, most of that comes from extra cores. In single thread performance, the difference is about 20%-25%. Which is still considerable, but if KSP2 is still mostly bound by single-thread performance and Intercept manages to optimize that thread's performance a little better than PS5 would need, then the 2400G might do just fine.
tl;dr: That setup might be entirely fine for KSP2 - there is no glaring problem that would make me heavily doubt it - but there is no way to be certain at this point.
Good news, though, is that even if your CPU can't handle KSP2, that's the only part that needs an upgrade. You currently have an AM4 socket motherboard, and that will easily take the aforementioned Ryzen 5 3600X, for example, or even something a bit more modern. Obviously, no need to rush for anything, and the best strategy is to just wait until the specs are announced and then consider if it's something worth upgrading over.
The only thing about my PC that it was a pre built. So I got a pretty low poor motherboard as result ( ASRock > A320M-HDV ) I've already upgraded most parts of the PC already and I thinking the next time I upgrade it would just be best to start new and build my own. Plus the whole shortage isn't helping anything either. If things get a bit choppy in KSP 2 it'll be fine as long its no worse than KSP 1.
-
My rig has a 1660 super, Ryzen 5 2400G, and 16GB of ram. I can can play pretty much every game I throw at it, besides MSFS 2020. So i'd imagine something around my system should good enough.
-
48 minutes ago, tater said:
Man I hope this actually happens in the future. Making Super Heavy and Starship even bigger and more powerful. One of the most exciting things (IMO)
EDIT: Wonder if this 150 Ton reusable figure includes a possible stretch.
-
Hate to be that guy but when are we expecting a full test fire and then orbital flight? All of this is moving incredibly fast.
-
Since bases and colonies are such big parts of the game id like to see some self leveling legs for small bases. Maybe even some tubes to connect them.
-
-
4 hours ago, tater said:-snip-The black structure looks like a jig. Is this the first chomper?
Forgive me if I'm dumb, but is the chomper the thing they will use the grab the booster when it lands?
-
In my opinion there's pretty much only 2 currencies in career mode. I don't think I ever really cared about reputation or effects. What I really want to see is them make reputation actually matter in some way. But I do think 3 currencies makes career mode better. Especially if reputation is improved
-
23 hours ago, The Doodling Astronaut said:
-Snip-
So i'm curious, why did you guys go with vertical instead of horizontal?
If i had to guess it looks more "modern' and "sci-fi" compared to regular turbines. Plus I think they're more efficient IRL
-
7 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:
Thats pretty much what the US military does, and they just fly cargo flights at nearly the same pace as an airline. There is no supply gap that needs to be filled with a rocket.
All it would do is just get it there faster
-
3 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:
And what do you do with an empty starship afterwards. Just leave the multi million dollar piece of equipment there or somehow ship it back over most likely uneven terrain under suboptimal circumstances.
Unless they only launch it between very large military bases. It takes around 14 hours to fly from New York to Dubai (just some random example) If the US builds a launch and landing site in the middle east they could use that as a huge cargo hub and use fleets of helicopters to deliver the rest of the way. Still saving many hours in the process
-
-
-
-
About Ingenuity's 4th flight With Goals Met, NASA to Push Envelope With Ingenuity Mars Helicopter
"Flight Four sets out to demonstrate the potential value of that aerial perspective. The flight test will begin with Ingenuity climbing to an altitude of 16 feet (5 meters) and then heading south, flying over rocks, sand ripples, and small impact craters for 276 feet (84 meters). As it flies, the rotorcraft will use its downward-looking navigation camera to collect images of the surface every 4 feet (1.2 meters) from that point until it travels a total of 436 feet (133 meters) downrange. Then, Ingenuity will go into a hover and take images with its color camera before heading back to Wright Brothers Field."
Free KSP2 Giveaway!
in Announcements
Posted
I'm most excited for the new parts and paint jobs. But also, just to try out all of the features and graphics!