• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

653 Excellent


About panzer1b

  • Rank
    Sci-Fi Military Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

2,411 profile views
  1. panzer1b

    What did you do on your first KSP Flight?

    Believe it or not, the 1st thing i did in KSP was send a SSTO to laythe and back to kerbin... Yeah it took me like a week to figure out how to pull that off, but no joke, 1st thing i made was a SSTO starfighter (which had weapons on it as i never launch anything unarmed unless its a supply ship carrying weapons), which just about pulled off a laythe roundtrip using basic hohmans (and a stupid amount of airhogging as that was like 0.23 or something and that was the only way to make efficient SSTOs, put 50 intakes on the thing...). After that, i spend the next week figuring out how to launch a massive cruiser into orbit, fully armed with pathetic weapons (these were the days before anyone really figured out how the collision model works and we had simple RT-5s as the strongest weaponry). That was very painful to get into orbit (given i covered it with wings and had to make all the launch stage engines be above the ship cause it kept flipping. So yeah, not you average beginner's start, but that was literally what got me into KSP, launching stupid completely unpractical sci-fi craft which made no sense at all and probably would have been hard enough for a veteran to get working...
  2. Its been like that ever since the fairings were updated with that texture swap feature. They basically dont render reentry FX at all. Still, its such a minor annoyance (and given that ive become quite used to no reentry FX since the 1.4-1.43 didnt even let you enable reentry FX at below 100% which lagged too much for my taste), not a huge deal. At least they fixed the whole seeing reentry FX through the backside of a starfighter as its roasting on ascent. In other news, i am happy they removed redshell. Not that i cared personally (i deleted the .dll and i never even let KSP through my firewall to begin with ever since DMP stopped being updated and died), but the principle in collecting data secretly without even telling the user why or what its for is very low. I feel they need to do the same with unity analytics, or at least return it to teh way it was, ask the user on game start if they want to have stats sent or not. Nothing wrong with data collection, just let the damn users choose on their own whether they allow it or not, dont try and conceal the data collection and create both a PR nightmare and loose people's trust just to sell some marketing data or whatever it is.
  3. Ill do that this weekend after doing a few more tests and battles (i may not have the time to mod much of anything, but i do still play KSP every few days). Im trying to figure out specifically which bullets are doing the problems, to see whether its just the 30mm or actually every HE round. Sofar ive tested the 30x173HEBullet and the 75mmBullet extensively, as well as the 105mmBullet and 90mmBullet. The 30 and 75mm have HE properties (explosive = True), and the other 2 do not. The 75mm HE is reasonably good right now imo as it does damage, but requires multiple hits to take down a small 1x1 100mm panel, so its neither overpowered or underpowered (and shreds unarmed anything as would be expected, virtually useless against very thick tanks). The 30mm HE just evicerated everything short of super thick armor due to the combination of rate of fire and somewhat high raw damage. It does alot less then the 75mm, but considering how much more often you are hitting a tank with the things (a single 240RPM weapon is enough per tank to do insane damage, goalkeeper or multiple single barreled autocannons will obliterate multiple heavy tanks), they are just broken OP. the 90mm and 105mm behave somewhat plausibly, doing decent damage, but requiring relatively flat armor to be effective. Sloped armor panels, even thin ones such as 100mm, are basically impossible to take down in a single hit unless you get super lucky and hit the panel on that ultra-thin edge near panel joints, in which case it will remove the panel in a single shot as expected (they will murder unsloped armor tanks, and have to work very hard vs slope). Another thing ive noticed (may just be opinion), is that increasing armor thickness doesnt really result in considerably stronger protection as would be expected in reality. 100mm of armor is in practice very similar to 150mm or even 200mm or armor, and you only truly notice a difference in protection when going from 100 to 300-500mm. Prolly the best example is my panther and tiger 2 replicas, which do not differ in effective protection by that much despite frontal armor going from 80 to 150 and the slope being sorta similar (panther's is more sloped, but not that much more sloped). I believe the best solution would be to make it sorta non-linear, with the exception of rounds that are actually capable of penetration. Non-penetrating shots that are NOT large caliber HE should do virtually nothing to a tank, or at the least require sustained hits to the same armor panel to take it down. A good example would be some battles in WW2, such as the KV-2 tank that took fire from like 1000s of tank shells, tigers when they were 1st put into play, ect. Those tanks could eat insane amounts