A "KSP Loading..." Preview: Kerbodyne ADTP-2-3 Adapter revamp

[passinglurker]

@SQUAD...

What were you told about recycling meshes!?

Seriously did you learn nothing from the mk1-3 pod? The top isn't even 2.5m when are you going to check this stuff before rushing into remapping? Never mind that this part is literally just a cone you can remodel from scratch in 15 minutes seriously I thought we were past these lazy shenanigans. No wait let me guess this is the same guy who made the mk1-3 pod isn't it? please fire them they're clearly phoning this in, and not striving to improve, or meet even basic standards.

P.S. I find the new texture ugly as sin its too loud and busy and suffers from rivet fetishization the artist you had texture the tricoupler seems to understand subtlety maybe ask them to fix it /rant

Edited November 9, 2018 by passinglurker

[RealKerbal3x]

Nice! That adapter certainly looks better now. No more purple and green pixelation, and there's more texture to the surface. I particularly like the orange stripe at the top on the orange variant.

This also looks to be pointing to a revamp of the rest of the 3.75m parts, which I certainly look forward to! Those are some of the most-used parts, at least for me.

Edited November 9, 2018 by RealKerbal3x

[Poodmund]

1 hour ago, passinglurker said:

@SQUAD *snip*

@passinglurker, your posts are so confrontational I would not be surprised if the whole of the SQUAD Dev team have you on their ignore list. I'd advise you to change the tone of your feedback if you want the people who are making these decisions to take your words seriously. I'm not trying to impose Moderation on you of which I have no authority to do so, I'm simply giving you a bit of ad-hoc advice as a fellow member of this community.

[GrandProtectorDark]

Looks cool. But really. Please make it either actually hollow, or be able to hold fuel. It's such a big empty waste of rocket volume otherwise.

[Vexillar]

Great to see that this part is receiving some attention.  There were certainly things that needed to be addressed:

1. Fit with other parts - the top diameter needs to be made uniform with the other parts.
2. Function:  Either it should be a tank (even if empty by default), or it should be able to be filled with parts such as batteries, reaction wheels, small tanks, etc., etc. and provide aero protection.  (If it is argued that we can now use fairings to provide inter-stage equipment bays then, OK, this part should simply be a conical tank.)
3. Texture: The old texture was lacking - too little detail, colour artifacts, obvious "scratch" patterns that are fine for the primary use case (a single adapter on a large stack) but look odd if there is a need for multiple adapters in larger kontraptions.

I can't tell if #1 has been fixed from the pictures; others clearly think not.

#2 does not appear to have been addressed at all.

#3, the new texture is much better defined, for sure, and addresses the multiple-parts-in-one-ship issue (even without using the variants for difference).  The detailing on the cross-bars is much better.  However, I think the outer surface is over-greebled.  It looks like there would be significant surface drag [yes, I know that appearance doesn't really affect performance], especially from the horizontal ridges [and I also know about the golf ball effect].

My tuppence (2 cents) worth:

• Remove the row of large rivets.  The small ones are fine.
• Remove at least some of the horizontal ridges.
• Tone down the vertical ones.
• Do my eyes deceive me, or are there some of the "handles" (as discussed on the lander can) lurking in the black stripe?  I don't see why they would be there... unless the part has opening panels... I would accept there being another corrugation ring down there for stiffness, again if it wasn't too deeply defined.
• The orange stripe on the variant looks like textured insulation, rather than simply the "Russian orange" paint.  Although I'd echo comments asking for an all-orange-insulated-tank variant, it seems odd to insulate a purely structural part?

[RealKerbal3x]

58 minutes ago, Vexillar said:

•  
• The orange stripe on the variant looks like textured insulation, rather than simply the "Russian orange" paint.  Although I'd echo comments asking for an all-orange-insulated-tank variant, it seems odd to insulate a purely structural part?

Hmm, now that you mention it, having what looks like insulation on a structural part is a little odd. Maybe it could be changed to look a little more like paint?

And echoing other posts in this thread, I hope the issue of the top being slightly larger than 2.5m has been fixed. That's one of the most annoying things about this part.

[Xurkitree]

This is the part we're getting for 1.6? Not complaning, but still, I do wish it had some ... oomph I guess?

Whatever. Its not like I use it because it has no fuel and strap together Size 3-Mk3-Size 2 Fueled adapters.

plz sqaud fix dis

[RealKerbal3x]

29 minutes ago, Xurkitree said:

This is the part we're getting for 1.6?

It's a revamp of an old part. It's been in the game since 0.23.5 IIRC, but it's getting a revamp in 1.6.

[T1mo98]

Sorry chief, not feeling this one.

It has too much detail for me, as if the designer just wanted every bit filled with something. It feels very out of place with the rest of the revamped parts and the existing fuel tanks.
I was hoping for something simpler and cleaner along with a revamp of 3.75 meter tanks to look more like the 2.5 meter ones along with a completely white and orange texture. I wouldn't mind a completely white 2.5 meter variant also.

[Tyko]

I have to +1 a couple of ideas posted:

1. Fix the sizing so it actually matches the rest of the stack
2. We need variants:
   1. A hollow version that aerodynamically shields the interior - use it for storage or as an engine shroud similar to the Saturn Stage 2 to Stage 3 connector
   2. A fueled version
3. The texture is too busy - not a deal breaker, but there's a lot going on for what's essentially a hollow shell

Edited November 9, 2018 by Tyko

[Mr. Peabody]

Put fuel in that thar tank!

[Snark]

I really like the look of the revamped adapter... just, pretty please could we have fuel tanks in it?

 

On 11/8/2018 at 1:16 PM, StrandedonEarth said:

Great! Now if you could just put some LfO tanks in it...

This, this, a thousand times this.

