panzer1b

Members
  • Content count

    1,433
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

724 Excellent

5 Followers

About panzer1b

  • Rank
    Sci-Fi Military Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

2,499 profile views
  1. panzer1b

    What did you do in KSP today?

    Well i sorta ressurected a very very old ship, probably my absolutely most pretty and detailed ship ever made that happens to be a SSTO. I made a few modernised ones with MK-2 bays instead of the monstrous double MK-3, but everything pales to the old one's interior which is just phenomenal and really brings back memories of the old days when i actually had hours upon hours to spend on KSP and could make crazy insane stuff like this thing ... Yeah, i nolonger have the time to make such monstrosities, but it was such a nice ship, full decked out internals, very good replica all things considered, SSTO capable on kerbin (which is all thanks to KSP bugs that let bomb bays occlude everything inside them when closed), and just plain awesomeness. Now if only i could do something about the 500+ parts that make this thing fly...
  2. panzer1b

    KSP Weekly: Mapping with Magellan

    I think thats pretty obvious... Still, if the devs actually do anything id prefer they pulled both the sunflare and skybox texture outside of the locked .assets files so that anyone who doesnt like whatever they ship stock doesnt have to install texture replacer and scatterer just to get 2 desperately needed fixes. Is it really that difficult to move a few texture files to a folder outside of those stupid locked .assets (which are a absolute pain to mod and im not even sure they can be in recent versions) and open up simple texture replacing/editing for everyone without requiring resource eating mods (texture replacer isnt too bad, but its really overkill when the only feature of it i use is the ability to replace a few universe textures (never really cared about the whole kerbal customizing thing, reflecty visors are cool though but still not worth the resource use). That and dont even get me started on scatterer, a mod that is completely overkill when all i truly want out of it is its sunflare replacement ability so that i can override the piece of garbage that the stock game ships with. All the other features are nice but just fluff, and id be content with just EVE if not for the unbeareable stock sunflare that doesnt look either realistic or sci-fi as id prefer (itd also do a huge number on my FPS as scatterer takes alot out of it). The stock sunflare rendering is i guess acceptable (not quite as cool as scatterer's but still workable), just that texture is pathetic and super outdated...
  3. panzer1b

    What sort of KSP player are you?

    Id say im mostly a sci-fi builder, albeit i tend to build things within the realm of "this could theoretically have been made if funding was infinite". While the vast majority of my designs are capital ships, starbases, refineries, tanks, ect, all of them tend to be believable (with teh exception of SSTO dropships as those cant be made stock without abusing certain physics bugs) and i try to avoid unrealistic things like excessive part clipping (i make exceptions for asthetics but in general no clipping, specifically no engine clipping), RCS thrusters inside the ship's hull, CFG edits that alter part performance, ect. I do still put a good deal of effort to make every single vessel i create look good though and not just a fuel tank strapped to an engine with a command pod atop it (no idea why, but i just really dont like the cylindrical asthetic, almost all my craft are more boxy/angly rather then circular like all real life vessels are normally. I also tend to arm almost everything i make (with rare exceptions) and have stock battles with them (generally space as thats alot easier to do stock, but i occasionally do stock tanks as well even though those take forever to setup and half the rounds fired never come close to the target). There is just something satisfying about having your newest capital ship attacked by another vessel i made earlier and seeing both sides take massive damage with debris being shot off. Then after i try to save the crews (if they survived, and no i dont ever intentionally have any ship target another's bridge if i can help it), recover whatever can be salvaged, and bring everything back to each faction's homeworld (which is a mission in of itself). All in all, i think i have a very good balance between engineering my ships, fighting with them, and just flying around the solar system (occasionally in wrecked ships, occasionally in brand new ones). I do also play with BDA on occasion, but i always end up going back to stock as its way more challenging imo to get right and i know that everything i do from guiding my own missiles to target to how i make the ship's armor takes alot more skill to pull off then slappiung a BDA weapon onto a set of wheels and teleporting however many of them i want to fight.
  4. panzer1b