of ammo provided none of the rounds were able to penetrate and keep on going. I still support the idea where large volume of weak ammo would dislodge a panel even if its very thick, but 200mm or higher armor should be virtually immune to anything sub 100mm, and imo should be 100% immune to anything below 30mm that isnt a AP round such as the depleted uranium used on teh A-10 or similar guns, 30mm HE would do squat to a 200mm armored vehicle nomatter if its WW2 or modern (unless its shot with hundreds of thousands of rounds). When i make the github bug report, ill upload a few tanks alongside so that you guys can try it out and verify whether its actually broken or just my machine/weapon selection (i use alot of turrets from old mods that have custom made weapon params, not to mention other mods like SMA so it may not be 100% relatable to bone stock BDA).
  4. So ive been messing around with some tank battles using the new AI (which while extremely minimalistic and not that smart, is very nice addition as tanks will now move and at least TRY to avoid fire), and ive come across something really really odd in my testing. It appears that armor and weapons really isnt very well balanced, specifically with regards to high explosive autocannon shells. As an example, i put up 3 light tanks with ~100mm of armor all around (tank AI sorta requires omnidirectional armor as there is no option to make it play with something akin to a TD which HAS to face towards the enemy at all times and never show sides), up against 2 medium/heavy tanks with 200mm or all around armor and armed with a turreted 105mm gun. Did 3 fights, and every time the light tanks (which SHOULD have been virtually unable to touch a 200mm armored tank) walk over the heavier tanks, EVEN when i added 2 more of them to try and even the odds. It seems that armor just doesnt have the intended effect against lightweight weapons, specifically anything firing 30mm HE rounds which not only is extremely prone to blow up a tank's interior if any holes are made in the armor, but it consistently and reliably removes said armor. I dont know, perhaps my tanks designs are made in such a way as to be very resilient to heavy weapons (most of which have major trouble even hitting a target consistently), but it seems that with equal numbers, tanks armed with automatic weapons (especially fast firing ones like the goalkeeper) are almost always going to win every fight purely because of the volume of fire and apparent ineffectiveness of armor against rapid fire HE ammo. I strongly suggest adding some sort of functions that dramatically penalize low caliber HE rounds hitting armor, specifically armor that is considerably thicker then the impacting round. There is nothing wrong with 30mm HE taking down heavier tanks with excessively conentrated attacks, but as it stands, 30mm HE is MORE effective at achieving kills then 105mm anti-tank guns. That and with my testing of the current version, HE in general tends to be the dominant weapon, since it works against both very sloped and flat armor and has a tendency to shred internals way faster then solid shot AP does. It should be effective against internals, but HE (short of very large calibers) should do virtually nothing to a well armored tank, especially with 75mm or lower HE rounds since they have very little bursting charge compared to say 122-155+mm rounds which actually have enough HE content to damage armor significantly. 75mm should still do something ofc, but 30mm should be 100% useless against 200mm armor regardless of what era the round was from (AP 30mm should do something, HE should be worthless).
  5. Well, thanks alot guys for updating this to 1.4, really fun to finally make my bases actually shoot on their own (stock warfare is still sorta my thing, but its alot better to use BDA on the ground since i cant engage with multiple vehicles at the same time). And ofc i still need to make my own guns since all the ones in the packs arent really right, but sofar the tanks and buildings are working as intended. Made a new tank hull that plain and simply REFUSES to die since its made in such a way that it actually absorbs insane amounts of fire. Took those base defenses over 10 minutes to cut down the 2 tanks... Now to see if i can actually get the guns to look right. Is there a way to make a plasma cannon effect so i can get somewhat authentic dual barreled plasma cannons (the twin turret had those by default). I tried to use lasers, but it looks terrible, and ive also tried to use something akin to a rapid fire burst (to simulate a stream of plasma) which overheats quickly and then cools down a long time, still not very good and it spazzes out spraying the shot like crazy when the target makes any maneuvers. I know BDA was never designed to make plasma beam weapons, but if there is a way to do this that anyones found, plz tell me Finally, ive found a huge bug with the armor health module that is resulting in parts changing their HP values when building vehicles in editor. Try attaching parts via symmetry, and they can occasionally bug out. Ive been able to fix this issue on less complex tanks using .cfg edits, but its rather annoying and would appreciate it if placing parts using symmetry and or copy functions not result in component HP values jumping around all over the place...
  6. panzer1b

