SQUAD

KSP Loading... Our New Dev Diary!

Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:

I don't recall it being broken but wouldn't be surprised. Its biggest problem (other than being ugly) is that in every single way imaginable it's worse than a cubic octagonal strut.

Stretching the limits of my memory leaves me thinking it was something about how symmetry worked (or didn't) with either attachments to it or with attaching it to ships. I'm probably just mistaken, but if there's any chance I'm not it was quite a while ago.

Broken or not, updating the appearance of that part could only improve things, but I agree it would still be worse than the cubic octagonal strut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/27/2018 at 7:36 AM, Mako said:

5+ years on and I don't think I've ever used this part.

I've actually used it for stations, hosting SR Docking ports to create expandable stuff.

(It was before I learned the magic of EVA Struts)

g9rtcf8.png

Edited by Curveball Anders
Doh!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Curveball Anders said:

I've actually used it for stations, hosting SR Docking ports to create expandable stuff.

(It was before I learned the magic of EVA Struts)

g9rtcf8.png

Won't it be super exciting when 1.6 comes out and those flat adapters are bright orange or bright white? I can't wait!  :/ 

Edited by Tyko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Tyko said:

Won't it be super exciting when 1.6 comes out and those flat adapters are bright orange or bright white? I can't wait!  :/ 

If it is as with the previously revamped parts, they won't. The assets are still present, you just won't get them when building new ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, DragonsForce said:

If it is as with the previously revamped parts, they won't. The assets are still present, you just won't get them when building new ships.

LOL...except the pic above IS in the VAB so they ARE building a new ship, so i'm not sure how your response applies to this particular comment.

My point was that bright orange or bright white pieces would look out of place as simple structural elements on the construct in the picture. I was calling attention to the apparent lack of a plain grey color option in 1.6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tyko said:

LOL...except the pic above IS in the VAB so they ARE building a new ship, so i'm not sure how your response applies to this particular comment.

My point was that bright orange or bright white pieces would look out of place as simple structural elements on the construct in the picture. I was calling attention to the apparent lack of a plain grey color option in 1.6.

Ah, gotcha. I thought you were talking about stations that were already launched, since they said they used this technique " before [they] learned the magic of EVA Struts".

 

Sidenote, while I agree that there should be a grey option, I don't think the white will look bad for these uses, especially for how I tend to use them: Bringing the size of large parts like the Hitchhiker or the Mobile Processing Lab down so I can use medium sized docking ports for my stations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonderful news on many front's here, starting with this thread.

I like to hear what is upcoming and to that incorporating an action plan for the release of updates is very positive. 

this game has progressed beautifully and is a great game getting better.

so thanks to all, for all your efforts. 

 I like to build large 2000 plus part vehicles and land lots of stuff on planets so to me all parts are welcome. I prefer more parts and functionality updates as it may look great, but if it doesn't work then I get discouraged(not pointing to anything specifically broken, as you already have some bugs to resolve-referencing old "landing legs bouncing on launch" kinda things-now fixed-TY).

Now for me not consuming all of my 32 gigs of memory would be a help, but a big part of that is on my end and the excessive mods I deploy. but maybe something could be done someday.

So Thanks to all of you, who work tirelessly at enhancing this game. and keeping us informed here

I do have 1 question as I didn't see it anywhere yet,

is the target release date from the previous release of 1.5.1(assuming so) or from the start of this thread? 

Jammer-TD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/21/2018 at 2:47 PM, SQUAD said:

KSP Enhanced Edition

In other news, we want to let console players know that  KSP Enhanced Edition is getting a substantial update that among other things includes many improvements and an update to Unity 2017, which will improve performance. We will be sharing the process with you and revealing the content of this update in the upcoming months.

Can we have a little more info? Maybe just some idea of whats being updated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the new butter stick variant of the Mk 2 Lander Can! I've always wanted a part like that, it was clever to turn the lander can into it :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Liking the new parts designs, in particular the FL-A5 and A10 parts. It's good to see that more work was put into the lander can (and butterstick variant) after the feedback on the earlier version of that update.

Edited by purpleivan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/21/2018 at 3:47 PM, SQUAD said:

We also took the opportunity to give Sean’s Cannery Mk2 Lander Can a brand new face-lift. We wanted this command module to be more in-line with comparable parts, so we reduced its mass and added a second top hatch. In an attempt to broaden the creation possibilities with this part we also added a third attach node to the back of the module and included a slimmed down ‘butter stick’ variant ideal for manned rovers. The default variant, on the other hand, will have a pair of built in service bays. The IVA view of this command module is also being worked on to match with its new look.

tumblr_inline_pikc54WXh21rr2wit_540.jpg

I realize that I'm really late to the party here, but ...