    Work-in-Progress [WIP] Design Thread

    Well ive been making some progress in KSP despite my almost non-existent amount of free time these days (i love my job but the hours i end up working sucks bigtime). Pretty close to finishing the internals of my newest shipyard, i think i struck the perfect balance between part count and aesthetics. Not too crazy detailed or anything, but it gets the look right and it doesnt make my machine lag like crazy. Along those lines ive also finished my newest interior for my smaller vessels. Rather low on parts but it has everything you really need on a warship's bridge, command overlooking the crew, pilot up front, and a few stations to control weapons, communications, and any other aux systems that the commander and pilot cant really focus on. Now i just need to implement this thing on a few more vessels as its currently only on my nebula class corvette. My 1st dropship attempt in like a year or so. Its still super early and im having trouble making it both function AND look halfway decent, but at least ive managed to make a SSTO that can accomodate a extra wide load (2 sideways MK3 bays). More or less abusing clipping as there IS a nosecone on each cargo bay clipped so that its behind the cargo bay and doesnt block tanks that drive into this thing while still allowing me to shut the cargo bays to disable drag on said tank when flying in atmo, but given that its the ONLY way to make a 100% stock SSTO dropship that doesnt weight 500t and can carry something in a double cargo bay im pretty happy with how the concept turned out. And my final craft ive been working on recently, a stealth starfighter that uses ion engines (its literally been 2 years since i used those for anything larger then a ultra long range probe), and i think it turned out good looking and functional. Armed it with 4 light SRMs completely inside the hull (nothing sticks out, and they are reloadable in orbit which is a 1st for the whole internally mounted weaposn concept), as i cant call it a stealth with weapons strapped all over the sides and it also looks amazing this way. Anyone know what this thing is based on (it should be obvious if you watch any sci-fi), not a 100% replica, but i got all the details as close as i could with what i had to work with.
  5. panzer1b

    KSP Weekly: Mapping with Magellan

    Well it looks like the devs are finally starting to go in the right direction (not perfect but there isnt a SINGLE part this week that makes me look at it with flat out negativity). Looks like ill actually start implementing the MK-1 pod in my ship designs on a larger scale, since the new ones are really really good. The IVA is really good, with a good combo of details and simplicity which fits the part. The textures are good too, and it seems like you guys have finally started focusing on fixing the little things, namely proper edge textures instead of using "magic-seams" in your parts, the single biggest eyesore i know of. I still see improvement in this regard, but what you made is good enough that id be happy to see that part as it is in the pics in game. I also like the endcaps, the top is unique to the pod (so no more reusing porkjet's end cap on every single part in KSP), and it has a good combo of simplicty and detailing. Even though its not quite authentic to reality (doesnt look like heatshielding), i like the texture on the very bottom too since its something that i havent seen on other parts and defenetely breaks the monotomy of every endcap being super similar and beats the flat black of the original while still keeping it a similarish style overall. The octos are also great, with some very nice edges which make sense to have, foil wraps around and ends with some metal covering the foil and no "magic-seams" present. There seems to be a little bit of artefacting on the octo-2 where the foil and metal meet, but it might be just the view angle or something, hard to tell if thats a bad angle or blurry textures. I also really like the vents on the octo-1, since they help break the monotony of the part and give it a bit of flavor without eating crazy polygons or taking away from the sort of classic look and feel weve all become used to. Now if only the HEX core can get the same treatment (i like that they are each a little different in style and layout, but the HEX needs to have properly done edges on the foil to metal seam like the octos have now). Anyways, there are still a few things you guys can do better, but i will say that you have CONSIDERABLY IMPROVED your art style from what ive seen before (and what was released in the previous revamps like the atrocious rocketmax 2.5m tanks, MK1-3 pod, ect). keep up the good work and PLEASE consider taking a second look at some of the not super great parts you showed us earlier (specifically the MK-1 LFO tanks and HEX-2). It would really go a long way to making the game both beautiful to look at and it would go a long way to restoring some of your community's faith that KSP is in good hands even if its a different company and most of the devs are new to this particular game.
  6. I agree, wanted this feature since day1 since there are many situations i NEVER want an engine to stage like at all (VTOL engines and some engines that are never used say structural SRBs that dont ever get used). We got it for fairings (which many use as structural components), we got it for decouplers (there are also many cases where id rather manually decouple vs staging), ect. Its about time engines got this feature too...
  7. panzer1b