    KSP Weekly: The Lunar Greenhouse

    Although im not that affected myself (currently playing on 1.4.1 since 1.4.2 is broken to the point its not even useable for me as i like to use landing legs on my land things), i agree with people that its sorta lame that the patch was delayed purely for a bug in making history which doesnt even affect those of us that dont have the DLC. I mean please improve making history, since it really isnt worth the money right now compared to the base game (unless you are a die-hard real world replica fan, and even then mods like RSS with the right part packs are a better choice), and there are so many bugs in the base game that even if making history was better it wouldnt really be all that playable right now regardless as fairing drag is a huge problem, exploding legs in 1.4.2 are perhaps even worse (loaded up 1.4.2 and went to land a tank at a base i made before, half the buildings tipped over as their legs exploded). Granted, a single week isnt really a big deal, but it sorta sucks that the only reason the patch was delayed was a making history exclusive bug. I understand why they really are trying with MH, since lets face it, mission builder alone is about the only thing in the expansion that has no mod equivalent, and any other content added helps improve sales for those of us that actually buy stuff that is worth the money and dont just blindly throw it at T2. Its not going to make me personally buy the DLC (i can get much more immersive launchsites with kerbin konstructs and seeing what MH has for launchpads id rather take the FPS hit then get a super teeny launchsite with no infrastructure or believeability behind it. Maybee the next DLC will be worth it, maybee not, either way, its not a good enough reason to delay patches to the base game, especially when said patch fixes bugs that literally make the game impossible to play without reverting to older versions.
  7. panzer1b

    What did you do in KSP today?

    Finished my new Duna base, and after a rather many landings i managed to assemble everything to decent layout. Had to load up 0.90 to get the 5 way symmetry thing, which looks different then the usual things i make. Too bad i cant actually get a proper fence effect in game, had to photoshop that to give it the right look. All i need now is for BDA to get updated to 1.4, so i can actually arm those twin turrets with plasma beam cannons instead of stock missiles and put something on those 2 armed wall segments near the entrance...
  8. Well, i took a teeny look at it, and im not really sure what i can do with the laythe rain to make it look good, there is always somewhere on the planet where the rain is pointing wrong direction (not to mention a lack of vertical velocity). Im not giving up yet, but sofar no luck doing anything good to it. If anyone has any ideas, im happy to hear it, as im pretty much stuck with being unable to properly orientate the effect. Aside from that, ive made a very small set of tweaks here and there, and ill update the mod when i can manage to fix the stupid rain (which i really really want to have visible in the game as it looks incredible when it happens to fall in the right direction). I thinned dunas dust storms a teeny bit (helps cut down artefacting and makes it a teensy bit less suicidal to land in valleys), but still kept it thick enough to actually block visibility by a huge deal (as in you dont see very far away from you).
  9. Well, im gonna release what i have at the end of today, sofar Kerbin, Duna, Eve, Laythe is finished, ill prolly leave Jool as it (everything ive tried sofar doesnt really look as good as the texture it has from 1.3). Ive had alot of trouble with the rain fx, but i think ive gotten it to the point where it looks good from virtually every angle, except one very specific one where the rain falls sideways (no way around it, best i can do with stock eve limitations), and ofc it doesnt actually "fall" downwards, but acts more like a dust storm that happens to have a rainy texture which sorta points in the direction it should be pointing at when considering wind and such. A little bit of a perf hit using it, but the effect is so good im willing to take that hit to make laythe something unique compared to say kerbin (and if you dont like the effect or dont want the perf hit you can always remove it via the EVE menu). Otherwise, it looks the same as before with a few minor tweaks. I liked what i did with laythe before, and thus i kept the overall look, just added the much needed rain fx. By popular request, Eve is thinner then before, but not so thin as to completely eliminate the challenge of landing (without scatterer you can clearly see the surface in certain areas, with scatterer a tad harder but still possible depending on the particular spot). I lowered the upper layer and sorta integrated both so i only require a single 3D particle layer on that planet. Its a little laggy, but there really isnt much i can do about it since Eve has always required a decently thick cloud cover to look right in my eyes. Most of the lag though comes from scatterer (which uses a crapload of layers to make the atmo look good, and also considerable ocean lag when thats enabled. So this mod alone isnt the problems really... On a cloudy day its pretty well covered in purple fog/clouds. But ofc when you get a hole in the cloud texture, it looks alot more like this. Otherwise, gonna finish a few touchups and upload V1.4 in 3 parts (base mod, cloud addon, dust addon). This was you dont need to fiddle around as much in the configs if say you dont want clouds or ground fx (and it gives those with truly potato comps ability to disable almost every effect). Its not quite exactly how far i wanted to get, but its all i copuld do in the very limited vacation time between jobs i had, enjoy... Updates out, enjoy everyone... As usual, im back to hiatus, just no time to do mods while you have a fulltime job and family to take care of. Ill be around so if there is a major issue with the release ill try to fix it, but otherwise enjoy the update and if you are having trouble installing/using the mod, ask around the community and someone more active then me should be able to get your install workin. Well i found a few bugs with the rain on Laythe, so temporarily feel free to disable it. Ill take a look maybee next weekend, ill see when i get time...
  10. panzer1b