Which butter stick variant are we going with?  The one with side windows (which would imply a 2nd IVA, or some really weird side views), or the variant that does not have a side-window that's in the 2nd row, right side?  I assume it's that latter one, since the side-view variant was shown previously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, MOARdV said:

I realize that I'm really late to the party here, but ...

Which butter stick variant are we going with?  The one with side windows (which would imply a 2nd IVA, or some really weird side views), or the variant that does not have a side-window that's in the 2nd row, right side?  I assume it's that latter one, since the side-view variant was shown previously.

I thought they were maybe variants. As in, both are in the game.

Edited by 5thHorseman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, MOARdV said:

Which butter stick variant are we going with?  The one with side windows (which would imply a 2nd IVA, or some really weird side views), or the variant that does not have a side-window that's in the 2nd row, right side?  I assume it's that latter one, since the side-view variant was shown previously.

The variant of the 2nd row right is not the butter stick variant, it's just the full cylinder one. Like the top left row one, but with lights on and taken from a different angle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, swjr-swis said:

The variant of the 2nd row right is not the butter stick variant, it's just the full cylinder one. Like the top left row one, but with lights on and taken from a different angle.

Okay.  That wasn't clear from the perspective - it looked like the butter stick variant.  Now that I look closer, I see a little bit of a curve on the lower side.  I guess that leaves my secondary question intact: is the IVA going to include those side windows?  Or are we going to get two IVAs, depending on which variant is selected?

I can foresee some interesting things that could be done with a way to support more than one IVA for a given pod using the variant mechanic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/27/2018 at 9:02 PM, Thorn_Ike said:

True enough; I wanna make a mod for KSP, but I just don't know where and how to start.

Learn by tweaking inter-mod compatibility, or improvements in general to the stuff you already love. Lower amount of time needed, and you get something out of it. That would be my tip. Mods become attractive when the quality is high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎29‎/‎2018 at 7:58 PM, Jammer-TD said:

 

Now for me not consuming all of my 32 gigs of memory would be a help, but a big part of that is on my end and the excessive mods I deploy. but maybe something could be done someday.

Jammer-TD

well after this weeks mod patches (b9partswitch, ALLYALL and InterstellarFuelSwitch) and modulemanager3.1.2 my system is no longer consuming all of the its memory. even after many hours of editing and flights with explosions(for fun testing).

I am not sure who or how but I take back my statement of "maybe/could be".. somehow you have done it! (at the least it has help a lot) 

and I get to play even more.

Thanks once again to the KSP Dev's and Modder's for all the effort you put in.

Keep Kerbaling

Jammer-TD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

KSP Team, I want to say THANK YOU for all your work and cool news about 1.6 update.

I just want to up question about this "excellent looking" part:

Oscar-B_FT.png

Any plans about update of all Mk0 fuel tanks? It really need for game.

Edited by Aerospacer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aerospacer said:

KSP Team, I want to say THANK YOU for all your work and cool news about 1.6 update.

I just want to up question about this "excellent looking" part:

Oscar-B_FT.png

Any plans about update of all Mk0 fuel tanks? It really need for game.

More stackable  0.625 tanks would be really nice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, GrandProtectorDark said:

More stackable  0.625 tanks would be really nice

Agreed... a set of different lengths would add a lot more in practical usability than just a single texture update. Would bring part count of tiny craft and payloads a bit more in proportion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/8/2018 at 10:23 AM, swjr-swis said:

Agreed... a set of different lengths would add a lot more in practical usability than just a single texture update. Would bring part count of tiny craft and payloads a bit more in proportion.

The Oscar tank still bothers me because of it's magical ability to hold more fuel than other LFO tanks. I still don't know why it's special. Does anyone else? If they're going to make more tanks like that it would be good to have a story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tyko said:

The Oscar tank still bothers me because of it's magical ability to hold more fuel than other LFO tanks. I still don't know why it's special. Does anyone else?

It's not special though, is it? Unexplained inconsistencies are kind of a hallmark of KSP, especially when it comes to mass/capacity and visible volume. :/

Mk2 tanks hold the same amount of fuel as 1.25m tanks, Mk3 tanks barely hold more fuel than the half-volume 2.5m tanks, FL-T400 holds twice as much fuel as FL-T200 being only 1.5 times as long, Mk3 LFO short/Mk3 to 3.75m adapter/S3-3600 tank where to even start, fuel cell arrays visually depicted and textually described as six small cells but delivering 12x the power, a gigantic Atmospheric Fluid Spectro-Variometer weighing the same as tiny flimsy thermometers or aerial antennas.

The Oscar-B would be special only if its capacity or mass had any kind of explainable connection with its volume.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They look good, but are these new textures requiring more memory? My memory usage and frame rate are bad enough as it is. Anything being done to actually make game more efficient in this regard?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.