    Clouds in stock KSP

    Honestly, id rather keep clouds as a mod (unless by some miracle the devs can make it so there is no noticeable performance loss which is like never happening). First of all the number 1 benefit of EVE is that i can make my own textures if i dont like the ones that ship with mod (which i dont like honestly as they are super outdated by modern mod standards and havent been touched in ages, SVE isnt bad, but even that isnt quite my style visually). I have my own mod for EVE, and thats the primary reason i love the mod so much, i can add my own clloud style, my own particles, my own atmosphere renderer, and tweak everything to achieve the performance i expect out of it and not be stuck running someone else's configs. That and i seriously doubt the devs would integrate scatterer as well (which is at this point in time really needed for me, if only for its sunflare renderer as the default one looks like garbage).
  8. panzer1b

    JoolTube: Starchaser!

    Actually really cool looking series. Always had a thing for sci-fiy things, especially space combat since pretty much everything everyone does in KSP these days is planes, boats, and fighter jets which gets boring quickly when thats all they do. The only thing that i think would make this even better is some actual weapon damage and not just the ship goes poof when shot enough times. A suggestion if you want to script it (and not use actual stock/BDA weapons) is to hide decouplers or sepatrons inside the ships where you want them to pop. The sepatron will overheat something making it explode nicely and makes it look rather authentic to being internal damage, decouplers are more predictable but not quite as cinematic. Finally, i really love the internals you made for the ships as well as the station. I always liked making those (even if i have to limit myself as my internal work comes with the ship and makes it a little laggier then usual if i go overboard) for my larger warships (or anything thats a command vessel), as well as most of my shipyards and stations that actually support life on them in the 1st place (i have quite a few unmanned facilities, fuel depos, mining installations, ammo supply warehouses, ect).
  9. panzer1b

    KSP Weekly: Thrusting into the future

    I dont think ive ever been made aware of the MK-1 inline docking port until today . literally, ive NEVER made a single craft that had that part on it in the entire time ive played KSP... Also, what mod is that, id love to snag that texture to put on the part...
  10. So i decided to try a new visual style for my stations and i think it came out pretty solid looking. Very good contrast between the see-thru girders and wings on the outside, and it looks like a nice hybrid between sci-fi and something that could have at least theoretically existed IRL. Im probably going to redo this from the ground up in order to make it a little more clean and cut down parts (230 isnt TOO bad, but it doesnt help if i actually intend to add to it later). And ofc a nice view from the ship that just deployed from said shipyard.
  11. panzer1b