    Make the DLC partially free.

    I dont think they need to make anything free, and this entire discussion is completely pointless as they are now stuck with what is done, since making stuff free will seriously turn off those that bought the DLC, likely resulting in far less sales of future DLC when those that buy are now unsure whether theyll just recieve half of the DLC free later. Still, one good point in this thread that i have to agree with, is the fact that paywalling parts will always create some division among the community, and puts people into a bad situation where those that bought the DLC cant upload a DLC part craft without potentially annoying some people that cant use it, and vice versa where people that dont have the DLC get annoyed with being unable to download a DLC craft (especially in situations where said craft has but 1 DLC part in it even if it can function without that part. Myself, i have no intention of buying the DLC anytime soon (until take 2 can prove to me they care about quality of KSP and not rushing it to meet investor meeting deadlines and other BS, then ofc release something super buggy, im not giving them a penny), and i honestly dont care (ive yet to find a craft i wanted to download with DLC only parts in it, but thats beside the point). I suggest considering not putting parts behind future DLC, but its not like the current one is so expensive (unless you are using ur moms credit card or something ) as to limit you if you really want the new parts, none of which is really a big deal really or opens up something mods havent already done in some way. Things id like to see in future DLC is multiplayer (never been done thusfar in a method that isnt so buggy its pointless), optimized visual effects like clouds (doubtful devs can beat EVE+scatterer, but if they could make similar fx without requiring as big a performance hit id gladly pay the game's base price for it), and something akin to a good planet pack (which will have very little compatibility problems between people outside of save file sharing which is very rare on here anyway outside of well stock spaceship battles or something akin to that).
  11. Well progress is going well, Kerbin and Duna is all done, and Eve is almost done (still messing with variable cloud thickness to try and create a decent balance between covered and visible from orbit so you can see at least some spots), and all i really need to do is Jool, Laythe, and touching up a couple of ground fx im not entirely happy with for one reason or another. Kerbin is currently very balanced in terms of coverage, a couple spots are overcast like, and a couple spots have absolutely no cover at all, where the sky ranges from very cloudy over certain days to completely clear over others, and some areas are inbetween. Also, ive added axial tilt of a few degrees which does 1 very important thing, creates variable wind direction. It still blows east, but it sometimes blows more or less north/south depending on the time of day and planet orientation. Not perfect, and far from random wind direction, but alot better then the usual always blows perfectly east. Duna has a different cloud texture too, with far less coverage overall, but a couple decently large patches here and there. As with older versions, ive made the clouds wispyish, but alot less overkill wispy compared to previous versions of the mod. Dust storms are very thick now, and while they dont encompass as much of the planet as before, they actually make it very hard to land manually into the lower valleys and craters. Sadly, due to artefacting, i was unable to make the storms visible from orbit (cant really do this for , but with the vastly reduced frequency they appear, it should be perfectly fine landing on Duna most of the time (be sure to bring more fuel the absolutely necessary or send a probe first to the expected landing site to use as a beacon so landing mid storm is possible. Ill get some Eve pics in a bit, just want to rearrange layers a tad and see if i can somehow cut down on lag due to 2 particle layers. And ofc new mod is 100% optimized to work with stock scatterer, colors get a bit different due to the way scatterer does atmo, but its more or less the same thing and if you disable the fluff in scatterer, it really isnt that bad performance wise.
  12. panzer1b