We've got conical adapter fuel tanks for every other diameter transition except 2.5m-to-3.75m.  I've wanted that ever since I started playing KSP-- I've never had any use for the empty structural adapter, except that it was the only way to have an aerodynamic rocket that goes between those two diameters.

Personally, I'd just as soon see this adapter dropped from the game entirely, and replaced by a conical adapter tank that holds 12.5 tons of fuel or something around there.

 

On 11/8/2018 at 2:24 PM, MaverickSawyer said:

Well... Can't you do that with the part switching function?

Nope.  Part variants are very limited.  They can change the model, the texture, and the mass, but that's basically it.  Notably, they can't affect the resources content.  (Which is a pity, because otherwise it would be trivially easy to have switchable tanks that can toggle between LFO and LF-only, for example.)

(Feature request for Squad: could we make variants able to switch out resource contents?)

On 11/8/2018 at 2:24 PM, MaverickSawyer said:

I'd personally not see any issue with clipping some tanks into it.

Except that that comes with gameplay consequences in terms of the structural integrity and/or aerodynamics of the ship.  Plus, it's anathema to those of us who hate clipping.

Really... we seriously need a fuel-tank like this.

For example, something like this:

^ this is just a half-assed implementation from the MissingHistory mod, that uses some config to rescale one of the Making History adapters to fill this role.  It's what I've been using in my own gameplay.  Just... would really be nice to have this as a "first-class citizen" in stock instead of needing to rely on a mod.

[klesh]

Everyone pointing out a fueled version of this conical transition piece has played the game before.  Its a glaring omission that really needs to be rectified, and now is the perfect time to do it.

I agree, the 2.5m side of this part needs to match the other 2.5m parts properly.

I agree, the texture looks too busy to me.

If I had to choose between an adapter part like this, and a fueled version adapter part, I would prefer and chose the fueled version 100% of the time.  If there is only room for one, please put fuel in it.

[lunardog15]

+1to fuel tank

[Vexillar]

If there are concerns about changing the role of this part (for career progression/game balance or backward compatibility), then I get that... but please, pretty please, @SQUAD give us a tank as a separate part.

[Loskene]

On 11/9/2018 at 8:15 AM, passinglurker said:

 /rant

Despite the aggressive tone I agreed with the basic message of your post right up until you advocated for someone to lose their job because you were dissatisfied with their work. That's not for you to decide, and it's a seriously scummy idea to try and put into an employer's head [snip]. It's a trivial aspect of a video game to you, but it's a life and livelihood to them. [snip]

Anyway.

While I appreciate the revamp and standardisation of the older parts, I'm in agreement with others that the texture is too busy, and just looks out of place/kinda ugly as a result. Plain white with a coloured stripe looked just fine. I understand the impulse to change things in a revamp, but not everything needs to change too much, as change for its own sake isn't necessarily beneficial. Fixing the 2.5m end would be nice too.

Edited November 14, 2018 by Deddly
Toned down just a little

[qzgy]

Kinda felt like this one was fine before the revamp. I liked the plainness of it that's now been removed by all the greebling of it. 

Also have to agree with other posts - needs an LFO tank and maybe someway to shield parts or something. And if you do change it, fix the model to work with the 2.5 m tanks properly. 

[Deddly]

On 11/9/2018 at 8:15 AM, passinglurker said:

rivet fetishization

Hey, I like the rivets.

#Savetherivets

 

#Thegreeblesarepossiblyslightlyoverdonethough

[passinglurker]

9 hours ago, Deddly said:

Hey, I like the rivets.

#Savetherivets

 

#Thegreeblesarepossiblyslightlyoverdonethough

lol not denying a rivet can be nice I just find symmetrical rows of them everywhere to be a bit lazy in a "copy/pasted design" sort of way. I suppose I should be thankful for that though as it means they probably didn't waste to many hours reskinning a part that they will have to scrap and do over from scratch because they based it off a bad mesh.

Edited November 15, 2018 by passinglurker

[Dark Lion]

On 11/9/2018 at 1:46 AM, 4x4cheesecake said:

Yeah, please remove this annoying gap

Definitely need to tuck that lip. Up-aesthetic @SQUAD... Yeah, the new textures are alright, but that lip is still gonna be so bothersome, I just won't use the part. 

Got to hand it to the fellow forum-goers on this thread: the cry for an adapter fuel tank must be heard!
Give use to the adapter (more than just size change) and you give us more use for it. 

To tell it true though, I still couldn't stand using it as an adapter fuel tank with that ugly lip poking out... Please fix that before you repaint it or you'll just have to paint it all over again  

[basic.syntax]

Too many rivets. (Bolts!)

[Vexillar]

21 hours ago, basic.syntax said:

Too many rivets. (Bolts!)

Too true.  Aircraft carriers are so un-aerodynamic.  They'll never take off.

[razark]

42 minutes ago, Vexillar said:

Too true.  Aircraft carriers are so un-aerodynamic.  They'll never take off.

Exactly!  You'd never see rows of bolts like that on a rocket, would you?

Spoiler

 

[Kerbart]

22 minutes ago, razark said:

Exactly!  You'd never see rows of bolts like that on a rocket, would you?

  Reveal hidden contents

 

“OMG my rocket, manned by little green bug-eyed aliens, has visual details that make it look interesting but UNREALISTIC. The horror!”

I’m totally in on “it doesn’t fit right with other pieces” but dropping greeble for the sake of realism might not be the optimal course for something that, in the end, is entertainment.

[razark]

11 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

“OMG my rocket, manned by little green bug-eyed aliens, has visual details that make it look interesting but UNREALISTIC. The horror!”

I’m totally in on “it doesn’t fit right with other pieces” but dropping greeble for the sake of realism might not be the optimal course for something that, in the end, is entertainment.

Did you look at the spoiler?