    KSP Weekly: Thrusting into the future

    Ill be honest, and i actually like these models WAY more then the old ones. Now there are a few things that i could get super picky about like the (hard to tell from the renders) lack of a specular map, the white color looks a little bit off from the porkjet white making seamless transitions look a little derpy, copy/pasted texture on the RT-10 which makes the top and bottom identical, and no clue on whether the part comes with proper glow animations when its running (which is a huge deal since nothing in making history came with glow layers and many of the old models seem to have lost their glows as well and it completely kills any immersion). Still, im EXTREMELY happy about what looks like ACTUAL EDGES on this part and not textures magically changing from whatever is on the edge to whatever is on the top/bottom. The biggest eyesore in just about ANY game ive played that has is are textures that unexplaineable change from one to another resulting in crappy seams (best example is the edges of the foil on last week's revamped hex probe), and this part seems to be going in the right direction. As for lack of an apparent normal map, i really dont see why its necessary (after seeing what porkjet could pull off on the simplest of 3d models without a normal map just using specular mapping), so whether it has a normal map or not i really dont care aslong as it has some specular (which is imo far more valuable visually then normal mapping). The yellow color i dont mind at all as is (and prefer it over pure white) since i like NEVER use monoprop on anything but starfighters and those only use the smallest monoprop tanks or whatevers inside the cockpit. Really like the yellow stripes (wouldnt mind if they were a different color or had like a few color styles to choose from, maybee red as someone suggested b4), so plz dont remove them entirely. Nice to have something that breaks up the monotony of everything being white or grey as almost every ship i make is almost entirely made of MK2/3 parts, wings, armor panels (1x1 and 2x2 panels) and exposed fuel tanks, or some combination of those things, so that results in everything being a combination of white, grey, and some black, yellow (or whetver color you wanna make it that isnt some shade of grey) is very welcome for variety. Finally, my last complement has to go towards the end cap, which is phenomenal compared to what ive seen previously. Its simple but at the same time has actual detail to it which really makes that part alot prettier (especially for me since 90% of RT-5s in use at the AKS space program are used as stock warheads and have that end cap visible when loaded on capital ships). Thanks alot for actually putting some real effort towards a part, and not cutting too many corners in the process (yeah that copy/pasted texture sux, but i can live with that unlike the plethora of issues i saw last week's revamp preview)!
  12. panzer1b