    Naval Battle League 2016-2018

    A bit off topic, but ive actually decided to pass on the DLC entirely. I tried it on a friend's machine and all i can say is bugs bugs bugs, not to mention that the only thing even remotely useful for my playstyle are the triangular panels, but given as they are way too small to make anything large with, no point at all. Mission builder is pointless when i have the imagination to make up my own missions/scenarios/goals/limitations all in sandbox mode. The new launchpads cant be easily (as in a cfg edit or so) added to other worlds in sandbox mode (all we get is womera and thats it, no duna launchpad, no laythe launchpad, at least outside of mission builder that is) making them useless (why would i care about a launchpad on kerbin when 90% of my gameplay in KSP is away from kerbin these days). That and 90% of the new parts are already doable in stock, service bays and engine plates can be done via fairings just take a teeny bit more work to get there, and with regards to engine plates, ive yet to come across a reason to cluster engines, if its a launch vehicle i use the largest 3.75m engine 99% of the time, anything heavy in space is nukes or aerospikes or 909s (ive yet to create a ship so heavy that 6 nukes isnt adequate for if i plan my burns correctly and everything else has terrible ISP for interplanetary work and is used for interdictors or landing capable dropships or sometimes starfighters). The 1.8m parts are interesting, but again, not really necessary since they are way too small for launchers, and way too big for capital ship internals (i only use 1.2m tanks since they can be compactly stored under armor and dont require ships the size of minmus). 5m would be interesting, had i actually had issues launching stuff with 3.75m hardware. I have a rocket that is 7 3.75m dual tank stacks with 1 quad engine below, and that will launch 90% of anything ive ever created (with the notable exception of stuff too big to fit in a fairing atop it which requires custom built side boosters) to jool. Finally, im not really big on "replicating" real life tech, and its not like the pack contains non circular cross sectional parts (one thing id actually pay for, good quality capital ship hull parts that dont force me to custom make em from panels/wings or whatnot). Maybee if the devs had released it without so many bugs id have bought it purely to support devs, but as it stands, im starting to believe that modders are doing a better job at making stuff for KSP, so why would i support further development of the base game when its clear its bugged and now ran by a company that cares more about deadlines and money then actually providing a quality product. Nothing against the devs themselves, but pushing content out before it was truly ready just to get it out before an investor meeting really is a bad move that makes me doubt the company even cares about anything but money. Until the day that whoever is behind the games development proves to me they know what they are doing and actually care about quality, im not giving them a penny. Anyways, as to armor development, ive made 2 new ships which are fairly good, SK-V cruiser is almost complete (not a huge fan of the part count necessary to make it look good, but its very hard to do anything serious to), and i have a newly upgraded SK-II corvette which is not super armored, but well, more then enough for what its meant to do, escort larger vessels and engage the fighters or other soft targets harassing the main ships flanks. All things said, i havent really made too much progress in that regard, both of them are heavily based on the SK-IV frigate hull which has proven to be very very good when considering the part counts and weight involved.
  13. panzer1b

    What visual mods do you all use?