    Naval Battle League 2016-2018

    Well there are a few ways to make good ships, but id start with your armor layout. The first thing to do is understand what makes armor work in KSP. Now there are many ways to make ships, but the general consensus is that every vessel's core structure (skeleton that its built around) has to be made entirely of 80m/s impact tolerance parts, almost always your choice of girders or ibeams since those are the only stock elements that have the required impact tolerance and are long enough to make a ship out of easily. Then there are 2 philosophies that ive found to work, "single core", and "lengthwise spine". These are both rather simple to understand, the former being a single critical component that everything your ship has branches off of (most of my ships are made using this style), so its very hard to cut the ship in half, and the critical section can be well protected inside thge ship and hard to hit in the 1st place. The downside of this approach is that when that part goes the entire ship is kaput, meaning you have little redundancy and if that part does indeed go you will be turned into a cloud of debris. I prefer this style because the odds of being split in half are very low, and 75% of the time a ship that is split in half is for all intents and purposes out of the battle even if its technically "alive". The latter style relies upon a long spine that runs down the entire ship from front to back. Ship components are then attached to that spine and solong as the spine remains intact, this ship can take a rather extensive beating and keep on going. The trick is to not loose the spine, which is obviously easier said then done. Another benefit of this style is that is provides much more useable surface area to attach weapons to it, and is much easier to make viable without quite as much experience as its more or less super simple, make a length of 3+ girders, then build out radially from those girders and place weapons and engines and fuelon the branches or directly onto the spine depending on how valuable the component is (usually command pods and probe cores get directly attached, fuel and such does not). Anyways, my chibi star destroyer is an example of the first style of construction, and as you can see with most of the superficial crap removed, everything in the ship branches off of that one component and is attached to the branches. As long as that part doesnt get hit and explode, the ship will at worst case loose a few engines or weapons to every direct hit, but will remain combat capable to some extent (unless you manage to destroy all 7 engines or knock off like 10 different weapon hardpoints). Technically its a bit of a hybrid though, since it has a root part but it also has multiple spines running lengthwise so i can have something to attach the front to, but since it has 1 component that will result in loss of the entire ship, id put it into style 1. This ship is an example of style 2, it has 3 girders one behind the other, off of which everything branches off and is attached to. As for armor, the simplest solution is to use girders as branches and then attach plates to them to cover the outside (the 2nd ship is a very good example of this even if its got a few weaknesses of its own). anything with 80m/s impact tolerance will do for armor, but some people find it better to use fuel tanks as sacrificial armor (which works pretty well from my experience but isnt quite my style so i stay away from that). Then make sure to tie everything together using struts, and AVOID autostrut like the plague unless the ship is so high on parts you literally have to in order to not crash when the ship loads. Autostruts are super buggy, and ive had very mixed results with some use being helpful but other use breaking a otherwise solid ship and making it the equivalent of unarmored freighter in survivability. Finally, wings are good as low-grade armor of cosmetic filler. Dont underestimate wings as they can and will deflect high velocity rounds, but they offer little if any stopping power so most rounds might change direction a bit when they hit wing, but wont explode completely or stop moving and are likely to hit something behind the wing. Another ship using type-2 construction with MK-2 composite armor (lighter and simpler then panels, but alot harder to get right). Now there are more advanced armor techniques that you can try, for example using MK-2/3 cargo bays which have some really funky hitboxes and tend to desintegrate some types of warheads. Most of my modern ships (like the above nebula class) use this armor as its alot lighter for the same protection, but if its not done perfectly it really sucks (and by perfectly i mean everything is where it needs to be, put 1 strut in the wrong spot and trhe ship goes from insanely hard to kill to 1 shottable by ibeams). that said, for starters i recommend sticking to the tried and true core of girders/ibeams with structural plates on the outside, but feel free to experiment with other styles to see what works for you, aslong as the core of teh ship is a ibeam or girder or some other 80m/s impact part, it should stand up to some weapons fire. Another tip is to have redundancy regardless of the design, always have at least 2 command modules (cockpits, seats, droid cores, ect), and always have 2-3 engines so that someone cant just gently tap the ship's arss and knock it out of the game. As for weapons, its remarkably simple but yet takes alot of testing to see what shapes work best. For unguided weapons, the best choices are RT-5+structural part on the tip (either small structural plates, girders or ibeams), or ibeam/girder with 2-8 sepatrons pushing it depending on how far you are ok engaging at (2 will work if you are ok firing from 300-400m or so, 4 or 8 for shorter ranges). For guided weapons, generally you want some combination of ibeams girders and panels. Different people have results with different parts, but ive found the best choice for simpler weapons are AP solid shot warheads where the structureal parts are all attached to themselves. The other choice is some sort of shrapnel rounds where the girders or ibeams attach to a fuel tank or other soft part, it breaks, and they scatter throughout teh ship. Not as good with new physics as it was back in the really old days, but ist still a valid concept when targeting weaker internals after a hole has been punched through the armor itself. There is alot of variety, and you will need to find what impact velocity works the best for you (i like 200-300m/s relative to target but it heavily depends on the target im shooting, thick targets need more, thin need less). Propulsion isnt really very critical, solong as it can accelerate the round from whatever range you shoot at up to the desired velocity. vernors are nice to help aim it precisely, but are weight that isnt essential if you can aim without them. Anyways, GL with your shipbuilding, and if you want a example craft or 2 to play with ill upload something that doesnt actually suck. Dont try and replicate my chibi star destroyer, its terrible and is purely used as a carrier/flagshipy thing that looks super cool but has lousy combat ability, the other ship isnt bad, but gets split every time it gets hit by my newer G5a torp from directly below it when hitting near the back.
  13. panzer1b

    KSP Weekly: Closer to Bennu

    I honestly feel that the best thing squad can do going forward is to try and create a porkjet based style in revamped parts, at least in the STOCK revamped parts. Unless you want to then revamp all of porkjet's parts down the road, his style is the single most unified of everything in KSP as of this point, so the least effort route would be to stick to porkjet's style at least to a extent, handpainted parts with good specular maps and such. Now if you want to move away from porkjet, perhaps do this in a new DLC where you can make parts be different and not walk over the stock game creating multiple styles in the same game. Still, regardless of what style, i think the biggest thing they can do is properly draw edges on their parts. This isnt exclusive to the new 1.5 teaser pics, but the 2.5m tanks, mk1-3 pod, and a few others show blatant lack of properly drawn edge textures between dissimilar materials. Nomatter what art style is chosen going forwards, foil and metal cannot just suddently change to each other along a model's 3D edge, the foil needs to be clamped down somehow (probably going underneath the metal near the edge) with the corresponding edge feature (a few scrapes here and there wont hurt as well as specular map showing the brighter edge area like on porkjet's parts). Please do something about the undefined edge textures which completely destroy immersion, and please consider adding a little bit more dirt/scratches/wear on the parts because it just doesnt feel right when parts are coming out as cleanroom styled. If you guys need inspiration, open up the textures made by porkjet, take a good look at how he made edges very defined without overdoing it, and take a good look at how he made parts look exceptionally well without using a single normal map (which is the case of the 1.25m liquid fuel tank for airplanes and wing parts). Im not asking for copy/paste, im not asking for identical to his style, but i (and a good number of the rest of this community) are asking for high quality effort to be put into the game, and this is what would make it look much better in the long run!
  14. panzer1b