    Well as for ESSENTIAL mods, EVE using my own cloud/particle textures in my mod. Thing is, while SVE looks good in screenies, im really not a fan of many of its cloud textures (they look pixelated and really bad at certain angles and distances, great from orbit, not so great when looking up from a tank on the surface) and it has major lag problems since its designed purely to look good and not so much in regards to performance. That and i just have an aversion to the amount of washed out white present in that mod on planets like eve and jool, not that its bad (actually more realistic looking), but it just doesnt have that sci-fi feeling of highly saturated colors in my mod which was actually inspired by better atmospheres to an extent, a mod from 0.25 times... Another mod i use is scatterer, which i mostly keep turned on unless im working with truly absurd ships where the part count is so bad lag gets unbearable. This mod makes the atmospheric planets look amazing, and it comes with a very good atmosphere shader (sky effects), ocean shader (stock oceans look like garbage, and if you actually spend any time near the ocean turning it on is well worth the performance hit), and a few other fluffy features like terrain shadows, godrays, sunflares, ect. Of the fluffy features, the only one i use is the sunflare and well i actually use a different sunflare texture i found as the stock one looks pathetic and ruins the games sci-fi atmosphere (its realistic, but not pretty). Sunflare I only use the sunFlare.png texture out of that mod and replace the default scatterer one. Alternatively, if you arent a big fan of that orangeish glow or dont like the way my setup looks, there are many sunflare packs out there that should fit everything from sci-fi to realistic. Also, that screenie is kerbin with my mod setup as i normally play KSP, SciFiVE, scatterer, and that partial sunflare replacement. Finally, i use texture replacer to both make the kerbals look a bit better (plenty of suit packs out there for everything from sci-fi to nasa replicas), and to replace the absolute garbage looking skybox with something a little bit better. Like above, i use Poods calm nebula skybox, although ive modified my installation by seriously dropping the brightness levels and upping the contrast since i dont like very bright skyboxes as they ruin immersion for me and actually end up being brighter then my ships at night (i turn the brightness sliders way down to like -60 or so so at night you wont see squat without lights. Aside from that, you can use planetshine, distant object enchancement, and one of many terrain packs made via kopernicus (SVT is the best example) if you want extra fluff that looks good, but isnt as noticeable or essential as clouds and atmo effects and dust particles provided by EVE+scatterer combo. I dont use them myself as ive found that their effects are too minor to warrant any performance hit, but they really are nice (especially planetshine which illuminates your ship with glow from the planet you are orbiting, while distant object renders ships floating above you in orbit with glowy effects). Also, another mod i really like is KS3P, but its not currently updated (and needs to be modified heavily as the stock configuration makes it very tough to see anything in darkness even when its illuminated. Adds various post processing fx like bloom and depth of field, but i dont have it at the moment, and well it requires alot of fiddling with values and config files to get anything playable out of it. Very easy on the CPU/GPU, so it wont really be noticed unless you go crazy with part counts and try to launch 1500 part vessels. Worth considering once updated.
  14. Its not that the ocean lags too much, its just that if i have the choice between oceans being enabled and say clouds, ill take clouds 1st (as i rarely spend much time sitting in water or even doing anything in water while playing KSP). And ofc, given how little time i spent near water (with the exception of laythe), there is no point to even activate an effect id rarely if ever notice outside of intentional screenshot flights during which i may as well activate every effect and just eat the performance hit. That and to be honest, nothing is truly gonna make my lag problem go away, i refuse to stop building and launching 500-1000 part capital ships, and even in the bone stock game those lag insanely bad when you have a whole fleet rendered at the same time :)... And yeah, kopernicus is a mod i try to avoid as one, its not updated to 1.4 last i checked (im lazy at checking mod updates and refuse to use that AVC spyware), maybee its not true anymore), and 2, its completely overkill when all i care about is replacing a single texture (really wish texture replaced allowed us to replace planet/water textures, id have replaced everything with it if that was the case, and its pretty damn lightweight unlike kopernicus which is overkill when i dont load up an entire custom solar system).
  15. My original inspiration for that was the actual venus, which according to real images taken by probes has atmo that you cant see anything through. That said, i have lowered the elevation of the lower layer to make it more of a fog/dust type layer akin to the dust storms on duna (which can be seen from orbit) and to make it possible to see very tall areas of the planet from orbit (some of the mountains are above that thick layer and can be landed on if you somehow manage not to cook yourself on descent). Ill try to poke a few more holes in the really thick lower layer and see how it looks, but i always liked the concept of thick, hard to see, and hard to land on without dropping a couple probes first to survey the area as would be done with real life venus assuming there was ever a manned mission sent there as it makes venus err eve an actual challenge and not just pick a spot from orbit without any sort of sensors/probe landings. After i poke a few more holes ill see whether it came out well, but like jool, i always envisioned eve to be really dense and gassy, while places like duna would have barely any clouds above it (and what clouds there were would be super wispy and only add a bit of cool looks when they are at that super high altitude and visible for miles. Also a bit of sside thought, i think ill make the duna dist storms visible from orbit (doesnt take noticable processing power and would allow one to avoid landing inside it while planning a landing from orbit). Assuming i can do it without artefacting that is (may be an issue since that layer is very low down and could have artefacting or weird behavior when made visible).