    Naval Battle League 2016-2018

    If its the void, then i believe i have a file of it somewhere (i tend to collect people's ships to use as test platforms for various weapons when designing my own ships and weapons). Ill upload it if thats the ship u want...
  15. panzer1b

    Naval Battle League 2016-2018

    I made 2 new ships that im actually happy with which brings my total of half decent vessels to 3. I dont really have enough time in my life to do a super serious competitive battle unless you are willing to possibly wait a few days every turn then id be able to do one. As for my half decent ships that i dont dislike because of some fatal flaws or so: First is my rather old but constantly overhauled SK-IV Nebula class frigate which is the defenition of efficiency. It has very good armor and firepower for its weight/part count (~60t, 240 parts) and comes with above average dV of ~2800. Really the only downside of said ship is the fact that it doesnt have a focused role like most of my other craft, and is more of a versatility above specialization (which lets it engage anything but keeps it from dominating any particular fight). After that is the SK-V Galaxy class cruiser which is the first ever cruiser that ive made which im happy with, and it has a good combo of survivability and firepower with a crazy 3150 dV at ~90t. Its also got a really nice fully decked out interior command deck (all ships i make that are cruiser or larger come with interiors as standard). The only real issue is the somewhat high part count of ~320, but considering what it has onboard (interior, tons of weapons, struts everywhere as i dont touch autostrut), its not THAT terrible in this regard. Its only real issue is the fact that it is not very efficient unlike the workhorse SK-IV. It has the exact same weapons (4 more RT-5s, 1 less G5a torp, less and weaker aux weapons), its armor is a tad better, but it also weighs 1.5 times as much so those gains dont really help that much. Finally, the bridge is a massive weakspot which can cripple the ship if someone is sadistic enough to wanna target it and murder the poor exposed crew. It looks stellar, works nice as i can aim the guns from the 2 cockpits, but serves no real combat purpose otherwise (not to mention being a actual armor weakness) and just eats part count. Maybee ill make a combat version of this by replacing the upper deck with another weapons barrel giving it the equivalent firepower of 2 SK-IVs in ammo capacity, but then itd look meh. Finally my fleet's filler ship, the SK-III Nova class micro-corvette which is the only AKS ship im actually happy with that is based around conventional armor layout (its so small that there is no point of doing anything else). Being conventional (and not MK-2 based like all the other ships i have) makes it very weak to anything larger then a small ibeam, but considering it has a SINGLE engine which is pretty much guaranteed to go if anything hits it near the back, why bother spending mass and part count to armor the bugger, instead deploy 5 of them for every cruiser and call it a day. Pretty much based it around the oversized guns strapped to a single engine principle, it has the best firepower per tonnage and part count of the 3, but has no survivability to speak of and doesnt have the ammo capacity to guarantee a kill in of itself not to mention lacks any form of guided weaponry which makes it rely on getting up to the target. At least it also has plenty of fuel at 2800dV so i can move it around as needed. Prolly will arm it with at least 1 guided weapon in addition to its stack of RT-5s. Also the armor makes me wanna rename it the "kamikaze cannon fodder", given that thats what its used for right now in a fleet wide engagement since its armor is really really non-existent. So yeah, i might be able to fight someone, after i finish my assault carrier (always wanted to make a good carrier, but nothing ive yet to try has really worked with that regard, too many parts, bad armor, no firepower, ect).